Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: runequester on April 14, 2011, 08:46:01 PM
-
I'd like to discuss a phenomenom that I've observed in the past year or so.
Amiga guilt, and by relation, time distortion.
The subject is plagued by feelings of guilt about having used an amiga. This may come from insecurities of having made a "wrong choice" and a burning need to correct others misconceptions.
Various symptoms may manifest themselves, such as feeling a need to post in as many conversations as possible with any of the following:
How much commodore sucked
How much PPC sucked
How terrible the amiga was compared to the PC
How much every amiga model past the 500/1000/2000 was awful and terrible
How much better Turrican 2 was on the C64
That x86 solves everything
How terrible AGA was
That the X1000 is super expensive, in case you hadn't heard
In doing so, they hope they can somehow dispel the illusion other users had of having an interesting discussion about amiga's, by reminding them of things every person on the planet is already aware of.
This is often accompanied by Time Distortion. In this particular illness, the subject mentally transposes the PC market of today to the 80's and early 90's, imagining a world where PC's are reasonably priced and can run for hours without crashing, compared to an unexpanded 512 kb amiga 500.
All thoughts of 2000 dollar PC's running windows 3.1 while vomiting out PC speaker bleeps are banished, and the world is made of microsoft flowers and intel bunnies dancing in the meadows.
The cure for both illnesses is to go have a wank, and is thus easily accomplished. If you still suffer from either afterwards, you obviously didn't wank it enough.
-
Shoot, I thought this thread was about an Amiga quilt, which by after surrounding yourself in, you'd be zapped back to 1985 :lol:
Seriously, not sure I can relate to all of those points above, but I will say I felt guilt when I momentarily ditched the Amiga scene in the mid 90's. Took nearly 6-7 years before realizing I couldn't live without my first love :)
-
I don't know much about the 'guilt' effect, but you've hit the nail on the head with your time distortion theory - it's pervasive lately and the examples you mention make the point abundantly clear.
Having said that, it's not unique to aficionados of a some obscure home computer from the 80-90s: It's a common psychological fallacy, and some hold that even professional historians are not immune from it.
-
Yes this is really a phenomenon. For me it seems this are former Amiga-users went to x86 and want to convince now all remaining that this was the only right way. Why they do so? They miss the Amiga OS and really, really, really want that the holy Amiga direction goes the x86 way so they need not buy new HW because they are somehow not satisfied with their existing HW/OS possibilities.
But probably its more psychological - I don´t really know and also don´t understand. Thought there are enough Amiga directions available but there are still grownig crazy new ones (x86 with Linux?) - crazy new world :)
-
In doing so, they hope they can somehow dispel the illusion other users had of having an interesting discussion about amiga's, by reminding them of things every person on the planet is already aware of.
+1000 to the OP, and extra-emphatically to this bit. It's like some people here are so insecure about even using one of the x86 machines they grew up hating that they want everybody to agree that x86 is the new True Amiga, so that they'll never have been "wrong" in the first place.
Yes this is really a phenomenon. For me it seems this are former Amiga-users went to x86 and want to convince now all remaining that this was the only right way. Why they do so? They miss the Amiga OS and really, really, really want that the holy Amiga direction goes the x86 way so they need not buy new HW because they are somehow not satisfied with their existing HW/OS possibilities.
This.
-
Windows 95 ended the debate. It was solid, graphical and cheap. There was a brief moment for Amiga and then it was gone. I believe there was no winning hand. The direction the industry took was inevitable. Instead of crying over the past let's just enjoy our little corner of it.
-
Windows 95 ended the debate. It was solid, graphical and cheap. There was a brief moment for Amiga and then it was gone. I believe there was no winning hand. The direction the industry took was inevitable. Instead of crying over the past let's just enjoy our little corner of it.
Windows 95 Solid ???
Have you ever used it? Solid is not the first word that comes to mind.
I remember it well. It was incredibly slow, took gobs of RAM and flakey as hell. From a reliability point of view my Amiga was a lot better.
Windows 98 was better and was functionally a lot better than the Amiga but it was still slow.
Then I got BeOS and all was right with the world. It was fast, and it could multitask properly without sizing up or crashing. Just like the Amiga.
-
When Windows 95 came out, I was impressed. Until I bought a machine to run it. I always thought of Windows as a program that ran other programs - kind of like GEOS, but somehow Workbench never felt that way. Games that were designed to run on DOS ran better and with less fuss during the mid 90's. My first Win95 machine, I ended up using DOS more. Go figure ;)
-
Windows 95 ended the debate. It was solid, graphical and cheap. There was a brief moment for Amiga and then it was gone. I believe there was no winning hand. The direction the industry took was inevitable. Instead of crying over the past let's just enjoy our little corner of it.
welldone for proving RQ's point. C= going bankrupt ended the debate.
'95 was the first usable MS gui that vaguely operated as amiga/mac users expcted a gui OS to function.
It wasn't cheap. because our OS was free. it wasn't solid, because it invented the term 'bluescreen of death'. it was a massive resource hog, as all MS OS's have been since.
RQ I may think commodore heralded the downfall of the amiga, but that does not mean i'm a pc fanboy. C= does not automaticaly = amiga. Mehdi Ali proved that.
Also, many of those who slag off various elements of C= or Amiga, are probably mourning what could have been if things had been changed with hindsight, not shouting for the oposition.
-
There's two sides to this coin. There's realizing that from '85-'90 the Amiga rode tall in the saddle, then there's outright delusion: believing that the Amiga was still a viable platform into the late 90s, that AGA was some kind of awesome panacea of graphical capability (it wasn't; it was a chopped down version of a chipset that was late and throtted back by Commodore management and outdone by SVGA when it was released) and that OS4 was poised to take the world by storm.
Most people had seen the writing on the wall by 1994 and simply acknowledge that the PC side of things wasn't so terrible.
As for processor architecture, until the end of the '486 days and early into the P5 arch life, it was neck and neck. The 68k series hit a wall and that was that, Motorola made a clean break, went PPC and for a good long while had the backing of Apple and IBM - but there was never a "clean" implementation of PPC on classic Amigas, and no classic OS was created around it. It was half-steps with WarpOS and Power-Up. A version of OS4 for classic hardware didn't happen until what, 2008? 2009?
Amithlon showed that a tightly integrated emulation solution was a step in the right direction. That Amithlon could run pure x86 code was more proof of it: imagine all the apps being scrambled for now (decent web-browsers, for example) being at your fingertips circa 2002!
You can cry about it, you can hold up this or that datasheet from nearly 20 years ago but until you build a time machine that can warp the world back to 1990, that's where any arguments about what CPU is best for the desktop remains. Games went 3d, 3d that required a different approach than what the Amiga had or has. The apps that the Amiga was really a champion of? Rendering? Yeah, you know what that requires? LOTS AND LOTS OF CPU CYCLES. Ask me how long I'd rather wait for a CGI sequence to render: minutes on a PC or days on an Amiga. Simple as that.
That's what I saw, that's why I left. Maybe I'm foolish enough to let myself get trolled by people who rave about the importance of polling a joystick port at 1000hz or whatever, but waving around your AmigaDOS manual telling me I don't know from computing because I don't live inside the Amiga Reality Distortion Field and wear the rose-colored contact lenses doesn't make me want to see your side of the argument! I used an Amiga. For years. I know what it can do. I know what it can't do.
-
Windows 95 Solid ???
Have you ever used it? Solid is not the first word that comes to mind.
I remember it well. It was incredibly slow, took gobs of RAM and flakey as hell. From a reliability point of view my Amiga was a lot better.
Windows 98 was better and was functionally a lot better than the Amiga but it was still slow.
Then I got BeOS and all was right with the world. It was fast, and it could multitask properly without sizing up or crashing. Just like the Amiga.
OS/2 is related to Amiga OS.
Win95 was good enough to stop 99% of companies ditching PC and cheaper than OS/2.
I had the unreleased beta which was OK on 8mb PC, as ever it's usually memory for Winblowz being slow.
-
You can cry about it, you can hold up this or that datasheet from nearly 20 years ago but until you build a time machine that can warp the world back to 1990, that's where any arguments about what CPU is best for the desktop remains.
A fair point, but it seems like for every obsessive fantasizing about what might have been for the 68k or what might still be for the PPC, there's an equal obsessive ranting about how x86 is, was, and always has been The Only Way, instead of just being the one main path (of many possibilities) that the desktop PC market has taken, and from my reading of the OP that's mainly what he's talking about. (Actually, it seems like there's even more of the x86-obsessed killjoys these days than the PPC delusionaries, but that might just be me.)
Yes, it's true that for horsepower x86 kicks any other desktop architecture's ass these days, but that wasn't nearly so true back in the early '90s - the 68k line was still a reasonable competitor, and PPC was a promising up-and-comer. (Though either of these might be more relevant if Commodore had put some real support behind them, instead of half-heartedly sticking in low-end 020s and 030s with a couple MB of fast RAM and letting everybody else provide the workable 040 accelerators.) As someone in another thread pointed out, the x86 didn't really clearly outpace the 68k until the Pentium Pro in 1995.
(IMHO, what the Amiga really needed by the '90s was less a new CPU architecture and more a complete overhaul of everything else. The Z3 bus was a good first step, but the new machines were still tethered to a chipset far slower than even the now-stock CPUs, unless you bought a separate video card and sound card - not good, considering that Commodore was staking basically everything on them.)
-
Before cheap Pentium (ie 94) AGA vs ISA VGA = no real difference. 680x0 CPU price vs 486DX/Pentium/AMD586 was a problem for price/performance by 94.
