microcrapintel... No Thanks!

[adz]

stopthegop wrote:
"And then there was one..."

This merging of Microsoft and Apple was entirely predictable; nauseating, but somehow stimulating because they so richly deserve each other.  Bad marries worse.  May their union grow to be as big as...?  Well, as big as the Titanic.  True innovation in computer development is dying, if not dead, under the weight of these two alleged "competitors": co-conspirators is more like it.  Two bloated, greedy monoliths consolidated into one massive, reaking blob of self-interested power.

Merge??? Are you refering to "Boot Camp"? If so, I personally would call that offering the end user more choice.  

I'm not saying that technolgy hasn't progressed in the last 15 or so years.  Clearly it has.  But only for one (ok, two)platform(s)!  The small company with a great original idea doesn't stand a chance; the idea will either be bought immediately, then buried or it will be stolen outright and included free in the next version of Wincintosh.  I don't see what is so "innovative" about selling, say, a 1.0Ghz chip one week and calling it things like "breakthrough", "cutting edge", "all new", "totally redesigned", etc.. then the following week introducing the same exact chip, only with a slighly higher voltage applied to its master clock ocillator and a few pin re-assignments to make it incompatible with all previous versions, and describe it in those exact same terms.

What exactly does that have to do with Microsoft and Apple? Ahhh, now I see, we've moved onto Intel bashing, hmmm, is that an "axis of evil" I see forming?

Week after week, month after month, year after year.  The 2.5ghz PC that I own today running Windows is basically the same slow, crash-prone piece of {bleep} that I had in 1994.  Ditto for all the years in-between.  Software is even worse.  We went to the moon on 64K, but now we need 100 Meg just to send email.  Thats progress?

I'm yet to see my current Windows box crash and it runs oh so much faster than anything I have owned previous, I wish my A1200 was as stable. As for 100Mbps connections for email, I only have 10Mbps and email works perfectly fine :-D  

The consolidation in the computer industry at this point seems inevitable.  Microsoft likes to call it "competing".  With whom?  I grew up in Missouri.  We had a term for it.  Its called inbreading.  I'll keep my Amigas as long as they're legal!  Cheers

Not much the end user can really do about it, but there are alternatives to Windows and we are free to choose what we want to run. I personally use a whole variety or operating systems, Windows, MacOS, Linux, BSD, AmigaOS, they each serve their purpose and have all served me well. So see, we do have a choice, just open your eyes.

[adz]

stopthegop wrote:

Last I checked Bill Gates owned ~20% of Apple's (not a majority stake, but quite possibly a plurality stake?) stock.  Correspondingly, Steve Jobs owns (or has owned) a significant chunk of MS stock. I'm honestly not sure if this is still the case, but if I was betting I would stake that they each still do.  Wasn't Microsoft, back in the 90s, Apple Corp's "Angel Investor?", saving them from certain bankruptcy.  Oops, what I meant to say was they are in fact "competitors".... uh hu.   You are right about choice.  I go to a computer store and they give me a choice.  Wintel or the door.  And yea, Mac...  Just for argument's sake, I'll cede the point and agree that Mac was indeed a choice (albeit a lousy one).  I said was a choice.  Now even Macs use intel chips and run Windows without emulation.  So where's my choice now?   If it looks like a PC and runs the same software as a PC and uses exactly the same hardware as a PC, then...  Its a PC!  If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....    

Hmmm, I love how the term "PC" gets thrown around these days, essentially, "PC" is an acronym for "Personal Computer" and last time I looked, all the machines sitting on my desk were personal computers, be they Mac, x86 or Amiga. And what is this "Wintel" crap, you also have a choice when it comes to CPU as well. You have Intel, AMD and VIA. Sure they are all from the same basic architecture, but they are all different and they do offer you a choice. You never had that much choice in CPU manufacturer with Apple or Amiga, did you? At the end of the day, who cares what hardware drives the OS, so long as the OS is user friendly, stable and secure, I'm happy. And yes, for the record I believe both Windows and MacOS fall into this catagory.

My first Amiga was a 500 in 1987 (maybe it was '88?).  After that an A4000.  I had never even SEEN a crash until I got a PC.  I know of numerous organizations that have Amiga computers in production to this day precisely because they do not crash.  They are still widely used in PLC environments (factories, mechanical automation, assembly line, robotics, etc..).  The US FRB uses them to maintain "absolute, 100%, 7x24x365" uptime of currency monitoring systems.  Nasa uses them (although I'm not so sure thats an endorsement anymore?).    Anyway, if your 1200 is crashing something isn't configured right.    

We all know the Amiga was a great machine, I never said it wasn't, so what the hell are you going on about. Besides, I've seen plenty of UNIX servers with ludicrously long uptimes as well. Anyway, if your Windows box is crashing, something isn't configured right ;-)

You're right about that.  But I reserve the right to {bleep} about it.    Of the systems you listed, which one really stands out to you as truly being different?   Only the Amiga.  The others are genetic mutations of each other.  At least imho.  It would be like buying a car and, say, Ford was the dominant manufacturer.  Every car dealer would only carry Fords, but you'd have a "choice" between a Ford Escort, a Ford Truck, a Ford Sedan, or a Ford Escape.  If you didn't want any of these, you could also buy a Lincoln (which, unknown to many consumers, is owned by Ford).   Problem is Lincoln has less than 5% market share, so its more difficult to find parts for plus 3/4 of all gas stations don't sell gas that will work in a Lincoln....  etc.  

If your going to bleep about it, at least make an effort to construct something intelligent and thought provoking.

[adz]

mr_a500 wrote:

No, the Amiga is NOT a PC. It seems that these days people think that every microcomputer is a PC. For people who remember computer history, PC is a short form of the IBM PC or clone. Just because IBM chose the term "Personal Computer" and short form "PC" for their computer system, this does not make all personal computers PCs. MS used "Windows" as a term for its OS - this does not make every OS with windows called Windows does it? In every single Amiga magazine and every single Amiga manual I have ever read, "PC" is a term used to talk about the competing IBM system. In the Amiga manuals, the Amiga is referred to as a "microcomputer".

The C64 is NOT a PC. The Atari ST is NOT a PC. Linux runs on a PC. BeOS runs on a PC. Mac is moving into a grey area - now using mostly PC hardware. Strangely, Steve Jobs started calling Macs "PCs" in a presentation in 2003 after years of insisting that they are not PCs. Maybe this was a hint that they would soon be basically the same - using the same CPU and able to run Windows. (then again, maybe it was a marketing ploy to convince the ignorant Windows hordes to buy Macs)

Could have sworn my C64 and C128 have the word "Personal Computer" written on them, but anyway, according to this it depends on ones own opinion and just because my opinion differs from yours, doesn't automatically mean I'm wrong.