goldman wrote::x Heard some jerks going on the other day some joint I was hanging at carrying on about how the Amiga was better than the ST! I was wondering, being the fact you know about hardware you could point out the advantages of owning the Atari ST over the Amiga?
Ayreon wrote:Advantages of the ST over the Amiga 500.. hmmm it's kinda hard to find some. The Amiga is better in a lot of ways with it's "gaming" hardware.
It had no midiports, so no midimace for them
It's power supply was big and unhandy. It looks a bit like the old Atari xl power supply but Atari was smart enought to put the power on/off switch on the computer and not on the PSU. You either have to have that thing in reach and sight or dive under your desk or whatever to switch it off.
Oh and the cabel between the PSU and connector that plugs into the Amiga breaks rather easely. Near the plug or near the PSU.
I never understood the memory thing.. only1 or was it 2? MB real memory and 1 or was it 2?MB fast ram. Now i'm no programmer but i can imagine that having all memory accesable for all chips would be easier for certain things.. on the other hand i guess fast ram does have some advantages as well.
Some personal things i don't like on the Amiga. The keyboard. The mouse.. yeah i know most complain about the ST mouse, but i think the amiga mouse is even worse. The diskdrive made even worse noises than the ST. I used to call it the perferator cos it really does sounds like it's chewing up the disc.
Having to use a bloody bootdisk all the time to get rid of that annoying hand pushing that disc in your face.
Batman wrote:hmmm, I might be wrong here but I think I have read some amiga specs somewhere saying that the cpu clockfrequency was lower then 8mhz. Don't know if I remember correctly or if it makes any difference?
Anonymous wrote:I really don't see why using 3 processors' instead of one would be cheating? Does that mean that ant time someone builds a computer system with more than one processor that they are "cheating" too? Atari could have added a custom processor or two to the machine to make it better, but they were short-sighted in order to get the machine out FAST (6 months after the Tramiel's took over), they later added such processors like the blitter (which the Amiga already had a version of). I wouldn't even consider it cheating by hacking the hardware to make it better, but when you show it off, tell people it's not stock! Cheating would be saying or implying that there's less computer there than in reality. The ST was better in Value for the money and extras like the midi ports, more memory and still less (1040ST vs Amiga 500), etc.
I've always been an Atari computer fan since I bought my first 130XE in 85', but I bought Atari because it seemed as good AND better in many ways than the Apple II/E/C or C64, and it was less money and within my budget. I've owne other computers like the C64 since, but it's advantages over the Atari didn't seem to add up to the Atari's advantages of the C64. It goes both ways. I know he Amiga is more poweful, but I prefer the ST. Plus, I'm a hardware hacker and intend to upgrade my 1040 in any way I can. (32,000 color pallette, more memory, blitter and newer TOS/GEM roms to stat with...)
Ayreon wrote:An Amiga without its costum chips would erh.. some sort of ST
I think that what the Amiga coders could do on the Amiga was a big inspiration for a lot of ST coders to do the same effects on the ST. So without the Amiga i don't think the evolution of ST coding would have been at the point as it is now. You can argue about Amiga coders being lazy/less inventive then the ST coders since the Amiga had the hardware to do a lot of work for them... i guess thats why they started to focus on design earlier and more. ST- coders were more busy with profing the ST could do the same (and more) as the Amiga.
It's true that ST-coders can virtually do any effect that the Amiga can do, but not as many and not at the same time.
Correct me if my thoughts on this are wrong
soviet wrote:1)First the Amiga have stereo sound output (and 14 bit sound output)
far better than the atari 1040st
2)The video output
Amiga Genlock,Overscan to 740x580 in interleaced with up 32 colors
Atari 1040st, no genlock,640x200 mono, no interleaced no overscan
3) Amiga 500, 1 mb of sound and video memory
Atari 1040st, 32k video memory
4) Floppy drive formats Amiga standart to 880k
5)Amiga 500mb have blitter chip, atar 1040 not
6)Colors (the amiga can do 4096 colors in HAM mode at the same time)
And 64 colors simultanius (most games use 64 colors)
Atari 1040 stfm 16 colors max.
7)Atari st keyboard (chiclet keyboard with calculator style feeling)
Amiga Keyboard (real mechanic keyboard)
Amiga default mouse (is crap)
Atari default mouse (bettter than the amiga one but not much)
9)If you take a look at the demos (i see lots of atari ones and amiga ones) you gona find that the amiga demos are much much prettier and far more impressing than the atari ones)
10)The amiga chipset is lot better than the atari 1040 one
you could see at graphic in games, the amiga ports of games have better backplanes and backgrounds more colors are fasters and have better sound.
I love the atari 1040stfm (i have one and i use it every day)
but the true is that the amiga 500 is far better than the 1040 stfm.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests