Amiga's place in the modern computing world - 00s

[Sig999]

Raffaele wrote:

Excuse my poor english But in Amiga you can use ancient Picasso96 cards still 20 years old, or even add EL-CHEAPO PCI graphic card that are 5 years old...

I do not see a crime in this...

Still it is only 1992 computer that can mount internal modern PCI Cards with BUS expander...

Also do not make silly statements attempting to confusing readers...

20 years old motherboard it is still 20 years old motherboard...

You can't change this fact...

I never said I could - but it that isn't what you originally stated.  You mentioned being productive and using the web and FTP and writing documents and fixing images... well all those things could be done with other computers at the same time, which means that they can STILL do these things - on their existing hardware.

So, you original statement is false... not only from a hardware standpoint - but also from a software standpoint (which you also mentioned - 20 year old hardware/software)

From a software standpoint the '20 year' (which btw would be 1988) is invention too.  When did Amosaic come out? 1996ish?
Amitcp 1993ish?

Again, the Ami did some wonderful things in it's hayday that other computers COULDN'T do.. for instance when it came out the PC was using 16 colors and the Mac at the time, even though it had a gui interface was using 2.

Inventing stuff detracts from the machines very real accomplishments and makes you look foolish.

[Raffaele]

bloodline wrote:

Does this paragraph support or weaken your argument? I appreaciate English may not be your first language, and I'm having difficulty understanding.

No english is not my native language...

So 20 years ago the Mac had better software than the Amiga had 20 years ago... fine...

Again attempting to confuse readers?

As I said here

Raffaele wrote:

Also Netscape Navigator was supported with a robust team of developers, while Amiga browsers were maintaned by little teams.

Better software it was just a matter of better investments and big development teams made of many many people...

Amiga had decent software comparing to PCs and Macintoshes, but she never did in Office camp and in Browsers...

She was enough good in Music, painting, videoediting... she has some decent wordprocessors and some usable browsers.

So what?

Also Netscape Navigator is officially dead...

So is the Amiga...

And so is dead your poor old 68K Macintosh and so is dead your precious PPC Macintosh running dinosaur MacOS...

So please don't bother us continuing using it as they were precious evidences to improve and to enhance your babbling...

[Sig999]

So...hang on....

Amiga browsers were unsurpassed and better than Netscape Navigator.....

or Amiga had not so good software in browsers compared to the Mac?

I'm confused... which is it?

Seriously.

[Raffaele]

Sig999 wrote:
So...hang on....

Amiga browsers were unsurpassed and better than Netscape Navigator.....

or Amiga had not so good software in browsers compared to the Mac?

I'm confused... which is it?

Seriously.

I used netscape on 486 DX2 100 MHz and on Macintosh (I think it was Mac II FX (), and it did not seem to me such a great software...

Sure on Windows it hanged too much times...

On Mac it was far better more reliable...

It was good compared to Amiga browsers because it had many, many many options.

but this is a matter of MONEY, investments and enormous developing teams...

I used Amiga browsers only on Amiga machines that were not mine, with few RAM, and these browsers were still buggy versions so I could not say they were better or worse than Netscape Navigator.

Sure they lacked many features, but they are lightweight and performed quite good their task to make me surfing the internet.

Personally I found wintel and some Macintosh browsers ENORMOUS and hungry of RAM compared to Amiga software of the same class...

This sure makes Amiga better than these browsers on different platforms.

Recently on some Amiga forum sites (I remember it on Amigaworld.net, if I remeber it well) I read the testimoniances of people who used Voyager last version and they said that the feeling they had with Voyager it was better than any browser experience they had...

I could not testimony it by myself, because I do not own Voyager, so I can only report their comments...

Why I should not believe them?

(/seaching the internet to find these testimonies)

[koaftder]

Why I should not believe them?

(/seaching the internet to find these testimonies)

Because they're delusional.

I wouldn't bother to load a browser on my amiga. The ram would probably fly out of their sockets and flames would spew forth from the processor the moment it hit a 10mb myspace page chock full of animated gifs and gobs of javascript code.

[uncharted]

bloodline wrote:

Just off the top of my head I can run Netscape Navigator on a stone age 68k Mac... that's better than the Amiga.. sadly... :-(

You could use Fusion to run it on the Amiga :-D

Actually I did play with it back in the day, and it was pretty good considering.  The main problem was that image loading was very slooooow.  Don't know if that was an Amiga/Emulation issue (I was running in 256 colours on an AGA machine) or a general speed issue with Netscape.

[Sig999]

Recently on some Amiga forum sites (i remember it on Amigaworld.net, if I remeber it well) I read the testimoniances of people who used Voyager last version and they said that the feeling they had with Voyager it was better than any browser experience they had...

I could not testimony it by myself, because I do not own Voyager, so I can only report their comments...

Why I should not believe them?

(/seaching the internet to find these testimonies)

I used Amosaic when it came out - and it wasn't that great and that was around 1996. by that stage Netscape was a far better browser - I think that was around Netscapes prime, before it's downhill slide into bloatware.  I had used Netscape at work on a 486 since it came out around 1994 - thus I had great hopes for a Amosaic on my home machine (my Ami).  So - I used them both reguluarly within the same 24 hour period.

