Atari ST versus Commodore Amiga in pictures

[InTheSand]

monami wrote:
...atari who did nothing but innovate since conception and succeed as far as i'm concerned...

As far as you're concerned... Exactly.

Meanwhile, back in reality, Atari innovated in the 1970s with the 2600 and the 400/800 series, but it's a bit of a push to consider the likes of the ST as "innovative". Cheap, yes, but not innovative.

As history shows and others in this thread have stated, it was hastily cobbled together from mostly off-the-shelf parts, using someone else's GUI (GEM) and someone else's base OS (CP/M 68K). Innovation? Where?

 - Ali

[InTheSand]

DigitalQ wrote:
The rest of it was made of cut-rate parts from whoever the lowest bidder was.  I think that maybe Atari made the case, however.  

Yes!!! The experience of typing on that squishy keyboard is certainly unique!

If you can get hold of it, the "Byte" magazine ST review and interview (circa 1986) makes interesting reading. In particular, the ST was never originally intended to be shipped with that awful YM/AY clone soundchip...

 - Ali

[InTheSand]

Retro_71 wrote:
i would never get a Atari ST (and there was chances too for free)

Aww... I'd *NEVER* turn down a free computer (well, unless it was an old generic PC). STs weren't necessarily bad - just not anything particularly special, and without them, the A500 would probably have stayed at a higher price for longer...

I progressed from a ZX Spectrum to an ST, and the change at the time was spectacular in terms of what could be done in comparison (though the sound chip was curiously familiar!), but the Amiga was always the one to aim for, which I then upgraded to a year or so later.

 - Ali

[InTheSand]

Hammer wrote:

What really disapoints me is to see this world dominated by PCs. Crappy processor, crappy video, crappy sound, crappy OS, and It won the big fight over all the nice machines...

The X86 PC has a superior distribution model i.e. unified PC clones compared to fragmented 68K PC world.

Starting from 1991, PC world has ATI Mach series GPUs. In 1992, ATI Mach32 already beats CBM's AGA.

And... the rise of 3D first-person shooters pretty much killed off the remaining Amiga games market... If only the AGA chipset had included a chunky graphics mode as part of the original hardware (Akiko excluded)... Then again, that'd only have just delayed the inevitable...

@AeroMan: As for crappy processor... yes, but it's now fast enough for that not to be an issue... And crappy OS? Err.. you must be using Windows!

 - Ali

[InTheSand]

DigitalQ wrote:
A well-known fact is that modern Windows is based on NT.  A little-known fact is that NT is based on OS/2.   :-D

Errm... Windows NT was originally going to be based on OS/2, but this fell apart when Microsoft continued to develop its DOS-based Windows GUI instead of putting its resources into OS/2. IBM and M$ fell out, with IBM going the OS/2 route and Microsoft with Windows. The rest is history!

 - Ali