Amiga vs PC

[amigakid]

Wow the never ending thread LOL.  We still trying to debate this? Let me finalise it for everyone  Some people love Windows, some love Mac OS, some love Linux and some love Amiga OS.  There are even those who prob still swear by DOS, BIOS MorphOS and so on and so on.  I love my Amiga, I really like my Windows 7 computers and don't care much for Mac or Apple,...but that is me and I'm sure we can argue forever on this so everyone has the computer(s) they love.  Now new thread?

[Franko]

Wow the never ending thread LOL.  We still trying to debate this? Let me finalise it for everyone  Some people love Windows, some love Mac OS, some love Linux and some love Amiga OS.  There are even those who prob still swear by DOS, BIOS MorphOS and so on and so on.  I love my Amiga, I really like my Windows 7 computers and don't care much for Mac or Apple,...but that is me and I'm sure we can argue forever on this so everyone has the computer(s) they love.  Now new thread?

Okay what about "PC vs Amiga" for a change... :roflmao:

It's a bit like religion, as long as their are people who either believe or disbelieve, they'll always be willing to share their viewpoint on it, reckon this is a thread that that'll keep on cropping up whenever someone new finds it and wants to have their say.

[persia]

Just drop the versus.  It's "Amiga PC" now....

[Karlos]

Yes, that one. Cost million of dollars, needed a room to operate, had a power consumption of 15000 Watts (or something similar), no ide hard disks, and probably some I didn't mention. That's not very modern.

Using your earlier argument I could just say that modern systems are simply smaller and use less power and thus the Cray 1 counts as a modern machine. After all, architecturally it shares things in common with SSE etc.

[Arkhan]

Surprised at you Karlos coming out with a crazy statement like that, I mean comparing a Cray 1 to the Amiga...

He didn't bring the Cray up, someone else did.  He just responded accordingly.

anyway

the Amiga isn't modern just like a 1985 Toyota isn't modern.  Yeah it drives nice and can play next to a 2011 model Toyota on the highway..., but to get it to the same drivable state, you have to upgrade the shit out of it with aftermarket nonsense.

and then a part breaks and you're like SHIT. and you wait a week to locate a new one, then it gets put in.

then you drive away, something else breaks.   800$ later you wish you had a new car with a warranty.

that and you wish it had a better more efficient engine, newer car features and bells/whistles an 80s car didn't really have....

and eventually break down and get with the times.



Amiga's aren't antiques.  They're just old.  Technology gets better.  Theres a reason they aren't flying friggin wright brothers planes around anymore.

[jj]

Sorry posted in wrong thread

[amigaksi]

Not sure what all this is about.  I'm using a 2.8 GHz Dual Core running Windows 7 Pro 64 Bit. I was abit surprised, but Mechwarrior 4 runs just fine. That was released on November 24, 2000. Almost 11 years ago. No compatibility mode.

I just build a new computer for a friend this Spring to replace her 7 year old Dell. The new computer is slightly better than mine. Same OS. I installed all the software that was on her old computer. A good bit of it was from 1995 to 2000 release programs. All of it ran, no issues, no comparability mode.

After trying some more Windows software the past week or so:

Windows 64-bit runs ZERO programs from Windows 3.x whether 16-bit or 32-bit.  I have tried Photoshop 3.x, all of my software, etc.  This is not some I/O port stuff which can have problems due to newer OSes blocking and checking every I/O port call, but even API-only stuff.  So what was once a big thing about PCs-- compatibility is no longer true.  Obviously, they got rid of real-mode DOS as well since Windows 2000, but they did emulate the DOS calls and some I/O ports in the command prompt.  Mechwarrior must have been a 32-bit Win 95/98 program.  These also have issues, but many of them run.

[Arkhan]

boohoo. use DosBox.

Amiga doesn't have 100% OMGCOMPATIBILITY either.

[amigaksi]

Why would anyone posting to this thread take themselves too seriously?

Those who insist on defending the idea that original Amigas are a potential alternative to modern computers:

I only use PCs for internet these days.  My computer time is split between Atari/Amigas (80%) and PCs (20%).  So if something had to go, PC would go.  If someone's work was just computing math stuff that is supported by a calculator, he doesn't need to use a power-hungry and bigger PC for the task.  Perhaps, we should stop using calculators since they don't run at 3Ghz or stop using those Nintendo DSi which use a pretty slow processor.

The world REALLY is flat!

We never went to the moon.

Those are debatable, but someone can be quite happy just using Ataris/Amigas and no PC.

[Arkhan]

I only use PCs for internet these days.  My computer time is split between Atari/Amigas (80%) and PCs (20%).  So if something had to go, PC would go.  If someone's work was just computing math stuff that is supported by a calculator, he doesn't need to use a power-hungry and bigger PC for the task.  Perhaps, we should stop using calculators since they don't run at 3Ghz or stop using those Nintendo DSi which use a pretty slow processor.
.

integrals are supported by calculators.  Until you need to do alot of large ones quickly and realize its a PITA.  Powah Howngry PCs do it good with minimal effort.