OS wise Win 3.1 was pretty bad, until Win95 all that editing conig.sys file and 640kb memory barrier = utter bollox for PC gamig. Win95 multitasking was WORSE than KS/WB 1.3 whatever CPU you bought. Oh and massive memory leak requiring reboot 2 or more times if you go on intetnet/use GDI memory* my Amiga 2000 with Supradrive ran for WEEKS, something you need 2000/XP to manage on PC
Also add the fact you needed a 486DX50/DX266 to play Lotus 3 as fast as CD32/1200 (1500+VAT in 93 with CD+Gravis) and Pentium 100-120 for Super Stardust PC at same speed as AGA (aain 1500ish in late 94) I think there is some clueless posting at best. More to PC gaming than Wing Commander (shit) and Doom (perfect for PC like Beast is perfect for A1000/2000/500 and impossible on PC in 91)
AGA inside CD32/A1200s only problem was C= needed to update it in 2-3 years AND solve 680x0 CPU price performance. Unlike 1986 A500/1000 in 1991/2 wiping the floor with £800 386DX25 multimedia PC playing Lotus II(Amiga OCS) vs Lotus III(PC) oh and don't forget 2 hours with QEMM386 (£99) to get the DOS games to work. Also a not having a SIMM slot and hence a cheap 512kb SIMM option to double 1200/CD32 speed was a classic Commodore oversight. Hell make it 1.5mb Chip/512kb Fast on motherboard deign. grrrrr don't remember Apple/Wintel crippled to 50% CPU speed in the box from day of sale *sigh*
256 VGA colours was a bit of an issue pre A4000/1200 release sure.
*I know this as a fully ITIL qualified service manager from 96-99. Win95 was terrible for business users, Win98 SE bare minimum acceptable.
-
There's two sides to this coin. There's realizing that from '85-'90 the Amiga rode tall in the saddle, then there's outright delusion: believing that the Amiga was still a viable platform into the late 90s, that AGA was some kind of awesome panacea of graphical capability (it wasn't; it was a chopped down version of a chipset that was late and throtted back by Commodore management and outdone by SVGA when it was released) and that OS4 was poised to take the world by storm.
THere's a lot of grey scale inbetween. Its okay to think AGA was pretty cool, and the A1200 was a nice machine, without being a zealot. AGA /was/ better than OCS/ECS. Now, in 2011, how it compared to [insert PC here] or how OS 3.1 compared to [insert windows version here] is competely irrelevant.
That's what I saw, that's why I left. Maybe I'm foolish enough to let myself get trolled by people who rave about the importance of polling a joystick port at 1000hz or whatever, but waving around your AmigaDOS manual telling me I don't know from computing because I don't live inside the Amiga Reality Distortion Field and wear the rose-colored contact lenses doesn't make me want to see your side of the argument! I used an Amiga. For years. I know what it can do. I know what it can't do.
Lets step back and relax man :)
Its not binary. Its okay to enjoy what the amiga was, for what it is.
Its 2011 today. Not 1995. There's no point fighting the holy wars of computing anymore.
-
Yes, it's true that for horsepower x86 kicks any other desktop architecture's ass these days, but that wasn't nearly so true back in the early '90s
The point PC was viable future winner for UK computer gamers was mass adoption by software houses of VGA graphics as standard. Why?
386 VGA/SBLASTER owner buys SF2....pretty slow and unplayable. 18 months later sells it and gets 486DX66 +GRAVIS etc....suddenly old unplayable game is arcade quality. Had 256 colours but is faster and sounds better automatically.
A500 owner buyss SF2...32 colour slow rubbish....3 years later he gets a 4000/030 and loads SF2....STILL rubbish (same speed, 32 colours, SFX/music). Has to pray a good AGA version is released and buy a 2nd copy if it is ever made! No reward for his £999 investment!
And that my friends is the problem, in 1990 most arcade games on PC had 256 colour graphics like Super Nintendo and their old PC games bought before upgrading to better PC automatically improved without the need for a single line of game code to improve. VGA mass adoption was the key. EGA Cinemaware games will forever be inferior to Amiga versions even on an running on Intel i7 920 PC today. After VGA though it was game over. 256 colours was enough even for 3D games like Doom or Screamer Rally comparedto PS1 RidgeRacer/Doom.
Big problem for AGA AND Atari Falcon potential purchasers no?
-
It depends on how the game was coded. There's amiga games that benefited from a faster CPU, and some expected it (try running AB3D2 on a 68020 without fast RAM if you don't believe me), and there's PC games that became unplayable at faster speeds.
In any event however, its completely irrelevant today. Why bother worrying about it?
Amiga guilt is why.
-
The point PC was viable future winner for UK computer gamers was mass adoption by software houses of VGA graphics as standard. Why?
386 VGA/SBLASTER owner buys SF2....pretty slow and unplayable. 18 months later sells it and gets 486DX66 +GRAVIS etc....suddenly old unplayable game is arcade quality. Had 256 colours but is faster and sounds better automatically.
A500 owner buyss SF2...32 colour slow rubbish....3 years later he gets a 4000/030 and loads SF2....STILL rubbish (same speed, 32 colours, SFX/music). Has to pray a good AGA version is released and buy a 2nd copy if it is ever made! No reward for his £999 investment!
And that my friends is the problem, in 1990 most arcade games on PC had 256 colour graphics like Super Nintendo and their old PC games bought before upgrading to better PC automatically improved without the need for a single line of game code to improve. VGA mass adoption was the key. EGA Cinemaware games will forever be inferior to Amiga versions even on an running on Intel i7 920 PC today. After VGA though it was game over. 256 colours was enough even for 3D games like Doom or Screamer Rally comparedto PS1 RidgeRacer/Doom.
Big problem for AGA AND Atari Falcon potential purchasers no?
Hmm. So having the game run shit on your £1000+ 386 is a good thing?
So the fact that it was badly written for the 386 is good thing?
And we all have the money to then buy a new computer every 18 months?
Ever wonder why gamers have switched from the PC upgradathon to an Amiga like console lifespan of 5+ years?
The switch over to most games being VGA did not occur in the UK at least, as early as you say it did.
Also, the game will not suddenly improve. EGA and VGA were often different boxes for disk versions.
Your exactly illustrating what's being talked about here.
-
In any event however, its completely irrelevant today. Why bother worrying about it?
RQ we are posting on a forum dedicated to a computer that realisticaly died in '94. It's all irrelevant. But it obviously matters, else none of us would be on here. :)
-
386 VGA/SBLASTER owner buys SF2....pretty slow and unplayable. 18 months later sells it and gets 486DX66 +GRAVIS etc....suddenly old unplayable game is arcade quality. Had 256 colours but is faster and sounds better automatically.
A500 owner buyss SF2...32 colour slow rubbish....3 years later he gets a 4000/030 and loads SF2....STILL rubbish (same speed, 32 colours, SFX/music). Has to pray a good AGA version is released and buy a 2nd copy if it is ever made! No reward for his £999 investment!
You're undermining your own point. Yes, OCS/ECS Amiga games don't suddenly get better when you play them on an AGA machine. But EGA games don't get better on a VGA box, either. The only real difference is that AGA came too late in the game and didn't offer enough improvement, not that VGA was some kind of instant market-conqueror.
-
I feel no guilt.
Amiga's were great when they were current.
I continue to use an Amiga derivative every day for almost all my computing needs.
-
Windows 95 ended the debate. It was solid, graphical and cheap. There was a brief moment for Amiga and then it was gone. .............
not so short.
The first year the Newtek Toaster came out a million Amigos sold and many of those Amiga were used in cable stations, for local video companies and many many artists making their way in films.
I can't say enough that the very existence of Amiga CHANGED the way people worked in these fields. It opened people's eyes and fueled their imagination.
There's no going back. You may think the moment came and went
I say the Amiga Effect continues to this day
-
not so short.
The first year the Newtek Toaster came out a million Amigos sold and many of those Amiga were used in cable stations, for local video companies and many many artists making their way in films.
I can't say enough that the very existence of Amiga CHANGED the way people worked in these fields. It opened people's eyes and fueled their imagination.
There's no going back. You may think the moment came and went
I say the Amiga Effect continues to this day
Amigos?:)
Actually Amiga did start a revolution in cheap video manipulation and low cost special effects.
-
Windows 95 ended the debate. It was solid, graphical and cheap. There was a brief moment for Amiga and then it was gone. I believe there was no winning hand. The direction the industry took was inevitable. Instead of crying over the past let's just enjoy our little corner of it.
The Amiga really never had a huge chance. IBM already dominated the business world. A world where the Amiga would never be able to penetrate. I mean look at it this way. The Amiga was in production in various guises for 9 years and in those nine years NOT ONE MAJOR maker of software for business ported their stuff to the Amiga. As much as we all hate to admit it the Amiga was a nitch computer. It could have moved into the area where the Mac went for a number of years and that is Desktop publishing. C= was killed from inside by Medhi Ali before that could happen in any serious way.
-
The Amiga really never had a huge chance. IBM already dominated the business world. A world where the Amiga would never be able to penetrate. I mean look at it this way. The Amiga was in production in various guises for 9 years and in those nine years NOT ONE MAJOR maker of software for business ported their stuff to the Amiga. As much as we all hate to admit it the Amiga was a nitch computer. It could have moved into the area where the Mac went for a number of years and that is Desktop publishing. C= was killed from inside by Medhi Ali before that could happen in any serious way.
From memory wordperfect was ported. And Electronic Arts are chopped liver i guess?
What type of software did the amiga lack that ibm machines had?
-
From memory wordperfect was ported. And Electronic Arts are chopped liver i guess?
What type of software did the amiga lack that ibm machines had?
microsoft word :(
-
microsoft word :(
Today sure. In a pre internet world i dont know. There were plenty of word processors and dtp stuff on the miggy.
-
From memory wordperfect was ported. And Electronic Arts are chopped liver i guess?
What type of software did the amiga lack that ibm machines had?
It isn't that there wasn't software that was aimed at business for the Amiga it was the BIG names that were missing. 1 big name software package out of a few hundred that ran under PCDOS/MSDOS is not a BUT But but moment. It is also doubly hard when your company is looked at by businesses as a games machine maker.
-
I don't think the "thousands" mattered at all..
WordPerfect was a huge deal....
