Crappy comparison of Amiga 1200 vs Atari Falcon

[stefcep2]

A stock A1200 is a crippled machine.

You could easily spend three times its price on expansions alone.  Some say that's good design because it allows expansions to grow your system as you needs change.  I say it was nothing but a cash grab.

You'd think the CPU is a big let down.  But actually no, that wasn't the biggest brain fart decision.

Seriously: shipping with 2 MB chip RAM?  Not upgradable?  C'mon.  Even 2 MB of fast RAM revamps the performance and possibilities.  

Then adding even a 20 MB hard drive improves it further.  

Just those two changes as standard improves the software and OS  possibilities.

And sound: the same chip for 10 years?

Please.  Of course a stock ATARI was better than a stick A1200.

[stefcep2]

On paper, and for specific audio workloads, the Falcon was better. But for all intents and purposes, in real world applications across a broad spectrum of workloads, the A1200 was better.
The article does not take into account the TCO of each system. Bang for buck the A1200 was a much better investment. The market dynamics proved it to be so.

As a floppy-only 2 Mb system?  What real world apps and broad spectrum of workloads would be possible?