As for Voyager/Netscape - you can beleive whatever you choose to read.. I'm saying 'I used them both - side by side - and it simply ain't so'

That's my testimonial - so I don't NEED others when I've actually done it myself.

When had great hopes for Amithlon and tried every browser there was at the time - including the last versions of Voyager and Ibrowse.  So - I not only tried them, but tried them on the equivilent of an accelerated Amiga AND a graphics card.  I tried them alongside Netscape

And to tell the truth - even if it HAD suprassed Netscape, by that stage that was no great accomplishment anymore.

Now.. to say something is 'unsurpassed' is something different again - that is to say it is the best - now being the best experience can be a subjective thing, but no matter how I slice it - I can't see using the web with Voyager as unsurpassed... not by a long shot.

That's just the way it is - here in reality.

Seriously, this whole argument is like saying I can put a CD ROM on my Sega Megadrive and outperfom a Playstation 3.  It can't, it won't, and to tell the truth that doesn't bother me because if I wanted to use a playstation 3 I'd buy one.  The fact that it can't is part of it's charm and appeal.

[Raffaele]

Warning:

I remember of Voyager and I said that was better experience than Netscape for many Amiga users, but seems that better experience in Amiga was with IBrowse AND NOT Voyager...

With a brief search in google I found twice:

First testimony is the inquirer of Interview with Bill Panagouleas asking him why to insist with Mozilla when he prefers Ibrowse far better:

http://www.discreetfx.com/AmiZillaInterview.htm

And here is some mail collected of some people discussing...

One is affirming that Mozilla sucks more than Ibrowse

http://www.mail-archive.com/voyager@vapor.com/msg11911.html

Found more when I have some time, had to leave internet connection for almost three hours...

P.S.

I actually use Opera on my laptop PC Wintel, Sputnik and AWeb on my Pegasos/MorphOS...

So I have no more problems with modern HTML 4.0 and CSS that afflicts old Amiga browsers.

[Sig999]

I think you need to re-read that second one.

It's saying that he THINKS it sucks while agreeing it lacks features and is not as good.

He 'prefers' to use ibrowse...


See above anyways - I've used them both side by side - I don't LIKE mozilla - I don't LIKE netscape (as I've said before it became a big bloated pile of pooh) - that being said, it is a better browser.

It does it's task better - it displays web pages better.

And that's all it really comes down to.  And as the web marches on and people use it more and more, as it adopts more and more features, ibrowse, voyager, etc. will fall further and further behind to the point (which I think we are at very close to, although others may disagree) to where the machine is no longer technically able to use the modern web productively.

The first is an interview with the head of DiscreetFX - it mentions very little about browsers other than he prefers Firefox over Internet explorer and that he uses Ibrowse on his Amiga.

In case you haven't followed this - DiscreetFX are supporting the Amizilla project - an amiga port of Mozilla (which has never happened) which is probably why it is brought up in the interview at all.

It doesn't say anything like what you've written.  If it does please show me - because that certainly isn't what I walked away from reading either of these 'testimonials'.


Sorry - but try again


If anyonere were saying 'Ibrowse/Voyager are better than Mosaic' - THAT would be a statement of truth... not the fantastic slam dunk folks some folks would rally behind... but it would be a statement of truth, and something you could prove...... and right now that would be something indeed.


Right now you're saying that product X I don't use on a computer I don't use is better than product Y that I don't use.

That's not really grounds for an objective argument anyways.

[Damion]

bloodline wrote:

No, the last Nascape that runs on a 68k Mac is still better tan any Amiga browser I have on my Amigas...

68k Mac even has a fairly modern version of ICab, which (as far as compatibility) blows away Amiga browsers IMHO... and it's FREE.

[amigaksi]

>by Roj on 2008/6/11 13:11:21

>If I didn't have a CSPPC, I probably wouldn't still be using >an Amiga. I don't really think a stock Amiga can be given a >place in the modern computing world - 00s.

If you first define what you want to use the computer for, then you can make a better determination if the Amiga can be used for that purpose.  Modern computing uses games so I would say Amiga can still be used for games.  If you want a simple machine for just controlling external devices and stuff, I would prefer an Atari or Amiga with it's simplicity and ports than the latest PC.  I used to use the Amiga for video titling stuff and they came out pretty good.  Recently, I got used to using the PC as just a big server for all the files, image disks, etc. for Atari and Amiga and just upload whatever I need via a cable like this one:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320262511361

Some things just don't require complex OSes and 4Ghz processors.

[Belial6]

swoslover wrote:
lol the mac guy definitely wouldn't be cool.  He'd be the kind of guy who puts pretentious literature & world music on his coffee table to impress friends.

As for the Amiga an aging lady who you can tell used to be pretty would be appropriate.

Not to hijack the thread back to the beginning, but it just struck me.  The person that should play the Amiga in the Mac commercials is Jane Seymour.

She was really hot when she was young.  She aged well, and even though she is now past her prime, we would still like to take her home and play with her for awhile. :-D