And there were alternate solutions for most everything else that were pretty good..
But, in my mind, it comes down to MS.
No MS Word. No MS Excel.
2 platforms had those. Windows and Mac.
2 platforms survived..
I'm not a fan per se (although Word 4 for the Mac was awesome..), and not everyone had to "use" those in business. But it sure seemed like you had to "have" it available to be taken seriously...
desiv
-
Macs had some of this software available and didnt make much of a splash in the business world either, outside a few niches.
IBM/DOS grabbed the corporate market and that was it.
Commodore didnt need that market to survive and aiming at the consumer is where the focus should have fallen.
-
Various symptoms may manifest themselves, such as feeling a need to post in as many conversations as possible with any of the following:
How much commodore sucked
They didn't, they brought us the Amiga, it was down to little sh!tes like Mehdi Ali that brought about the downfall of Commodore & the Amiga not all the other folk at CBM who worked to bring us the Amiga... :)
How much PPC sucked
It didn't, it just arrived too late (after Commodore had folded) and was still too new and expensive to be a mass Amiga market hit... :)
How terrible the amiga was compared to the PC
Bollox... :)
How much every amiga model past the 500/1000/2000 was awful and terrible
More Bollox... :)
How much better Turrican 2 was on the C64
Possibly... :)
That x86 solves everything
Biggest load of Bollox ever... :)
How terrible AGA was
AGA was and still is, the best thing since sliced bread, end of story... :)
That the X1000 is super expensive, in case you hadn't heard
Maybe, but consider how much you spend on PCs/ Macs/ Consoles etc... then for a new small market product it aint that bad and if your too miserable to part with the cash then stop ruddy complaining about it... :)
-
I'd like to discuss a phenomenom that I've observed in the past year or so.
Amiga guilt, and by relation, time distortion.
The subject is plagued by feelings of guilt about having used an amiga. This may come from insecurities of having made a "wrong choice" and a burning need to correct others misconceptions.
Various symptoms may manifest themselves, such as feeling a need to post in as many conversations as possible with any of the following:
How much commodore sucked
How much PPC sucked
How terrible the amiga was compared to the PC
How much every amiga model past the 500/1000/2000 was awful and terrible
How much better Turrican 2 was on the C64
That x86 solves everything
How terrible AGA was
That the X1000 is super expensive, in case you hadn't heard
In doing so, they hope they can somehow dispel the illusion other users had of having an interesting discussion about amiga's, by reminding them of things every person on the planet is already aware of.
This is often accompanied by Time Distortion. In this particular illness, the subject mentally transposes the PC market of today to the 80's and early 90's, imagining a world where PC's are reasonably priced and can run for hours without crashing, compared to an unexpanded 512 kb amiga 500.
All thoughts of 2000 dollar PC's running windows 3.1 while vomiting out PC speaker bleeps are banished, and the world is made of microsoft flowers and intel bunnies dancing in the meadows.
The cure for both illnesses is to go have a wank, and is thus easily accomplished. If you still suffer from either afterwards, you obviously didn't wank it enough.
1993 DOOM's release accelerated gaming PC's rise.
I still have my PC Format and Amiga Format mags e.g. I have 386DX33+SVGA box and Amiga 3000/030/25Mhz between 1992-to-1993. Sometime late in 1996, I switch to Pentium Classic 150Mhz (overclocked to 166Mhz) and sold my Amiga 3000.
-
Hmm. So having the game run shit on your £1000+ 386 is a good thing?
So the fact that it was badly written for the 386 is good thing?
And we all have the money to then buy a new computer every 18 months?
Ever wonder why gamers have switched from the PC upgradathon to an Amiga like console lifespan of 5+ years?
The switch over to most games being VGA did not occur in the UK at least, as early as you say it did.
Also, the game will not suddenly improve. EGA and VGA were often different boxes for disk versions.
Your exactly illustrating what's being talked about here.
I think you are illustrating a lack of understanding.
His points were 100% spot on.
PC users once they did have VGA as standard on ALL games (which he took great steps to point out) and let's face it 286s came with VGA so hardly anything unusual to own a VGA 386 at the time of A500Plus or before.
The second point was ZERO CODING was required to get an immediate improvement on those said VGA games just by buying a new machine, ie unlike us they didn't have to wait for 256 colour versions to be specifically produced.
And finally 256 colours IS enough until you get into the era of PS2/Xbox with photo-realistic fully 3D rendered worlds (Something the Amiga even to this day can not match so it's not important).
So actually all those things DID come together and conspired against the Amiga. It's just the way it goes, custom chips like unusual console components are fine at the start of the product lifecycle when you are opening a can of woop-ass on PCs but at the end of the lifecycle and beyond when you produce new custom chipsets you need the software houses to reprogram their game engines and graphics to actually use the new improved custom chips. PCs with VGA never had this problem, faster processor = faster shootemup, beatemup, scaled 2d graphics driving games as well as 3D games (with or without texture mapping).
You are the classic reason why this place is going downhill fast, too eager to post your ill-conceived response.
-
VGA mass adoption was the key. EGA Cinemaware games will forever be inferior to Amiga versions even on an running on Intel i7 920 PC today. After VGA though it was game over.
That about nails it. Word processing? You really want to do that in hi-res laced on a 1084?
I remember when I got Dune 2 for my A500. I went to a friend's house to check out the PC version, and left pretty ruffled. All the games had better sound, more colors, higher resolutions...
Then the mid/late 90's, after C= tanked... Competing "standards" (each with their own bug-ridden patina), vaporware, over-priced, unfinished, flaky products like the Delfina and CS-PPC, pre-order scams... You had to be a real gambler back then to "keep it real". :-/
I enjoy computers in general and always have, so there's no hit to my "true-amigan" status to acknowledge reality. I still use Amigas on and off in life simply because I find it relaxing and enjoy the learning curve. The PC did some things better, so what?
-
The point PC was viable future winner for UK computer gamers was mass adoption by software houses of VGA graphics as standard. Why?
386 VGA/SBLASTER owner buys SF2....pretty slow and unplayable. 18 months later sells it and gets 486DX66 +GRAVIS etc....suddenly old unplayable game is arcade quality. Had 256 colours but is faster and sounds better automatically.
A500 owner buyss SF2...32 colour slow rubbish....3 years later he gets a 4000/030 and loads SF2....STILL rubbish (same speed, 32 colours, SFX/music). Has to pray a good AGA version is released and buy a 2nd copy if it is ever made! No reward for his £999 investment!
And that my friends is the problem, in 1990 most arcade games on PC had 256 colour graphics like Super Nintendo and their old PC games bought before upgrading to better PC automatically improved without the need for a single line of game code to improve. VGA mass adoption was the key. EGA Cinemaware games will forever be inferior to Amiga versions even on an running on Intel i7 920 PC today. After VGA though it was game over. 256 colours was enough even for 3D games like Doom or Screamer Rally comparedto PS1 RidgeRacer/Doom.
Big problem for AGA AND Atari Falcon potential purchasers no?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTvr_Q3bkTY
AMD AM386SX processor @25MHz + Street Fighter 2 Gameplay. SF2 was playable on AMD 386SX @25Mhz. PC version SF2 was moving 256 color graphics.
To run it smooth, one would need 386DX33(with proper 32bit FSB) with fast SVGA.
PS; IBM PS2/ Model 55SX(386SX 16Mhz)'s VGA was slow.
-
You're undermining your own point. Yes, OCS/ECS Amiga games don't suddenly get better when you play them on an AGA machine. But EGA games don't get better on a VGA box, either. The only real difference is that AGA came too late in the game and didn't offer enough improvement, not that VGA was some kind of instant market-conqueror.
lol some people really don't read too well or remember how abundant VGA was, even 286 Amstrad machines had VGA AS STANDARD....vs Amiga A500/2000 era in late 80s.
The problem was not that people had to upgrade to VGA from EGA because by the time the home PC was even remotely acceptable since the Amstrad PC1640 CGA/EGA days, but games were not always produced with a VGA option. Like the guy said this happened around 1990/91 (have a look on sites like HOTU) and AFTER this happened and everyone already had VGA games that may have been unplayable on your 386SX-16 VGA suddenly became arcade quality on your 486DX33, so that was the turning point and a spot on observation.
The point is PC owners automatically usually got better games with each faster machine purchased, therefore the quality of their back catalogue of games often improved over time based on improving PC specs, and most importantly nobody had to wait for some hacksaw coding job of an update like most of the AGA 'enhanced' drivel we got in 93/94 from the usual culprits to be honest.
SF2 is a classic example, add to that the fact that ALL PC arcade games were hard disk installable and maybe 2% of Amiga action/arcade games and you have yet another nail in the coffin (this time thanks to ignorant and blinkered software houses producing 4 disk games etc).
AGA in A4000 release and A1200 first Xmas was pretty much still able to hold it's own against VGA on an ISA BUS @ 8mhz. Like Digiman says it was only viable for 2-3 years not like when we had EHB and HAM6 in 1986 vs PC CGA 4 colour puke that they could just keep using for 7 or 8 years. Nothing wrong with AGA really except 16bit sound was missing in.
Man I wish people who actually know about 80s and 90s PC technology would comment on other people's knowledgeable posts rather than all this thread pollution.
As for Win95, personally it's OK, but to be quite frank it did more harm to Apple and their single tasking Mac OS than Amiga. Overnight, the premium you paid for an Apple Mac suddenly looked a bit....well useless :)
-
Every time someone mentions about how wonderful VGA was, I have to laugh and think "after all these years the poor sod still doesn't get it"... :)
These folk either have forgotten or didn't know in the first place why the Amiga used the video standards it did for a very simple reason, It was the aim of the Amiga to use video modes that would run on the TV in the corner of your living room or any other TV in your house, plain and simple... :)
No need to go out and buy a monitor cos you couldn't run VGA modes on your TV, just hook your Amiga up to any TV in your home and you were up and running... :)
Seems some folk either missed that point or deliberately ignore it... ;)
-
You are the classic reason why this place is going downhill fast, too eager to post your ill-conceived response.
hmm, iv'e been on here since the 90's, so i can't be making it go downhill that fast.
my post history shows me helping people out, welcoming new starters, and giving away hardware. i'll go through yours and get back to you. I expect it will have giant waffling paragraphs of shite. just like the ones you just posted.
