XPost: rec.arts.comics.strips   
   From: YourName@YourISP.com   
      
   On 2026-02-16 02:10:00 +0000, Bobbie Sellers said:   
   > On 2/15/26 17:10, Your Name wrote:   
   >> On 2026-02-16 00:13:36 +0000, Bobbie Sellers said:   
   >   
   > snip   
   >   
   >> The Amiga was technically the better computer, but the OS was very   
   >> kludgey in comparison to the Mac OS, although the Amiga OS was still   
   >> far better than Windoze.   
   >   
   > But it was based on TripOS which I know nothing else about. The   
   > commands were simple to learn and I was not then as stupid as I am now.   
   > I used to have 3 external 3.5 floppy drives and used multiple terminals   
   > to do format and copy for the Amiga Users Group here in San Francisco.   
   > That was with my A1000 with an external expansion box with a GVP SCSI+   
   > host card which could handle up to 8 MB of 32 bit SIMMs.  I had only 2   
   > MB of simms because of the price for most of the time I used that card   
   > which I later moved to an A2000b (mb/4.3). It like the vast majority of   
   > my machines was second hand.   
   >   
   > The flaw tolerated for price purposes was lack of memory management.   
   > The 680x0 range cpus was quite expensive to get up to that capability.   
   > I think the 68020s were the lowest level that could have managed memory   
   > but it was much more expensive than the 68000/14 MHz which is what the   
   > AmigaOS was based on.  I finally got the cash together for accelerator   
   > card with a 68060/50 MHz and thought I was doing well.  Still fell over   
   > when I ran web browser with word processor.  Always had Textra, a   
   > Forth-based text processor running as well.  Textra was shareware and   
   > vastly superior to KWrite or Kate.   
      
   The idiocy of "fast RAM" and "slow RAM" was one of the biggest hardware   
   issues with the Amiga, and it cause no end of problems trying getting   
   software to run properly. Whoever designed that should have been   
   jailed.  :-)   
      
      
      
   >> The biggest problem with the Amiga was that it was bungled by   
   >> incompetent Commodore management who couldn't decide what to do with it   
   >> - business computer, audio-video computer, home computer, all of the   
   >> above. Apple pushed the Macintosh (and the previous Lisa and Apple II   
   >> range) as business computers and in education.   
   >   
   > I can but agree. The ultimate owners never used computers and so they   
   > did not realize what they had. CBM tended to point it at home use for   
   > games and AV use.  The AV business had to use Amigas but with a card   
   > called the Video Toaster.  It was very expensive but very capable and   
   > was sold under other labels as a Video Toaster computer.  Still was an   
   > Amiga hardware base for the same reasons the Video Toaster people chose   
   > it over other platforms in that it was designed from scratch to use   
   > CRT/TV as output display.  Oh and if you had to use Mac or MS-DOS we   
   > had cards for that too.  Amigas with the Mac card were faster than   
   > production Macs.   
      
   I went to university with the guy who wrote the A-Max software for   
   emulating a Mac on an Amiga. Many of us with Amigas at home did beta   
   testing for him, but it was a great piece of software that worked   
   really well from the start, even without the later hardware.   
      
   He also did a lot of work on the Amiga versions of the Dragon's Lair   
   arcade games.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)