Atari ST versus Commodore Amiga in pictures

[Hammer]

monami wrote:
@hammer

those are not my words they are from the online amiga history!

In 1991, PC was in ascending as a gaming platform e.g. Wing Commander series reveals classic Amiga’s architectural weakness for certain type of games.  

[Retro_71]

My 2 cents.
I have alot of retro computers not just Amiga's. Microbee's, Trs80's, C64, C128, Dragon, Apple IIE-GS, and a few retro consol's (MegaDrive - CD32).. Point is that i would never get a Atari ST (and there was chances too for free), because to me and alot of people they don't represent any mild stone in computing history (and i was around back then as well, I can still remember the TRS-80/Apple Days) whereas the Amiga's did make mild stones. I know that you don't agree which is fine, but as a retro computer enthusiast they just don't do anything for me.
Also around my area you had to go very very far to find at least 1 ST user (Sydney, Australia).
Anyway as people have said before your point seems to be comparing the Amiga COMPUTER to the Atari COMPANY...
Anyways Merry Christmas.  :cheers:

[monami]

well i'm here again and i'll wait for the superiority of amiga to convince the world again... but i'm not convinced about the a500's absolute power in the 80's i don't remember it blowing the cobwebs away! seemed very much like everyting the st could do.

[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

[bloodline]

monami wrote:
i'm sure the amiga was the same. surface mounting and all...

Not at all, the original Atari ST was essentially built around the same design ideas as Atari's old 8bit machines... except that it used a very powerful and modern CPU and a lot of RAM... for the time.

The Amiga brought a whole new set of rules to the table...

Stereo PMC Audio
CoProcessors
Dedicated hardware acceleration
DMA
etc...
the list is endless...

[monami]

@retro 71

being as you are a retro gamer and own all these systems and are master of them. could you offer your technical opinion of each of them interms of the market aimed at and the cost effectiveness of the hardware for the time? i'm just curious...

[monami]

thanks bloodline you proved my point! earlier in the thread you will see why i said the amiga 500 should not be compaired to the st. as it was 2 years later. the amiga 1000 is the only fair comparison. goodnight folks. :-)

[AeroMan]

Atari and Commodore are very close companies. They even swaped their chairmans (Bushnell was at Commodore when Tramiel was at Atari)

If you guys have read On The Edge, there is a part where it says the ST's design started inside Commodore. Amiga's creators were ex-Atari people.

Amiga's hardware is closer to the Atari 800 than to the C64. It uses a list to feed the video chip for graphics and sprites, as Miner did for the 800. It has DMA to obtain this data, and lots of similarities.

The ST is closer to the 64, in the way it has a number of fixed modes, and they work in a simpler way. It has a single video chip that shares RAM just like the VIC did. It is a simple machine. Shivji was part of the Commodore 8 bit team.

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...
(crappy world ! :-? )

[HenryCase]

Watched the vid, only minor differences between most of the screens, but as others have said showing intro screens isn't a truly accurate representation of the differences between the two machines.

@monami
Please clarify this one point for me (and please leave out the Atari almost buying Amiga history stuff, most of us know this already). Are you trying to say that the Atari ST's existence is the only reason the A500 was created?

[DigitalQ]

It seems to me there wasn't anything the Atari ST could do that the Commodore 128 could do.   :-D

[Retro_71]

InTheSand wrote:

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

 :-D  Well I have a few computers and room is getting pretty had to come by (the wife is always on my case), so i can only get computer that i feel made a big impact on history. And as i have said although the ST wasn't a bad computer it just didn't really make a big splash in computing history hence why i won't get one.

[Retro_71]

monami wrote:
@retro 71

being as you are a retro gamer and own all these systems and are master of them. could you offer your technical opinion of each of them interms of the market aimed at and the cost effectiveness of the hardware for the time? i'm just curious...

No i won't as THAT would take a whole book and quote frankly i hate typing if i don't need to. WOW your sarcasm overwhelms me, gee i wish i was smart enough to be sarcastic.
Anyway enough wasting my time on someone that doesn't want to see the true world (u can stay in your little world).
Anywayt again Merry Christmas to all

[bloodline]

monami wrote:
thanks bloodline you proved my point! earlier in the thread you will see why i said the amiga 500 should not be compaired to the st. as it was 2 years later. the amiga 1000 is the only fair comparison. goodnight folks. :-)

The ST can be compared with the A500 for three reasons:

The ST was built in response to the Amiga (later renamed the A1000).
The ST was actively marketed against the A500.
The ST was upgraded (though not significantly) over the course of it's life cycle during it's competition with the A500.

[Hammer]

well i'm here again and i'll wait for the superiority of amiga to convince the world again

Ok, Amiga's Stardust (OCS/ECS, smooth multi-level scaling objects like Wing Commander), Brian The Lion (OCS/ECS, SNES style Mode 7(TM) effects), Shadow Fighter (OCS/ECS, CapCom System 2 style effects) and Elf Mania (OCS/ECS, CapCom System 2 style effects), Links (OCS/ECS, HAM mode game not just title screen) vs select an Atari ST/STE game with similar gfx quality.

[monami]

@henrycase.

no i suspected that miner was in on the atari next gen computer and tried to cut their throat. and that using a reasonable ability of phycology "mines bigger than yours." he would win with a slighter improved computer that to be honest was his only want to get up the nose of atari corp or who ever. amiga didn't seem a happy platform it was always "i've got an amiga, it's more powerful..." like i say i didn't see it. maybe my g/f should have been here. "that's lame." "thanks babe."

[Flashlab]

@all

Sigh, this is just a troll that missed 20 years. All "points" he tries to make have been answered. About comparing companies with platforms, units sold, the difference in design and even the fact about the chipset that was in the A1000 being similar to the one in the A500 two years later. He doesn't want to hear it.

Maybe this one is a candidate for a life time membership on the Retrogeek Computers forum.