-
hmm, iv'e been on here since the 90's, so i can't be making it go downhill that fast.
my post history shows me helping people out, welcoming new starters, and giving away hardware. i'll go through yours and get back to you. I expect it will have giant waffling paragraphs of shite. just like the ones you just posted.
+1
Too many new users who haven't even touched an Amiga since the 90's, let alone contributed anything useful to the community are the reason this place is going downhill recently.
-
For me personally I hated to see the slow death of Amiga. When Commodore folded, I was still holding out hope.
I remember seeing some of the 386 VGA flight sim games and comparing them to the Amiga versions. The multicoloured sky and how the ground changed colour into the distance, just made the game so realistic!
Games like TFX, A10 Tank Killer, F15 Strike Eagle 2, F117A Stealth Fighter, Jef Fighter 2 (which was done by the same guy that did F18 Interceptor).
Having said that I missed the creativity software of the Amiga. I missed Vista (scenery generator), Deluxe Paint, Amos, Octamed, etc.
It was C64 and then the Amiga that really got me interested in computers and has lead to my career path. It is a shame that the Amiga did not succeed in the commercial world, but there is still a place in the world for the Amiga, even if it is here at Amiga.org just remembering the glory years of the Amiga!
-
+1
Too many new users who haven't even touched an Amiga since the 90's, let alone contributed anything useful to the community are the reason this place is going downhill recently.
-1
Gotta disagree with that point of view... a lot of "new users" or folk who are finding the Amiga once again post quite a lot of interesting questions looking for help setting up their Amigas, which when I can, am only too glad to help out with... :)
It's mostly "old members" who post the "downhill" stuff about PCs, iPhones etc... and use the place as some sort of social club that detract from the real Amiga questions & topics new users have... ;)
-
-1
Gotta disagree with that point of view... a lot of "new users" or folk who are finding the Amiga once again post quite a lot of interesting questions looking for help setting up their Amigas, which when I can, am only too glad to help out with... :)
It's mostly "old members" who post the "downhill" stuff about PCs, iPhones etc... and use the place as some sort of social club that detract from the real Amiga questions & topics new users have... ;)
Well, I stay here because there is always a good influx of interesting new people, but that's added to the older crowd, there's good and bad amongst both. I'll judge on what people say, not how long they have been on here.
I actually enjoy the odd 'back in the day' discussion. Until someone personally insults my contribution to the site that is :)
-
PC users once they did have VGA as standard on ALL games (which he took great steps to point out) and let's face it 286s came with VGA so hardly anything unusual to own a VGA 386 at the time of A500Plus or before.
The second point was ZERO CODING was required to get an immediate improvement on those said VGA games just by buying a new machine, ie unlike us they didn't have to wait for 256 colour versions to be specifically produced.
But it's a false comparison. He compared games choked by CPU weakness to games choked by chipset weakness. That's apples and oranges. If you want to compare chipset upgrades, look at the difference between lush VGA stuff and the "barely improved Tandy" stuff that dominated the EGA market. Castlevania for DOS is always going to look wonky, even if you put it on a VGA box, just like OCS Street Fighter is always going to look wonky, even on an AGA machine. CPU horsepower has nothing to do with either.
Now, it is true that VGA mass adoption was quicker and more complete than the adoption of AGA, and it's probably also true that that quick and easy overtaking of the Amiga graphics-wise was a significant contributor to its demise. I'm just saying that the initial comparison was false, is all.
-
I didn't want to switch to a pc but I was forced to. I was a musician and I needed 16 bit sound, and more channels.
A 100mhz pentium running with an sb16 let me do 32 channels. This was too attractive at the price to stay amiga. Besides this, yes vga games
like wing commander, x wing and others sealed the deal for me.
I could have bought an amiga 3000 at the time instead. I could not justify
the expense difference in comparing the capabilities, speed, hard drive space,ram and so on.
This amiga trend seems to continue today, in that people hocking amiga hardware and software want you to pay too high a price for too little power and capability.
My phone's browser is better than os4's, and my phone also has more computing power than most os4 systems.
I love amiga but I have needs that these pricey amiga systems can't fill.
Until then, I love playing with my emulated os 3.x amiga on my linux box,
I also love aros, and hope to see it improve so much that it can be your every day computer, needs smp, better browsing, and more native apps.
Steven
-
As for gaming, Amiga was left behind (faster than the technological graphics' gap implied) simply because it lacked HDs and CDs. Period. Games were beginning to require more space; included digital audio, Full Motion Videos, more detailed graphics (bigger textures), installation on HD for faster loading times. The combo of 1200 was simply suicidal; no CD nor HD presented, when by 1993 Psygnosis was selling PC Games' conversions in CDs already. One can think that Commodore never really looked at the PC competition offer and didn't even made a brief chat with companies actually developing for Amiga for what they should include/develop/upgrade in future Amigas.
-
For me growing up C64/Amiga, PC's were the devil and with the death of Commodore (*sigh*) and everyone playing Warcraft, Rise of the Triads, etc. in lan parties with IPX/SPX networks the PC was too tempting to avoid. Soon many exciting things would evolve RAPIDLY on the PC, games got better, productivity got better, faster and faster.
Remember when Windows 95 was released and there were huge lines wrapping around stores to get if first? Of course Apple has created that culture in their products now.
If Commodore had survived with REAL leadership it would be a sight to see and what could have evolved over 17+ years!
I wouldn't be surprised if the modern amiga was just like the modern Apple system, or basically another Intel based computer.
-
I'd like to discuss a phenomenom that I've observed in the past year or so.
Amiga guilt, and by relation, time distortion.
The subject is plagued by feelings of guilt about having used an amiga. This may come from insecurities of having made a "wrong choice" and a burning need to correct others misconceptions.
Various symptoms may manifest themselves, such as feeling a need to post in as many conversations as possible with any of the following:
How much commodore sucked
How much PPC sucked
How terrible the amiga was compared to the PC
How much every amiga model past the 500/1000/2000 was awful and terrible
How much better Turrican 2 was on the C64
That x86 solves everything
How terrible AGA was
That the X1000 is super expensive, in case you hadn't heard
In doing so, they hope they can somehow dispel the illusion other users had of having an interesting discussion about amiga's, by reminding them of things every person on the planet is already aware of.
This is often accompanied by Time Distortion. In this particular illness, the subject mentally transposes the PC market of today to the 80's and early 90's, imagining a world where PC's are reasonably priced and can run for hours without crashing, compared to an unexpanded 512 kb amiga 500.
All thoughts of 2000 dollar PC's running windows 3.1 while vomiting out PC speaker bleeps are banished, and the world is made of microsoft flowers and intel bunnies dancing in the meadows.
The cure for both illnesses is to go have a wank, and is thus easily accomplished. If you still suffer from either afterwards, you obviously didn't wank it enough.
I do not know your age, but much of this distortion is do to users posting about things they know little about like the 90's technology, much less the 80's technology do to their age. Many users I see here posting comments about 80's were not even born at the time. I know there are some interesting tidbits on Wikipedia and such, but many are factually wrong. That being said I enjoy using my amiga and have since 1985, but putting down PC's is another waste of time since - What is standard computing platform now and has been for the last 30 years? Oh, the PC.
-
It's not just age that causes distortion, it's location. Amiga's were an also-ran platform in the U.S by the late '80's. U.S users see the Amiga as a minnow, EU users see it as a fallen giant.
Maybe PC's were cheaper there, perhaps consoles were released cheaper/before europe got them. I don't know. I know the U.S has higher disposible income, and still does, might have something to do with it.
-
It's not just age that causes distortion, it's location. Amiga's were an also-ran platform in the U.S by the late '80's. U.S users see the Amiga as a minnow, EU users see it as a fallen giant.
Maybe PC's were cheaper there, perhaps consoles were released cheaper/before europe got them. I don't know. I know the U.S has higher disposible income, and still does, might have something to do with it.
You make a good point, I know amiga died down in US and in the EU they were hugely popular for years after.
-
My signature states Im a linux fan boy. What makes you think I am putting down PCs.
-
My signature states Im a linux fan boy. What makes you think I am putting down PCs.
I wasn't implying that, I was just stating and observation that may have been a little off. The Amiga was played out differently in different parts of the world also making perceptions appear quite different.
-
I wasn't implying that, I was just stating and observation that may have been a little off. The Amiga was played out differently in different parts of the world also making perceptions appear quite different.
ah gotcha :)
-
Windows 95 Solid ???
Frozen solid in classic MacOS style? :-)
Anyway, couple of years ago I acquired old Pentium 90 with Windows 95 and I was amazed how usable it was. You can get that thing online and download decent software.
Then I got BeOS and all was right with the world. It was fast, and it could multitask properly without sizing up or crashing. Just like the Amiga.
When Commodore went belly up there wasnt chance for Amiga anymore. No hardware and soon after software support was diminishing.
-
:roflmao:
Who cares? It's about the coolness factor, and only true Amigas (chipset+680x0) have that awesome coolness factor that's lacking everywhere. Perhaps some people just need to stay with their peecees and be happy with them (no shame in that, I use a 667 Mhz Pentium 3) :)
-
It's not just age that causes distortion, it's location. Amiga's were an also-ran platform in the U.S by the late '80's. U.S users see the Amiga as a minnow, EU users see it as a fallen giant.
That is a lot of it. The last Amiga I ever saw in a shop was the A600. I was working in a Software Etc. We got the A600 in, it ran OS2.0 and half of the software on our shelves wouldn't run it. The Amiga section was already 1/10 of the PC section, and now, even half of that wouldn't run. That was when I knew the Amiga was dead.
