[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference hydra::amiga_v1

Title:AMIGA NOTES
Notice:Join us in the *NEW* conference - HYDRA::AMIGA_V2
Moderator:HYDRA::MOORE
Created:Sat Apr 26 1986
Last Modified:Wed Feb 05 1992
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:5378
Total number of notes:38326

5136.0. "Checkered Orb Dilemma" by SUBWAY::LAFFORD (Llewellyn Lafford--PriceWatch Principal Engineer) Tue Oct 22 1991 17:35

All--
     Here is a dilemma which has haunted me, and I'll bet a lot of you as well,
for years now.  Maybe a spirited discussion here would clarify some of the
issues for us.  Ever since the A1000 appeared on the cover of Byte in 1985(?)
with a powerful description of its elegant design and I'd go down to the local
computer store and watch the checkered ball bounce hypnotically for hours,
I knew the Amiga was something special.  I went to the first NYC Amiga users'
meeting in an East Village art studio and heard it sing and play and talk
simultaneously.  It was definitely the right machine for creative-types and
cash-poor types and it did the right stuff chipwise from the start (as opposed
to Mac and ST).  A technologically more elegant machine than the competition
for less money.  While I talked several friends into buying Amigas as I
rhapsodized, I myself never took the plunge....
     The dilemma:  Having been a VAX programmer for years, I still fantasize
being a multimedia programmer and writing the Great American Application.
Having always had clone loaners available, I haven't had to buy a machine for
myself since my C64.  If I had $1000-2000 to spend on the platform of choice,
should I go for the largest common audience (80386-based clone running
Windows), accept whatever Mac package might be available for its inflated
price (I doubt it), or go with my heart and dive into AmigaDos?
(Another factor is my SY77 synth in search of a screen-based sequencer.)
And if it's Amiga, I assume I should hold out for the 3000 even if it's 'only'
a 68030...or pick up a 500 for cheap fun now?  How does Amiga programming (in C)
compare to MS Windows?  How many copies of an Amiga utility I coded could I
sell compared to one under Windows?  (I know probably a lot more for the IBM--
assuming equal competition--but would I feel contentment?)  Is it absurd (or
cost-inefficient) to program for an AT environment using the Bridgeboard?
     Are others as haunted by these demons as I?  Or was there some sinister
communication emanating from that checkered orb?
                                                   --Llewellyn
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
5136.1buy an Amiga :^)WHAMMY::spodarykFor three strange days...Tue Oct 22 1991 18:5559
I admit, I'm biased.  I too, was amazed by Boing and Juggler, so I bought
an Amiga 3 years ago and have never regretted it.

>How does Amiga programming (in C) compare to MS Windows?  

I really haven't done a lot of Windows programming, but over the last
six weeks or so I've done a tremendous amount of reading, and a decent
amount of DOS programming.  I'm just now starting to really get into the 
Windows side of things...

And I don't care for it.  

Perhaps it doesn't bother some people, but I find the ideas of memory
models, near and far pointers, and the whole segmented Intel architecture
really...  how can I say it?  Tedious?  Clumsy?  Probably not as 
bad for application development, but it's too much work for programming
interfaces and libraries. 

It's frustrating to have to use DOS to run the C compiler, and then startup 
Windows to run the application.  Then back to DOS, then back to Windows... 
The Amiga development environment is much easier for _me_ to use.
I'm not overly impressed with the Microsoft C compiler or development 
environment.  I do like the on-line help.

I really enjoy working on my Amiga.  Maybe (heresy!) more so than doing VMS
development or even ULTRIX work on my DECstation.  I can't really place why,
but it's maybe more similar to how I like to do things.  I definitely
feel much more productive on my Amiga than on DOS.  Certainly good 
multi-tasking helps that.

The whole design and implementation of Windows is pretty remarkable, but
it is also somewhat kludgy in many regards.  FAKE multi-tasking, pseudo
memory management, etc.  AmigaDOS is much cleaner/elegant a system.    
Of course, AmigaDOS won't run Lotus! 

