Amiga vs PC

[koaftder]

There are no words for this level of stupid.

That's not even fair. Having recently had to write bootstrap code his post is pretty spot on albeit from a specific and narrow perspective.

[runequester]

I wonder if Commodore 64 forums ever have to put up with this crap.

[B00tDisk]

I think there's DOSBOX, but it doesn't run Windows 3.1 and it has its limits unlike running it in native mode.  Hey, if they can run Windows 3.1 in Windows XP and 98, they should be able to do it in 64-bit OSes.

Wrong.

[runequester]

I would say the PC is overdue for a redesign: when Google comes out with its seconds boot will be the beginning of a whole new PC era... so, relic or no, the PC is still using the same design architecture as the 286.

My box boots in 13 or 14 seconds, and shuts down in 2 or 3.
WIth SSD's, its possible to get ubuntu up and running in 5 seconds.

[DavidF215]

Sheesh, what is it with some of you people.... never learned basic manners or courteousies? Also to those who seem to be driven to point out amigas shortcomings,... you do realise that most people are aware of these "problems" don't you?  Some people simply dont care and enjoy what the Amiga gives them.... I read over and over again posts by people who seem to think theyre enlightening people,... too arrogant to realise that theyre not the only ones who know what it is they point out.
I understand that this thread is a comparitive thing, so in some ways is probably the place for comparisons, but the tone and attitude some people here take based on things they "know" is quite childish and rude... ever heard of the concept of discussing things without resorting to stupidity ?  I wont name people, but I suspect those who are responsible already know it, so it's not necessary.

Indeed.

[Karlos]

I wonder if Commodore 64 forums ever have to put up with this crap.

Maybe from spectrum users? :lol:

[gertsy]

I moved from a ZX Spectrum to a C128 so I could do music and use a real keyboard.  Damn Amiga 1000 came out the same year.

I agree with RayTech70:
"I would say the PC is overdue for a redesign: ..... the PC is still using the same design architecture as the 286."

I love to see the same old bios interupt list on bootup on my beefy 6600 that I used to see on my work borrowed 386.  "Girl Interupted" or "Architecture Interupted." 20 Years later let's subsublet....

[koaftder]

I don't get these posts about, "on the pc, the architecture is old and needs to change". Change? How? Like what, remove super i/o and a bios rewrite? What difference does it make? End result will be the same, a computer that runs windows, *nix, OS X, aros, etc. End user won't even be aware of anything different.

[Karlos]

I don't get these posts about, "on the pc, the architecture is old and needs to change". Change? How? Like what, remove super i/o and a bios rewrite? What difference does it make? End result will be the same, a computer that runs windows, *nix, OS X, aros, etc. End user won't even be aware of anything different.

Let's face it, it has changed a lot over the years. Here are just some of them:

Processor:
16-bit -> 32-bit -> 32-bit + SIMD (MMX, 3DNow, SSE etc) -> 64-bit multicore

Peripheral buses:
ISA -> PCI -> PCI + AGP -> PCIe -> PCIe 2.0 (not to mention the other PCI fork, PCI-X)

PCIe couldn't be more different to PCI, using high speed point to point serial "lanes" rather than parallel (which limits the achievable speeds significantly).

HD interfaces:
PC/XT -> IDE (PIO) -> UDMA IDE -> SATA -> SATA II (not to mention SCSI variants)

Other peripheral buses:
Serial/Parallel/PS2 -> USB -> USB2 -> USB3

Video:
Mono -> CGA -> EGA -> VGA -> SVGA -> HD

Audio
Beeper -> 8-bit + FM -> 16-bit + wavetable -> 24-bit HD + wavetable + DSP etc

I'm not really sure what there is that needs to change, other than people's concepts of what a PC actually is. It's not a "PeeCee", wintel box or any of the other decade old names people like to use. It's a modular computer made from standardised parts that is capable of running a myriad of different operating systems.

[stefcep2]

Let's face it, it has changed a lot over the years. Here are just some of them:

Processor:
16-bit -> 32-bit -> 32-bit + SIMD (MMX, 3DNow, SSE etc) -> 64-bit multicore

Peripheral buses:
ISA -> PCI -> PCI + AGP -> PCIe -> PCIe 2.0 (not to mention the other PCI fork, PCI-X)

PCIe couldn't be more different to PCI, using high speed point to point serial "lanes" rather than parallel (which limits the achievable speeds significantly).