It wasn't until years later that I even knew that the 1200 existed, and it wasn't until 2008 that I actually saw one in real life.
@runequester
I think you are suffering a bit from your own described syndrome. If you look at the threads on this board, the hostility comes from the anti-x86 crowd. Go to the RetroReplay threads. No one is complaining about that. Everyone is universally excited. Some are not interested in buying one, but they appreciate what it is. The Natami threads used to be negative, not so much out of a dislike of what it is, but out of a disbelief that it could be produced. Now that it is showing some actual progress, people are much more friendly towards it. After the holy wars based around the idea that there was a rightful heir, MorphOS is accepted as a fun alternative OS, as is OS4. Criticism is generally mild, and intended as constructive to the discussion. The biggest complains in the PPC camp are centered around the cost of hardware for OS4. Given the umph and cost, these are valid complaints. Add to that, the fact that OS4 and PPC are not 'classic' Amiga, complaints about them cannot really be chalked up to Amiga Regret.
Now look at any thread concerning CUSA, and their desire to produce Amigas on x86. They are full on flame fests. People are vicious. Alternate web sites have been set up for the sole purpose of bashing them.
It isn't a matter of people regretting the Amiga and trying to put it down. Most people are perfectly comfortable with what it was. The problem comes in with a conflict between the people that have emotionally moved on and accepted that x86 has evolved into a good platform, and those that are still carrying around their platform rage from the 80's.
You yourself keep exhibiting that behavior. You kept asking the same questions over and over claiming that you couldn't understand why someone would want a computer that looked like a C64 and acted like a C64 that was brand new, as well as how that related to Amiga. You would claim that you didn't understand why a company that has shown that it can and would produce replica retro computers that ran the retro software and had announced Amiga computers would be relevant on an Amiga board. That isn't "Just being curious". It is a passive aggressive attempt to push the idea that x86 is inferior.
-
It is a passive aggressive attempt to push the idea that x86 is inferior.
Let me give you a hint there mate. You know from my signature I use linux.
Let me give you a freebie then: Im not running it on PPC, ARM or 68K.
So what do you suppose I am running it on?
-
z80?
-
z80?
now /that/ would be badass :)
-
Let me give you a hint there mate. You know from my signature I use linux.
Let me give you a freebie then: Im not running it on PPC, ARM or 68K.
So what do you suppose I am running it on?
You throw that out there like it proves something. It doesn't. It just explains why you feel guilty. Your like the guy that is worried that the two different girls he is dating might meet. Me, I'll introduce them and all play together.
-
You throw that out there like it proves something. It doesn't. It just explains why you feel guilty. Your like the guy that is worried that the two different girls he is dating might meet. Me, I'll introduce them and all play together.
You really have a complex about this whole thing huh.
Find a single post from me on this forum where I've professed to either
A: Hating x86 processors
B: Being a 68K processor fanboy.
Im happy playing your villain that you seem to need, but let's make with some actual proof instead.
-
-1
Gotta disagree with that point of view... a lot of "new users" or folk who are finding the Amiga once again post quite a lot of interesting questions looking for help setting up their Amigas, which when I can, am only too glad to help out with... :)
It's mostly "old members" who post the "downhill" stuff about PCs, iPhones etc... and use the place as some sort of social club that detract from the real Amiga questions & topics new users have... ;)
Cheers mate ;) But still no one replied to my A4000 questions ;(
-
Cheers mate ;) But still no one replied to my A4000 questions ;(
Which ones?
Point me in the right direction and I'll do my best for you. :)
-
Well I feel a great guilt. I feel guilty that I left Amiga and went PC, then went Mac, and returned to Amiga [I never really left].
I was young, in 94 I was 11, I owned an A500 and to me it was the best! When I got my A1200 in 97 / 98 ish [Amiga Inc Tandy clearance] my school had gone Win95, I was studying IT, I was going my GCSE's and I didn't have much choice but to go Win. I also couldn't afford, or justify the upgrade costs of my A1200, £100+ for a tower, alot of money to get a CD-ROM working, and I still couldn't take school work across platform, or rather I didn't know how. I never got too technical with Amiga, not like I have with PC, it was mainly games and word processing. I wish I did though, which is one of the reasons I am here.
-
Which ones?
Point me in the right direction and I'll do my best for you. :)
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=57332
This one.......lots and lots of views........maybe it was crap, can't remember better read it back......
-
You really have a complex about this whole thing huh.
Find a single post from me on this forum where I've professed to either
A: Hating x86 processors
B: Being a 68K processor fanboy.
Im happy playing your villain that you seem to need, but let's make with some actual proof instead.
How about the first post in this thread. You don't say "I hate x86" or "I am a 68K fanboy".
What you do is chime in over and over with passive aggressive comments about how x86 makes no sense. How a company that has announced Amiga compatible computers branded as Amiga have no connection to Amiga because they are on x86 processors.
Playing innocent because you use passive aggressive language doesn't mean you are not saying it. If I were to continually post "I don't understand why runequester thinks his opinion matters in any way", I would still be making a statement about you. That is how being passive aggressive works.
Heck, even in the above post, you play passive aggressive. You pretend to be a victim by claiming to be depicted unfairly as a villain in a thread that was passive aggressively complaining about x86, and peoples comments that Amiga wasn't perfect.
-
How about the first post in this thread...
...What you do is chime in over and over with passive aggressive comments about how x86 makes no sense.
Didn't see that anywhere in his first post???
How a company that has announced Amiga compatible computers branded as Amiga have no connection to Amiga because they are on x86 processors.
Again.. er.. where in his post did he say that??
:confused: :confused: :confused:
Am I reading a different first post than you??
desiv
-
How about the first post in this thread. You don't say "I hate x86" or "I am a 68K fanboy". What you do is chime in over and over with passive aggressive comments about how x86 makes no sense. How a company that has announced Amiga compatible computers branded as Amiga have no connection to Amiga because they are on x86 processors.
You fail reading comprehension. If you want to dredge up the CUSA crap again, my question at that point was what a PC in a C64 case has to do with amiga.
The answer at the time was that at some unspecified future point, they'll sell a computer titled an amiga, which will run some sort of OS that is going to be amiga-like. As I said /repeatedly/ in that thread, once they sell an amiga product, I think they should have a section on amiga.org, just like AROS, Morph OS etc.
It has fuck all to do with the processor type.
Playing innocent because you use passive aggressive language doesn't mean you are not saying it. If I were to continually post "I don't understand why runequester thinks his opinion matters in any way", I would still be making a statement about you. That is how being passive aggressive works.
So you have nothing, other than whining?
Given that you seem to follow me around now, it seems you think quite a lot of my opinion. I suppose that's flattering.
Heck, even in the above post, you play passive aggressive. You pretend to be a victim by claiming to be depicted unfairly as a villain in a thread that was passive aggressively complaining about x86, and peoples comments that Amiga wasn't perfect.
My post had exactly nothing negative about x86 in it, and you know it.
Lets examine what I posted.
The only thing that is remotely negative is that yes, in the 80's PCs were wicked expensive, they generally ran windows 3.1, and PC speaker sucked.
Care to refute these points? Or have you dug yourself so far into fantasy land that you can't distinguish between facts and imaginary attacks ?
Since you claim you know exactly what I mean, you know damn well what I intended. As I have posted /in this very thread/ this isn't about amiga being superior. It's about being able to have a conversation without the same "commodore failed because of XXX" "amiga sucked because of XXX" crap that comes up every single time.
Yes, we all know that AGA was slow, and that commodore had bad marketing and that the 1200 wasnt powerfull enough and that windows 95 sold monstrously well.
It all doesn't matter anymore. It's 2011. Everyone else moved on.
Why keep dredging up the same crap over and over and over and over again?
-
@desiv
I added a couple of carriage returns for clarity.
The whole first post is passive aggressive complaining. Do you think that runequester really believes that x86 solves everything? Or do you think he was being sarcastic in an attempt passively aggressively say that x86 isn't worthy? Do you think that he believe anyone actually thought PPC sucked at the time, or do you think he was passive aggressively implying that it is better than it is?
As for his comment about CUSA Amigas not being Amigas, that he repeatedly invades CUSA threads to post this in his passive aggressive attempt to discredit them.
-
Are you trying to claim that
"That x86 solves everything"
was said in all honesty? That you really believe that it solves everything? I read that as sarcasm and a passive aggressive jab at systems running x86.
So, just to be clear... Are you now truly claiming without any sarcasm "That x86 solves everything"?
-
Wow! Time out!
Chill out boys!
Geez......
-
You fail reading comprehension. If you want to dredge up the CUSA crap again, my question at that point was what a PC in a C64 case has to do with amiga.
The answer at the time was that at some unspecified future point, they'll sell a computer titled an amiga, which will run some sort of OS that is going to be amiga-like. As I said /repeatedly/ in that thread, once they sell an amiga product, I think they should have a section on amiga.org, just like AROS, Morph OS etc.
It has fuck all to do with the processor type.
So you have nothing, other than whining?
Given that you seem to follow me around now, it seems you think quite a lot of my opinion. I suppose that's flattering.
My post had exactly nothing negative about x86 in it, and you know it.
Lets examine what I posted.
The only thing that is remotely negative is that yes, in the 80's PCs were wicked expensive, they generally ran windows 3.1, and PC speaker sucked.
Care to refute these points? Or have you dug yourself so far into fantasy land that you can't distinguish between facts and imaginary attacks ?
Since you claim you know exactly what I mean, you know damn well what I intended. As I have posted /in this very thread/ this isn't about amiga being superior. It's about being able to have a conversation without the same "commodore failed because of XXX" "amiga sucked because of XXX" crap that comes up every single time.
Yes, we all know that AGA was slow, and that commodore had bad marketing and that the 1200 wasnt powerfull enough and that windows 95 sold monstrously well.
It all doesn't matter anymore. It's 2011. Everyone else moved on.
Why keep dredging up the same crap over and over and over and over again?