You're saying NASA or some other engineering place should just do all the mathematics with a TI calculator?

Nintendo DSi is for games not work, and it's the best selling handheld on the market.  It also browses the internet easier than an Amiga, and fits in your pocket!

Good try.

Those are debatable, but someone can be quite happy just using Ataris/Amigas and no PC.

I don't know if you saw these things called photographs.  They were taken from space.  They clearly show that the earth is round.  If you would like to debate this, allow me to direct you to the nearest padded cell.

[amigaksi]

Yes and no. you download VMWare server (i think it was...) and request a key from VMWare site... you install the software and run it. quite simple..
Though, the enterprise versions are quite expensive.
And BTW if you already have the old 98se install cd collecting dust. its nice to be able to use it again..

No, I don't want to install 98SE and VMWare on an already bloated Windows 7 64-bit and hope it works.  The more compact the OS, the better for my stuff.  And I am talking Windows 3.x not Windows 98SE.  

And BTW partitioning the drives. do you really expect Win 3.x to work on modern hardware? Even 2K have problems with that. (mostly driver availability of modern motherboards). The answer is quite simple; virtualize it. Or even emulate it.. (dosbox)

Yes, I expect Win 3.x to work on modern hardware.  That's what compatbility means.  I shouldn't have to buy some other emulation scheme (assuming it exists).

1. No, it aint the OSs fault that retailers don't include the disks with the computer when purchasing it!
2. Compatibility can be achieved by selecting compatibility mode.
3. Benchmarks is just a figure... So far my newer PCs have graveled any W98se setup in any benchmark. (3D benchmarks like 3Dmark 99, 2k, 01....)
Rendering: Vegas video have increased performance at every step i have upgraded so far, even OS upgrades.
That goes for working with photoshop as well... I would like to see you edit a RAW format 18mp image from your canon eos... in win 3.11 with a P90 and 16mb ram... i would pay to see that.. the image is 30MB in size...

It's the OSes fault that it's incompatible with previous windows API.  I won't even mention I/O ports yet, but suffice to say that up to windows 98SE, they were backward compatible on API level as well as I/O port level.  Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft.  It allowed direct port I/O and APi access just like Amiga OS.

Compatibility is NOT achieved for Win 3.x through selecting compatibility mode.  And even for many Win98 stuff, it doesn't work.  Windows 3.x will beat Windows 98SE given the same hardware setup since you can do 32-bit stuff in Windows 3.x.  So editing an image of 30MB using 16MB machine and a more bloated OS will degrade performance.

[ElPolloDiabl]

If one system does something better/easier than the other then that systems wins. Some people treat Amiga like a religion, they are sticking it to 'the man' to only use an Amiga.
I'm interested in Amiga because Amiga is interesting. A simple customisable user interface from the dawn of GUIs. I guess that means the software is the deciding factor whether I like it or not.

[Arkhan]

If thats what you want, then you don't understand how any of this stuff works, lol.




and what "stuff" do you need a compact OS for? You just said all you do is use PC for internet.  How compact does your nonsense have to be if you're just opening a browser and typing on a forum.

[Franko]

You're saying NASA or some other engineering place should just do all the mathematics with a TI calculator?

Hi Arkhan, good to see your back on form again...

The preferred choice of calculators at NASA seems to be HP & not TI ones...

http://hpinspace.wordpress.com/category/hp-35s/

[Arkhan]

yeah and they hook up robots to them to frantically type batches of calculations in, because noone actually uses modern computers on this flat world.

The moons also flat.  its going to collide into earth and fold us in half.

[psxphill]

Yes, I expect Win 3.x to work on modern hardware. That's what compatbility means. I shouldn't have to buy some other emulation scheme (assuming it exists).
 
It's the OSes fault that it's incompatible with previous windows API. I won't even mention I/O ports yet, but suffice to say that up to windows 98SE, they were backward compatible on API level as well as I/O port level. Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft. It allowed direct port I/O and APi access just like Amiga OS.

I think you're in a very small minority. Not being able to access I/O ports from every program is a good thing, I don't want everything to be able to access my hard drive directly. You can access I/O ports on x64 versions of windows, but you have to have a signed driver installed to do it.
 
Also, not everyone wants to pay extra so their hardware will be compatible with windows 3.1.
 
Before Windows 7, every graphics card had to support 256 colour mode X. Which was a clever hack back in 1995, but these days it just adds cost.
 
To run Windows 3.1 you'd need your VGA card to support planar graphics modes, which I have no idea if mine supports. 99.9% of people in the world have no use for them. So if they are sitting there on my graphics card, then I've had to pay for them.
 
If you really want to run 16 bit software, then a 32 bit Windows 7 would be your best bet. I wouldn't use it, because 32bit has more security risks but if you'd rather use Windows 98 then it's going to be better than that.
 
Well written 32 bit software should run without any problems. What you're trying to use is probably just buggy. You can't blame Microsoft for that (although they do go out of their way to make sure big name software works, no matter how badly written it is).