HD interfaces:
PC/XT -> IDE (PIO) -> UDMA IDE -> SATA -> SATA II (not to mention SCSI variants)

Other peripheral buses:
Serial/Parallel/PS2 -> USB -> USB2 -> USB3

Video:
Mono -> CGA -> EGA -> VGA -> SVGA -> HD

Audio
Beeper -> 8-bit + FM -> 16-bit + wavetable -> 24-bit HD + wavetable + DSP etc

I'm not really sure what there is that needs to change, other than people's concepts of what a PC actually is. It's not a "PeeCee", wintel box or any of the other decade old names people like to use. It's a modular computer made from standardised parts that is capable of running a myriad of different operating systems.

So if computing power doubles every 18 months, and the A4000 was circa 1992, do you feel that your 2010 PC gives you the power of 2^12 (ie 4096) A4000's working at the same time?

[ElPolloDiabl]

So if computing power doubles every 18 months, and the A4000 was circa 1992, do you feel that your 2010 PC gives you the power of 2^12 (ie 4096) A4000's working at the same time?

It is actually transistor count that is suppose to double.

[stefcep2]

It is actually transistor count that is suppose to double.

Maybe, but I've heard the general expression "computing power" being used, whatever that means.

"David House, an Intel colleague,[18] had factored in the increasing performance of transistors to conclude that integrated circuits would double in performance every 18 months.[19]"-Wiki

[mongo]

So if computing power doubles every 18 months, and the A4000 was circa 1992, do you feel that your 2010 PC gives you the power of 2^12 (ie 4096) A4000's working at the same time?

Motorola 68040 ~ 27.5 MIPS at 25 MHz
Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i980EE ~ 147,600 MIPS at 3.3 GHz

That's 5367 times the power of an A4000.

[amigaksi]

For what I do, there could be no way I could do all my work on an Amiga.  Even something as simple as signing onto facebook or webcam with my friends and family. Does the Amiga do that?  Sure eventually they could make a client to do such things, but it would be painful.
...

Internet was pretty much something that came after Amiga architecture was designed just like game ports, digitized audio/accelerated graphics was something of an afterthought on PCs of the 1980s.  

Sure if your comparing an ancient 486 and Windows 3.11, id pick the Amiga up any day, but we are talking for today's standards..  No Amiga programs could ever touch the features/abilities of that on PCs today.  Sure you might be able to do something good or produce something worthwhile on your Amiga, but it will take awhile...

It works both ways even today.  Atari 800 Pac-man is 8K cartridge (like many other games) and Amiga games are also pretty small given what they do whereas same things on PCs use up a ton of more code assuming you have some good interface to play them.  I'm glad you picked Amiga over 486 as processor should not be the only determining factor.  You have to take into account graphics power, audio power, gaming control, collision detection, etc.  Digital joysticks are always superior to analog for most games.

[amigaksi]

BOOTDISK WROTE:

 Re: Amiga vs PC

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by amigaksi  

I think there's DOSBOX, but it doesn't run Windows 3.1 and it has its limits unlike running it in native mode. Hey, if they can run Windows 3.1 in Windows XP and 98, they should be able to do it in 64-bit OSes.
---------
Wrong.
__________________
Back away from the EU-SSR!


No, you misunderstood the post.  I admitted even 64-bit processors can run older 16-bit stuff but the OS doesn't allow.  Similarly, DOSBOX runs DOS stuff fine but it won't run Windows 3.x stuff.  I.e., it doesn't have the required windows files.

[save2600]

Motorola 68040 ~ 27.5 MIPS at 25 MHz
Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i980EE ~ 147,600 MIPS at 3.3 GHz

That's 5367 times the power of an A4000.

Too bad all that power is wasted on Windoze and modern computing in general     And the internet, Adobe products, flash, ad banners, pop-ups, spyware, virus protectors, etc. being what they are today - todays boxes sure don't "feel" all that more powerful. Just bought the latest and greatest computer. Great... now all the crap I don't want to be bothered with in the first place, works that much quicker. Yay. lol

This new job of mine has me working with Windoze 7, Office apps, IE and more. Having ditched the PC world shortly after ME came out, I gotta say... Windows & M$ products *still* suck. Some of the least intuitive and just plain ugly looking garbage to ever grace computing. Blech. Even my company's interweb e-mail looks better and responds quicker through Safari on my Mac. I won't even get into how buggy & clunky their proprietary card reading/Retail POS system software is - all modeled around what looks to be a Windows for Workgroups GUI.