+1
I've found the ignore feature to be very useful recently mate. I recommend it highly! :D
-
I added a couple of carriage returns for clarity.
Ah! :-)
Do you think that runequester really believes that x86 solves everything?
Not at all..
Or do you think he was being sarcastic...
Definitely!!
.. in an attempt passively aggressively say that x86 isn't worthy?
No... I thought he was being sarcastic to point out how some people take this stuff way too seriously, with an underlying theory that it was mostly people who feel guilty because they left the Amiga and are over-justifying..
Do you think that he believe anyone actually thought PPC sucked at the time, or do you think he was passive aggressively implying that it is better than it is?
Didn't really get a feel for his PPC feelings, but I didn't read this stuff too seriously.. I saw (I thought) a bit of a tongue-in-cheek jab and based my reading of the thread on that..
As for his comment about CUSA Amigas not being Amigas, that he repeatedly invades CUSA threads to post this in his passive aggressive attempt to discredit them.
I don't really read those threads too much, so I haven't paid attention to his opinion on that..
Lots of people have very vibrant opinions on that matter...
Personally, I think most of that is pretty silly on all sides, but that's me..
desiv
-
Are you trying to claim that
"That x86 solves everything"
was said in all honesty? That you really believe that it solves everything? I read that as sarcasm and a passive aggressive jab at systems running x86.
So, just to be clear... Are you now truly claiming without any sarcasm "That x86 solves everything"?
You read the post right?
So let me quote myself.
Ahem
The subject is plagued by feelings of guilt about having used an amiga. This may come from insecurities of having made a "wrong choice" and a burning need to correct others misconceptions.
Various symptoms may manifest themselves, such as feeling a need to post in as many conversations as possible with any of the following:
How much commodore sucked
How much PPC sucked
How terrible the amiga was compared to the PC
How much every amiga model past the 500/1000/2000 was awful and terrible
How much better Turrican 2 was on the C64
That x86 solves everything
How terrible AGA was
That the X1000 is super expensive, in case you hadn't heard
In doing so, they hope they can somehow dispel the illusion other users had of having an interesting discussion about amiga's, by reminding them of things every person on the planet is already aware of.
Relevant parts in bold.
So tell me please, how do you go from A (my post) to B (your post) ?
You already know what I meant, so why this whole shell game of pretending I posted something else?
It seems everyone else got it just fine.
-
You read the post right?
So let me quote myself.
Ahem
Relevant parts in bold.
So tell me please, how do you go from A (my post) to B (your post) ?
You already know what I meant, so why this whole shell game of pretending I posted something else?
It seems everyone else got it just fine.
So, can you point to a single post that says "x86 solves everything"? What you did was a classic strawman argument combined with passive aggressive complaining.
-
Speaking only for myself:
People who like the x86 do not bug me.
People who act like the x86 is the Only And Inevitable Future and anybody who would like a new 68k or PPC-based system are backwards idiots do bug me. Very much.
Simple as that.
-
So, can you point to a single post that says "x86 solves everything"? What you did was a classic strawman argument combined with passive aggressive complaining.
So you did understand what I posted. Why did you pretend otherwise then?
As for a post saying exactly those 3 words? Probably not. History showed thats how it actually worked out though.
The sentiment? Its common enough that the poster immediately above me is familiar. As are others that have posted in the thread.
Again, you know damn well what I am talking about. Playing this little "I'll keep moving goal posts until I seem to win something" game is tedious in the slightest.
If you are still sore about the CUSA thing.. let it go. If you think my posting is somehow disruptive to the site, report me to the mod's.
-
when I said I enjoyed many new users comments lately, RuneQuester was at the top of my list. I don't always agree with his stance (in this thread for one), but his threads always provoke the most interesting conversations.
-
Speaking only for myself:
People who like the x86 do not bug me.
People who act like the x86 is the Only And Inevitable Future and anybody who would like a new 68k or PPC-based system are backwards idiots do bug me. Very much.
Simple as that.
+1
-
As one of the backwards idiots that bug you, I couldn't care less about you opinion.
I'm looking forward to new 68K and PPC systems. While I have X86 hardware, I enjoy my MorphOS system much more.
-
As one of the backwards idiots that bug you, I couldn't care less about you opinion.
I'm looking forward to new 68K and PPC systems. While I have X86 hardware, I enjoy my MorphOS system much more.
Uh, I think you mis-parsed my sentence. To clarify:
People (who act like (the x86 is the Only And Inevitable Future) and (anybody who would like a new 68k or PPC-based system are backwards idiots)) do bug me.
Clearer?
-
Then the mid/late 90's, after C= tanked... Competing "standards" (each with their own bug-ridden patina), vaporware, over-priced, unfinished, flaky products like the Delfina and CS-PPC, pre-order scams... You had to be a real gambler back then to "keep it real". :-/
And putting up with the total stupidity that occurred '95-99. P5 vs Hyperion, Clickboom, Visicorp, AT. Egos, egos and more egos. The only good things to come out of that period were AROS and UAE.
-
And putting up with the total stupidity that occurred '95-99. P5 vs Hyperion, Clickboom, Visicorp, AT. Egos, egos and more egos. The only good things to come out of that period were AROS and UAE.
and Soundgarden
-
when I said I enjoyed many new users comments lately, RuneQuester was at the top of my list. I don't always agree with his stance (in this thread for one), but his threads always provoke the most interesting conversations.
I appreciate it mate :) And better luck on the next thread.
-
Uh, I think you mis-parsed my sentence. To clarify:
People (who act like (the x86 is the Only And Inevitable Future) and (anybody who would like a new 68k or PPC-based system are backwards idiots)) do bug me.
Clearer?
Ahhhh!!! So you're an ARM guy! Good call, we will stamp out these deluded x86 and PPC/68k losers!
;)
-
Ahhhh!!! So you're an ARM guy! Good call, we will stamp out these deluded x86 and PPC/68k losers!
;)
Damn you ARM heretics, 65C816 is the one true CPU architecture!
-
In this thread runequester is making assumptions about the mental health of people who disagree with his zealous attitudes, obviously trawling for undeserved attention (which I regretfully give him, along with everyone else who facepalmed themselves to a headache).
-
In this thread runequester is making assumptions about the mental health of people who disagree with his zealous attitudes, obviously trawling for undeserved attention (which I regretfully give him, along with everyone else who facepalmed themselves to a headache).
I love you too
-
People (who act like (the x86 is the Only And Inevitable Future) and (anybody who would like a new 68k or PPC-based system are backwards idiots)) do bug me.
Way to go, calling people backward idiots :(
Intel inside an Amiga? Amiga's don't have an intel inside. Anyone who doesn't understand this doesn't know what an Amiga is.
-
Way to go, calling people backward idiots :(
Okay, I know bloodline was joking, but did I really just make things less clear in my attempt to clarify? ...bleargh. I need coffee.
-
I love how wanting to have amiga discussions without them negative piss fests apparently makes me a zealot for...something.
Amusingly i was the one posting a while back that an amiga desktop environment based on linux would make sense. Nearly got my head bitten off too :)
-
Way to go, calling people backward idiots :(
Intel inside an Amiga? Amiga's don't have an intel inside. Anyone who doesn't understand this doesn't know what an Amiga is.
The meaning I believe was "People who say that someone who wants a 68k or PPC machine are backward idiots bug me (him)"
He must have forgotten to close a bracket somewhere :D
-
I love how wanting to have amiga discussions without them negative piss fests apparently makes me a zealot for...something.
Amusingly i was the one posting a while back that an amiga desktop environment based on linux would make sense. Nearly got my head bitten off too :)
I'd love to see a linux distro with some Amiga-isms in it, coupled with what Linux can do.
-
I'd love to see a linux distro with some Amiga-isms in it, coupled with what Linux can do.
This needs it's own thread. Runequester...you know what to do!
-
I've just found another nice shiny silver teaspoon... :)
This time it was just behind my 3rd ear (the second one on the left that is) beside my old stuffed tortoise... :)
Anyone round here got a spare onion I could borrow for half an hour... ta... :)
-
The point PC was viable future winner for UK computer gamers was mass adoption by software houses of VGA graphics as standard. Why?
386 VGA/SBLASTER owner buys SF2....pretty slow and unplayable. 18 months later sells it and gets 486DX66 +GRAVIS etc....suddenly old unplayable game is arcade quality. Had 256 colours but is faster and sounds better automatically.
A500 owner buyss SF2...32 colour slow rubbish....3 years later he gets a 4000/030 and loads SF2....STILL rubbish (same speed, 32 colours, SFX/music). Has to pray a good AGA version is released and buy a 2nd copy if it is ever made! No reward for his £999 investment!
And that my friends is the problem, in 1990 most arcade games on PC had 256 colour graphics like Super Nintendo and their old PC games bought before upgrading to better PC automatically improved without the need for a single line of game code to improve. VGA mass adoption was the key. EGA Cinemaware games will forever be inferior to Amiga versions even on an running on Intel i7 920 PC today. After VGA though it was game over. 256 colours was enough even for 3D games like Doom or Screamer Rally comparedto PS1 RidgeRacer/Doom.
Big problem for AGA AND Atari Falcon potential purchasers no?
You are a perfect example for what he is pointing at. I had PC in the early 1990. My PC was Turbo and it had a Turbo button for a reason. Most of the old games were unplayable on faster machines, because they were tied to the slow processors. The sync with the videobeam was non existant on early PC games. I still have a magazine with source code for slowdowner that runs resident in DOS. A PC lamer told me in 1994 that the new games were undependable of CPU speed. So you can even run games on 4 MHz I asked him? He proudly answered yes.....
But the speed was not the only problem that sucked for the reasonable PC gaming, except for turn based strategies like Civilisation that was hit on the PC, while most Amiga gamers thought it sucked as a game. For every game before you start it you had to choose - type of Video controller (Hercules, CGA, EGA, VGA, SVGA), Type of Sound card (AdLib, SoundBlaster, SoundBlasterPro), Turbo or Normal version, JoyStick (what joystick, most of the games did not support joystick), Mouse. Shit, you had to run mouse driver before starting the game. Some games did not allow save of config, that was helping the PC gamers become DOS experts, because it was more interesting to type stupid scripts in DOS than to play actual games. Starting games from Windows was nightmare too, and even after Windows 95 appeared that put end of the configuration hell, people were still loving DOS because it was better for gaming.
The consoles were selling pretty well back in 1994-1995 for a reason - the Amiga and the Atari were no more, the PC sucked as a gaming machine and the PS1 was getting all the nicest games, that took the PC 3 years (late 1997) to catch up with the quality of the graphics and sound.
-
This needs it's own thread. Runequester...you know what to do!
Amithlon with a bare minimum 68k AROS kickstart and a 686-BE compiled AROS userland would be lovely methinks. :)
-
One thing I do know is most of the disastrous machine projects and design decisions that happened are because the founder of Commodore, Jack, had to leave.
Some examples...
1. Commodore 16 was meant to have been a project to produce a MRP $70-80 VIC-20 replacement.
2.There is no way Jack would have not screamed about the A1000 unlike Commodore whilst the delayed 500/2000 machines crept into 1987.
3. He would have shifted a lot more C64s @ <$199 in 84.
And before you unknowledgeable ones say "Atari" remember
1. Cost all his personal wealth to get it.
2. No MOS factory
3. VIC-II/SID quality best designers didn't move to Atari.
4. Atari R&D projects had nothing worth a crap.
5. No stake in arcade side.
Real shame.
2.
-
This needs it's own thread. Runequester...you know what to do!
Given my new found status as an attentionwhoring 68K zealot, i'll have to overcome my inner turmoil and self loathing first :)
i'll post something tonight and lay out some thoughts. Sadly i have zero ability to code anything but pipe dreams are fun :)
-
The meaning I believe was "People who say that someone who wants a 68k or PPC machine are backward idiots bug me (him)"
Yep. That's what I get for posting half-asleep...
-
You are a perfect example for what he is pointing at. I had PC in the early 1990. My PC was Turbo and it had a Turbo button for a reason. Most of the old games were unplayable on faster machines, because they were tied to the slow processors. The sync with the videobeam was non existant on early PC games. I still have a magazine with source code for slowdowner that runs resident in DOS. A PC lamer told me in 1994 that the new games were undependable of CPU speed. So you can even run games on 4 MHz I asked him? He proudly answered yes.....
But the speed was not the only problem that sucked for the reasonable PC gaming, except for turn based strategies like Civilisation that was hit on the PC, while most Amiga gamers thought it sucked as a game. For every game before you start it you had to choose - type of Video controller (Hercules, CGA, EGA, VGA, SVGA), Type of Sound card (AdLib, SoundBlaster, SoundBlasterPro), Turbo or Normal version, JoyStick (what joystick, most of the games did not support joystick), Mouse. Shit, you had to run mouse driver before starting the game. Some games did not allow save of config, that was helping the PC gamers become DOS experts, because it was more interesting to type stupid scripts in DOS than to play actual games. Starting games from Windows was nightmare too, and even after Windows 95 appeared that put end of the configuration hell, people were still loving DOS because it was better for gaming.
The consoles were selling pretty well back in 1994-1995 for a reason - the Amiga and the Atari were no more, the PC sucked as a gaming machine and the PS1 was getting all the nicest games, that took the PC 3 years (late 1997) to catch up with the quality of the graphics and sound.
I beg to differ,
PC comments-
whilst I started with a 486SX friends had 386SX and 386DX machines. The only times PC games were affected by CPU speed making them unplayable was running C64 quality simple EGA games from mid80s intended for 8086 CPU.
These were excluded from my comments for a good reason. ALL VGA arcade games were playable on even early Pentiums, many scrolling games sold in 386/486 era around 91/92 would not be as smooth as an Amiga 1200 or even 500.
So playing 8086 CGA/EGA 80s games on Pentium MMX is irrelevant to the discussion as weare talking Wing Commander VGA and onwards. Before this you wouldn't consider an EGA or 286 12mhz PC in the UK for gaming.
Console comments=
More Atari 2600 VCS consoles were sold than all Atari AND C= 8 bit home computers combined.
NES outsold Amiga + Atari ST combined
Megadrive outsold Amiga + Atari ST combined
Of those 3 examples only Sega Megadrive was superior in some ways to competition on it's launch day. VCS inferior to Atari 400, NES inferior to A500 but 300% lower cost was the advantage. Console sales and home use computer sales are not connected.If you need ed a computer there was no advantage in getting a Playstation. PS1 was a revolution and Sony's marketing combined to quadruple console market size. Had nothing to do with specs of Amigas and PCs available or whether those machines could even run Ridge Racer on launch day.
Ultimately I have given the generally accepted reasons most people in the industry see why, and when the breakpoint was, for when Wintel would secure a future no matter what C= or Atari did. A machine which has no custom chips can run games better/smoother. You will either agree or not but taken in context it is fact. As is whatever you think of Win95 for 95% of the world it was good enough for Wintel to make serious inroads in the UK into the home computer market.
PC SF2 bit choppy and sounding scratchy? Get a faster CPU and Gravis wavetable card. WTF choices did we have if an arcade conversion was botched? None! If SF2 PC was not produced in VGA but EGA however PC users would be stuck same as Amga users......get it? This is why Outrun PC is a waste of time and before the cut-off point. Needing touse moslow on a 200mhz PC to make a 1984 CGA version of Zaxxon playable is not related to the topic
CGA era = C64 versions of games better and EGA era = Amiga versions of games better....this is all about 1991/92 introduction of AGA fighting off rise of the home Wintel PC sales. AGA was fine for a couple of years but as Dave Haynie pointed out Commodore's AAA/Hombre was financial and technical suicide compared to off the shelf PC sound/Video/3D cards anyway.
-
I beg to differ,
More Atari 2600 VCS consoles were sold than all Atari AND C= 8 bit home computers combined.
NES outsold Amiga + Atari ST combined
Megadrive outsold Amiga + Atari ST combined
Hmmm... gawd knows where you came up with the load of keech... :rolleyes:
But even if you took the worst guestimate sales figures for both Atari & Commodore 8 bit computers they far outweigh the so called 30 million sales figures of the Atari 2600... ;)
The only consoles of that era that according to the various sales figures that could come close to such a claim is the NES with figures of around 61 million, followed by the SNES with figures of around 49 million sold... :)
Methinks you're just making thinks up to try and prove some pointless point... :D
-
Let's make a fair comparison:
There were very little amiga games that were harddisk installable, while all pc games were.
Harddisk installable amiga games ran fine from the GUI, even the more hardware-heavy games, like Lionheart and Fightin' Spirit, while the vast majority of pc games weren't until 1997.
The avarage sound card until 1995 was the Sound Blaster Pro, of which synthesizer could not match the Amiga synthesizer by a long run. I remember buying the Sound Blaster Pro for more than 200 guilders, which was a lot back then, but I desperately wanted to get rid of the beeper sounds (and many old games didn't support it to my disappointment).
Many pc games before 1992 were released in CGA or EGA while their Amiga counterparts were all VGA-ish, at worst EGA-ish. Sound blasters weren't that common back then so many games were CGA + pc beeper and I can tell you that the audiovisual experience was heaven for the die-hard masochist. The colour magenta is still burned in my retina and the shrieks of the beeper still haunts me in nightmares.
Sure, the Amiga had it's share of Guru Meditations, but it didn't cripple the machine as much as the BSODs of Windows 9x, and while the majority of BSODs were caused by Windows 95, the Guru Meditations were almost all caused by badly written software (and therefore could easier be dealt with).
-
@drHirudo
"For every game before you start it you had to choose - type of Video controller (Hercules, CGA, EGA, VGA, SVGA), Type of Sound card (AdLib, SoundBlaster, SoundBlasterPro), Turbo or Normal version, JoyStick (what joystick, most of the games did not support joystick)"
If i'm not mistaken, that only were made once via the setup program and never was required again.
"Mouse. Shit, you had to run mouse driver before starting the game"
Didn't you know of batch files?. I loaded the mouse driver along with others needed and didn't care of it before of launching a game or not.
-
Dunno what this thread is about. BTW which browser is best for DOS 3.3 ?
-
PC SF2 bit choppy and sounding scratchy? Get a faster CPU and Gravis wavetable card. WTF choices did we have if an arcade conversion was botched? None!
Eh, Amiga 2000/3000/4000 owners could easily upgrade, with accellerator cards, like Newteks etcetera. Point is, game developers did not aim the high end Amiga market as I guess there were less high end Amiga users as there were high end PC users. Otherwise they would have opted more often for HD installers as well.
-
"Mouse. Shit, you had to run mouse driver before starting the game"
Ah yes, the autoexec.bat/config.sys drama. One game wanted EMM386, the other puked on it. the other game did not run until you set an obscure parameter like buffer=40 (40-what? - an anonymous math teacher). So you ended up with creating a helluva startup menu.
I remember a game magazine stating they were just unable to test the PC port of Turrican 2 as the cd rom drivers needed too much memory, let alone the sound blaster drivers.
-
(what joystick, most of the games did not support joystick)
Eh, that's not quite true, even in the very early days joysticks were commonly supported (even more often than the arrow keys!).
You just had to have another isa card for it. (if you did not have a sound blaster). AND you had to calibrate it as these joysticks were analog and therefore mostly unusable for games designed for digital input.
-
I didn't say that, just quoted what drHirudo said. :) Now i remember that my 486 had game port and was mainly angry because i couldn't use my all time favorites "atari-style connectors" on it.
-
Dunno what this thread is about. BTW which browser is best for DOS 3.3 ?
That would be Arachne.
-
My 33MHz Commodore 486 with Gravis Ultrasound and Tseng Labs SVGA card wiped the floor with my expanded A1200 in '94/95.