My favorite quote from Petzold's "Programming Windows" (the Windows "Bible")
There are many others, but this is sums it up. (p10)

"If at first you find Windows programming to be difficult, awkward,
 bizarrely convoluted and filled with alien concepts, rest assured that this
 is a normal reaction.  You are not alone." 

>How many copies of an Amiga utility I coded could I sell compared to 
>one under Windows?  

Does DEC allow any employees to sell software?  If so, you might be able to
sell more apps for Windows - depending on what it was.  Installed base
is a definite concern for developers.  Maybe a really great Amiga app would
sell more machines, increase the user base and attract good developers.
Remember that the Windows installed base is approx the same as the Amiga.
That is, 4 million.  Approx 2/3 of Windows purchasers don't really use it,
so that cuts the number of "users" down to about 1.3 million.  

I'm not trying to bash DOS/Windows, but just give my opinions.  I am finding
that slowly I'm getting more and more used to the way that DOS/Windows does
things.  It's not always pleasant, but I can put up with it.  Hopefully,
other DOS users/programmers will give you some input as well.

Steve 
5136.2RGB::ROSEWed Oct 23 1991 10:2221
	I'm just getting started on Windows programming too. This is my fourth
windowing system. My opinion is probably biased because I am more familure with
Amiga programming than Windows.

	I don't like using windows. It's harder to navigate around the screen.
As I discussed in a different note, Microsoft has much less respect for your
software and hardware investment than Commodore. You have to keep buying more
powerful computers and replacing all of your software to keep current.
Commodore provides upgrade paths for hardware and maintains compatibility
between OS releases.

	In terms of creating programs, each system has its strong points and
quirks. You get used to it, whatever it is. Don't use this as a criterion to
pick a system. I will say that if you get Windows, get Borland C++. The
program development environment is JUST WONDERFUL. 

	I think there is a lot to be said for getting an A500 and going for
the cheap fun now. There is lots of PD software including a very serviceable
C compiler (DICE). If it is fun you are looking for, the Amiga is the only
choice. If it is a well engineered hardware/software system with a satisfying
user environment, the Amiga wins again. 
5136.3SYSTEM::GOODWINRameses Niblik III. Kerplunk! Woops! There goes my thribbleThu Oct 24 1991 11:3325
    I'd buy an Amiga or go for a 80386 windows box... only I already bought
    something else, an Archimedes A410/1 (a 32 bit RISC machine).
    
    I still wonder if I made the right choice, since there's less software,
    less PD, less packages around for it. It's made by a British company
    with little exposure in the US. I bought it because it was compatible
    with my old machine, and included an emulator for it. I've since bought
    an IBM PC emulator package as well. It works, it even runs Windows 3...
    inside its own windows... albeit a bit slowly.
    
    So I sit here green with envy with all those wonderful things appearing
    for the Amiga/IBM PC. Still, Lemmings has made its way over to my
    machine (I got a demo. I'm hooked!). I have an ANSI-C compiler for it,
    I've learnt it's windowing system. I'm still trying to hear about how
    others do the same thing.
    
    My fanatical Archimedes friends will tell me that it's far superior to
    Amiga's, PC's etc. However, what's the point in having a 'technically
    superior machine' (if that's true) if there's little software for it!
    
    There is enough s/w for me to be able to use it. It doesn't have the
    hardware features of the Amiga for graphics... instead it has a fast
    RISC processor.
    
    Pete.
5136.4DEFOE::JAMIEThunder knows all things.Thu Oct 24 1991 11:472
    I've been told that the BBC emulator for the Amiga runs faster than
    the original BBC machine...
5136.5Mac emulator runs well too !GIDDAY::MORANTue Oct 29 1991 21:088
    An AMAX II+ board installed on an AMIGA 3000 runs faster than the 
    top of the range macintosh. Also you save several $$$$ instead of
    buying a MAC.
    
    That's if you can afford the price of MAC software :-)
    
    Shaun.