23 Apr
2002
23 Apr
'02
7:16 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Hellige" <jhellige(a)earthlink.net>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)
There are a few distinctions that have to be made here. It's probably true,
though certainly not the case here in my house, that games/entertainment are a
major purpose/function of the PC. The folks who scorn gaming on PC's are
overlooking the benefits due to volume that they derive from the resulting
sales to non-computing-users of PC's.
The AMIGA was, indeed, in some of its forms, and with considerable extension
of its native equipment, a very capable graphics tool, particularly for
low-end and educational broadcast material editing/development. Most AMIGAs
that I've seen, however, were not terribly well equipped, hence, were not
particularly capable. They didn't use inexpensive conventional (yes, that
means PC-compatible) peripherals, either, notably printers. A local guy here
made a small fortune with an adapter that allowed the use of inexpensive
(EPSON) printers with the AMIGA and some other systems.
Dick
>I didn't make any decisions about the
Commodore 64. My kids, and maybe
their
>mom, did. I didn't have any of them around
here, except when they'd
brought
>theirs, which they only did once or twice.
Commodore picked the market
they
played in with
their packaging and features.
I find it interesting that the gaming market is one of the
main defining markets for current PC hardware...the very market that
PC users used to scorn. I've always thought it was stigma that was
unfairly applied to the Amiga, even if it was better at it than the
PC's of the same time period.