It was cheaper too.
-
My 33MHz Commodore 486 with Gravis Ultrasound and Tseng Labs SVGA card wiped the floor with my expanded A1200 in '94/95.
It was cheaper too.
Yeah, but what system do you still have and play around with :)
-
Yeah, but what system do you still have and play around with :)
:)
-
I love how wanting to have amiga discussions without them negative piss fests apparently makes me a zealot for...something.
Acknowledging that many newer operating systems and hardware architectures are superior to the Amiga in most regards mostly don't start any "negative piss fests." You don't seem to understand that people don't have to share your opinion on the matters you brought up in the original posts. Be reasonable and show some humility! After all, just because this is a discussion forum about the Amiga doesn't mean that people have to unconditionally praise everything about it. We're all obviously here because we like the Amiga system for one reason or another, so why don't we just leave it at that?
-
Acknowledging that many newer operating systems and hardware architectures are superior to the Amiga in most regards mostly don't start any "negative piss fests."
Oh.. You must be new here...
Welcome..
:)
desiv :roflmao:
-
Acknowledging that many newer operating systems and hardware architectures are superior to the Amiga in most regards mostly don't start any "negative piss fests." You don't seem to understand that people don't have to share your opinion on the matters you brought up in the original posts. Be reasonable and show some humility! After all, just because this is a discussion forum about the Amiga doesn't mean that people have to unconditionally praise everything about it. We're all obviously here because we like the Amiga system for one reason or another, so why don't we just leave it at that?
We'll skip past the fact that you didn't actually read what I posted and get to the meat of the matter.
I like that to you there's no room between "68K IS THE HOLY GRAIL" and "PC's WERE ALWAYS TOTALLY AWESOME"
So since I don't fall universally in the latter, I must automatically fit in the former category.
So riddle me this: Why did I start a thread a few months back, speaking positively of the notion of a linux based "amiga like" OS, if I am such a die hard 68K zealot?
-
Actually, let me make it simpler for you two.
Here is the actual post I made on January 30th.
Care to read that and explain to me how I am an evil 68K zealot stuck in the past?
I am going to don my fireproof suit for this one
The way forward for "amiga" in my opinion, would be very close to what they are touting (but with the bonus of actual results, rather than fapping about on the internet)
Linux distribution with amiga-like UI parts added to it.
This assumes pouring some serious effort and money into the desktop environment to make it slick and nice. There's some options out there that could be used as springboards.
Advantages:
Hardware support. Linux supports more or less every bit of hardware out there, whereas AROS supports a fairly narrow (but rapidly expanding) range. Morph supports even less, and OS4 of course only runs on a few specific items.
And at the moment, it seems the only way we're going to get multiple core support, access to tons of RAM etc.
Architecture support. Linux runs on pretty much anything, whether its x86, powerPC, ARM, 68K or stranger stuff.
Application support. Lack of modern software is a serious limit to some of the current options. While some recompiling might be needed here and there, to look nice in the desktop environment, there'd be a wealth of modern, compatible options available right off the bat.
This also covers modern file systems etc.
Corporate support. Linux has a ton of corporate weight behind it, pushing development. While they would have no interest in the "amiga" UI, we'd still benefit from their kernel developments, etc.
Would it pass the "purity" test? Well, no. It's not a commodore product running on 68K. But it'd be as much amiga as morph or os4, and it'd actually have a way forward.
Thoughts? Flames? Hatred?
-
So riddle me this: Why did I start a thread a few months back, speaking positively of the notion of a linux based "amiga like" OS, if I am such a die hard 68K zealot?
Yes, exactly...
Why did you???
It could be that you have been planning this all along...
Months worth of planting false information...
Leading up to this moment!!! When you show your true colors!!!!
AHA!!
I bet you don't even like Linux.. That's all a sham!!!
You're probably a BSD fanboi too... Even worse.. DragonFly BSD...
I should have known...
Well played Runequester.. Well played...
:laughing:
desiv
(Too much caffeine today? Hmm..)
-
The shamefull truth is.. I use GEOS :(
-
We'll skip past the fact that you didn't actually read what I posted and get to the meat of the matter.
I read it but disregarded most of it, because you don't seem to be able to express what is clearly a personal opinion without resorting to insulting remarks.
I like that to you there's no room between "68K IS THE HOLY GRAIL" and "PC's WERE ALWAYS TOTALLY AWESOME"
How did you come to that conclusion? Please elaborate.
So since I don't fall universally in the latter, I must automatically fit in the former category.
No, I'm calling you zealous because you think of every criticism of the Amiga as a personal insult. You should get over it.
So riddle me this: Why did I start a thread a few months back, speaking positively of the notion of a linux based "amiga like" OS, if I am such a die hard 68K zealot?
Did I say anything about 68k? I don't know why you started such a thread, and frankly I don't get the idea. Are you going to suggest turning an apple into an orange next?
-
I read it but disregarded most of it, because you don't seem to be able to express what is clearly a personal opinion without resorting to insulting remarks.
"I didn't read what you posted, but I am going to attack you based on what I think you wrote".
We're done here. Have a pleasant day.
-
The shamefull truth is.. I use GEOS :(
I couldn't afford an ST so I started writing my own GUI in a compiled BASIC and got as far as the Mac/GEM style windows and pull down menus :roflmao:
-
I couldn't afford an ST so I started writing my own GUI in a compiled BASIC and got as far as the Mac/GEM style windows and pull down menus :roflmao:
In BASIC? Thats pretty rad :)
-
"I didn't read what you posted, but I am going to attack you based on what I think you wrote".
We're done here. Have a pleasant day.
Really, that's what I wrote? Ironically enough, I think that you should read that sentence again. As I said, I did read all of what you wrote, but I disregarded most of it as pure bait, such as your golden bits of wisdom, like
The subject is plagued by feelings of guilt about having used an amiga. This may come from insecurities of having made a "wrong choice" and a burning need to correct others misconceptions.
and your brilliant conclusion; The cure for both illnesses is to go have a wank, and is thus easily accomplished. If you still suffer from either afterwards, you obviously didn't wank it enough.
because I don't really think that they can be addressed in a polite manner.
If there's any particular part of what you wrote (that wasn't obviously pulled out of god-knows-where to justify your inability to accept the opinions of others) that you'd like me to address, please go ahead and point it out.
-
I misread your post. Apologies for that.
Here's my thing: Things aren't binary. Its okay to have a thread about amiga stuff, without the same old stuff being brought up again and again.
We all know that PC's turned out to be more powerful, capable and cost effective. Why repeat it every single time someone wants to talk about the A1200 or the proposed A1300 or whatever ?
It'd be like going to a classic car forum and talking about how much better your Prius is.
If the tone was not to your liking, I apologize.
If being tired of that stuff makes me a zealot or someone who doesn't want to hear other opinions, I guess I'll carry that badge.
-
I misread your post. Apologies for that.
Here's my thing: Things aren't binary. Its okay to have a thread about amiga stuff, without the same old stuff being brought up again and again.
We all know that PC's turned out to be more powerful, capable and cost effective. Why repeat it every single time someone wants to talk about the A1200 or the proposed A1300 or whatever ?
It'd be like going to a classic car forum and talking about how much better your Prius is.
If the tone was not to your liking, I apologize.
If being tired of that stuff makes me a zealot or someone who doesn't want to hear other opinions, I guess I'll carry that badge.
Maybe I could respect your stance if you could point out a single thread that has become a "piss fest" because someone mentioned any of the points in your first post. Sure, I've seen people say similar things, but it has always been contextually called for and in the spirit of discussion.
-
Gawd... are you two ladies still at it in this thread... :lol:
If you're gonna have a wee cat fight, at least make it a bit more lively instead of this handbags at 10 paces malarky... ;)
Failing that... get a room... :D
-
In BASIC? Thats pretty rad :)
Well anything is possible as a kid with a compiled super hot BASIC no?
-
Gawd... are you two ladies still at it in this thread... :lol:
If you're gonna have a wee cat fight, at least make it a bit more lively instead of this handbags at 10 paces malarky... ;)
Failing that... get a room... :D
Here Franko, I'm sure I've seen someone else hanging around with your picture just a minute ago, was a bit of a double take....and anyway I can't work out how to make a picture work....nor can I design a logo ;(
-
Here Franko, I'm sure I've seen someone else hanging around with your picture just a minute ago, was a bit of a double take....and anyway I can't work out how to make a picture work....nor can I design a logo ;(
Just click on "UserCP" in the top right, then select "Edit Avatar", click on "Use Custom Avatar" then choose file and you can upload your own pic/avatar from your computer to use... :)
Your pic must be no more than 120x120 pixels and no bigger than 19.5Kb in size... :)
PS:they may try to imitate, but there's only one Franko... ;)
PPS:If ye cannae draw sumthin fur toffee, then send me a PM with an idea and I'll make one for you... :)
-
Just click on "UserCP" in the top right, then select "Edit Avatar", click on "Use Custom Avatar" then choose file and you can upload your own pic/avatar from your computer to use... :)
Your pic must be no more than 120x120 pixels and no bigger than 19.5Kb in size... :)
PS:they may try to imitate, but there's only one Franko... ;)
PPS:If ye cannae draw sumthin fur toffee, then send me a PM with an idea and I'll make one for you... :)
PM is done! 120x120? hmmmm I used to use PaintShopPro when I ran Windoze *rummage rummage* gotta be something in here somewhere that will do that.......*click click scratch head.........* time will tell
-
Batman rules!!!
-
@ LordSpunky
It's a start... you just need to add some blood and guts to it now and you should be onto something... ;)
-
Batman rules!!!
Nah... I always preferred The Joker meself... :D
-
@ LordSpunky
It's a start... you just need to add some blood and guts to it now and you should be onto something... ;)
Well it has taken me a year to work out how to resize a photo on a Mac! ARGH!.....but being a Mac I didn't need any extra software, I could have just used Preview!.....need a better pic now