Crappy comparison of Amiga 1200 vs Atari Falcon

[Kronos]

An extremely fair and balanced article. The Flacon was horribly crippled by its memory bus,

Don't forget that the Falcon was also horribly crippled by it's SW (read TOS) which allready was in legacy hell as it wasn't really planned for multitasking or HW expansion.

[Kronos]

@Thorham

Lack of chunky mode meant that the A1200 sucked donkey-balls in 3D.

But to your suprise there actually were other uses for computers in 1992 except FPS games !!

Plenty other fields were a stock Falcon was utterly useless compared to a stock A1200.

[Kronos]

And as to replacing the 68ec20 with a full 68020.

a) you wouldn't get any benefits, since the Mobo still has only 24bit addressspace

b) those extra 8 signals might get confusing signals (assuming there even is an 020 with the same package as the ec)

[Kronos]

Other mistake was 2.5" IDE connector as 2.5" IDE hard drives were
most expensive at the time , SCSI was much cheaper but 3.5" IDE
were way cheaper.

SCSI drives allways were expensive when compared to similar speced IDE drives.

3.5" IDE was no option:
- space (yeah I know they do fit, but surely not according to any spec)
- power consumption (add some RAM/CPU and drain a bit power at the ports and you'll have problem)
- most 3.5" drives at that time had problems sending there parameters, not a problem on x86 where those where strored in NVRAM after been read out at setup. 2.5" drive where much more reliable.

[Kronos]

3.5" drives made in 1993 or later, or older drives >200MB work without problem.

But in 1992 and on a budget C= would have offered drives around 50-200MB and most of them would not have worked.

[Kronos]

GEMDOS / TOS from start have support for Accessories.
Accessories are programs that are available from main application so TOS from start could run few !

If it had been anywhere near real multitasking, it would have been multitasking.

Sound more like the cooperative "multitasking" seen in some versions of 68k MacOS and just like MacOS at that time TOS was heading for a deadend.

Sure solutions could be found, but they allways were compromises between performance, reliability and compability.

AmigaOS3.x on the other hand was pretty much state of the art when it came to consumer OSes and could hold it's water against Win3.x and only got left behind a few years later.

None of the 3 multitasking OSes you mentioned were available/fully useable at the time the Falcon was released.

[Kronos]

Win3.x was what was available when the A1200 and Falcon came out, making it the right measure.

TOS failed even by that measure, AOS.3.0 was "state of the art", wether it was just as good or better than Win does not really matter.

[Kronos]

There is the Draco (and even some early version of the Casablanca )

Problem is that AmigaOS needs atleast the CIAs to work at all and either the rest of the chipset or massive patching (CGX/P96) to be really usefull.

Quite a difference to running MacOS or TOS on an Amiga where all you needed was the ROM-images and a few mild patches.