Atari's DON"T suck!
Ronald J. Hall
Just thought I'd make waves, go against the grain, and be politically
"uncorrect", at least as far as the last couple of (obviously non Atari)
posters to this newsgroup are concerned...
<big evil grin>
--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ Welcome To DarkForce! www.darkforce.org "The Fuji Lives!"_/
_/ The DarkForce BBS Sysop-DarkLord Telnet bbs.darkforce.org_/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Edward S. Baiz Jr.
>Just thought I'd make waves, go against the grain, and be politically
>"uncorrect", at least as far as the last couple of (obviously non Atari)
>posters to this newsgroup are concerned...
>
><big evil grin>
Hey, you do not have to make any waves with me. I agree with you totally. I am
sure there are others here that feel the same.
--
Edward S. Baiz Jr.
(Gamer)
HADES 060: 256meg Ram - Atari Clone
Daniel Mandic
>
> Just thought I'd make waves, go against the grain, and be politically
> "uncorrect", at least as far as the last couple of (obviously non
> Atari) posters to this newsgroup are concerned...
>
> <big evil grin>
I would not exchange my Speccy to an ATARI 8bit. But the ATARI is sure
better then the C64. Graphik is absolutely no thema. Just look at Jay
Miners Eyes, that are two monitors with a fine round edges and were
blazing fast (and sharp) - I could think. The oldest Chipset but the
winner till to the bitter end. Although, I did not give up the old
8-bitters. And Sound is not better but can be totally other what the
other can´t do. Better in some cases! Masic, Kemal Ezcan etc...
Faster. Better OS´s. Extendable. Better IRQ´s, IMHO.
Expensive.
Best Regards,
Daniel Mandic
P.S.: I have two 800XL, two 1050 - one with TurboPARConnector, one
1010, Speech Synthesizer - ATARI, M.U.L.E. and Ghostbusters :-))))
qnr
>
> Just thought I'd make waves, go against the grain, and be politically
> "uncorrect", at least as far as the last couple of (obviously non Atari)
> posters to this newsgroup are concerned...
>
> <big evil grin>
Sorry, the do suck. In lots of ways.
For example, they really suck at being boring. They suck at running
Windows natively. They suck at making a decent cup of coffee. The list
goes on and on.
Terry
--
Terry "qnr" Ross | http://linux.aliboom.com
1024D/E5796C4D | Key BE84 EC1D FC94 D97B 9063 AD15 0F38 193A E579 6C4D
Source Mage GNU/Linux http://www.sourcemage.org
AlbaClause
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 05:59:48 -0500, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
>
>>
>> Just thought I'd make waves, go against the grain, and be politically
>> "uncorrect", at least as far as the last couple of (obviously non Atari)
>> posters to this newsgroup are concerned...
>>
>> <big evil grin>
>
> Sorry, the do suck. In lots of ways.
>
> For example, they really suck at being boring. They suck at running
> Windows natively. They suck at making a decent cup of coffee. The list
> goes on and on.
>
> Terry
>
The whole point of using an Atari, is not to run Windows.
The whole point of using an Amiga, is not to run Windows.
The whole point of using a Mac, is not to run Windows.
The whole point of using Linux, is not to run Windows.
And even Windows PCs suck at running Windows natively.
--
--
People Against Corruption * Right Always Triumphs
Website: http://sarnia.selfip.org
Daniel Mandic
> For example, they really suck at being boring. They suck at running
> Windows natively. They suck at making a decent cup of coffee. The
> list goes on and on.
>
> Terry
They are exciting. They are native. Show me Windows, making coffee! The
list scrolls (dazzlefree) from left to right (hmmm, or was it from
right to left).
Best Regards
Daniel Mandic
Daniel Mandic
ws.
>
> And even Windows PCs suck at running Windows natively.
You can say what you want, but Windows gives the most out of that
office-machine called IBM-PC and compatible.
Best Regards,
Daniel Mandic
qnr
[...snipped...]
> The whole point of using an Atari, is not to run Windows. The whole point
> of using an Amiga, is not to run Windows. The whole point of using a Mac,
> is not to run Windows. The whole point of using Linux, is not to run
> Windows.
>
> And even Windows PCs suck at running Windows natively.
>
> --
Umm... it was supposed to be ludicrous, not an actual complaint -
certainly I neither expected, nor wanted Ataris to run Windows natively. :)
Ronald J. Hall
> You can say what you want, but Windows gives the most out of that
> office-machine called IBM-PC and compatible.
Nah, frag that bloated code, install 'Nix and you've immediately gotta a
better machine. :-)
Daniel Mandic
> Nah, frag that bloated code, install 'Nix and you've immediately
> gotta a better machine. :-)
Hi Ronald!
I saw 'mandrake' on a i686 (Risc'y, Prefetched). Thanks for your
suggestion, I have already parted my pleasures. Learning (setting up)
Unix, respectively 'Linux' would acually make three. That's too much
for me.
I am looking more to DOS and their 32bit-window. PGA486, Settler 2
etc.... but can be played well on i686. :).... Elite III and so....
Spaghetti code it stays, even with 'nix. But the PC can cover a long
time of software, with no limits in sight. The oldest app I have found
in the moment, dates back to 82' and the the oldest Game is 80',
"Rescue at Rigel". "MyChess", 79'.
Best Regards,
Daniel Mandic
P.S.: Of course ATARI, too. 800XL's I have, and I enjoy the VCS
emulation, too.
AlbaClause
> On Fri, 12 May 2006 06:35:44 -0400, AlbaClause wrote:
> [...snipped...]
>> The whole point of using an Atari, is not to run Windows. The whole point
>> of using an Amiga, is not to run Windows. The whole point of using a Mac,
>> is not to run Windows. The whole point of using Linux, is not to run
>> Windows.
>>
>> And even Windows PCs suck at running Windows natively.
>>
>> --
>
>
> Umm... it was supposed to be ludicrous, not an actual complaint -
> certainly I neither expected, nor wanted Ataris to run Windows natively.
> :)
>
> Terry
>
>
I understood the context of your post, and I was building on it -- not
detracting from it. For example:
You said that Atari's suck at being boring... That's a good thing! Why
would you want a computer that excels at being boring?
You said that Atari's suck at making a good cup of coffee... That too, is a
good thing! Why would you want a computer that makes coffee? After all,
those types of computers are typically called coffee machines... and
they're special purpose.
I understood that your message was to point out that the Atari's are good at
doing the things you want them to do, and that they suck at the things you
don't want them to do. I was merely building on the theme that you had
initiated. :-)
AlbaClause
I don't think you'll find too many people that will agree with you on that
point. The simple fact of the matter is that *nix is a much more capable
operating system than Windows will ever be.
The true strength of *nix is that it is entirely modular. You can scale
your *nix OS to be as small and tight as you want, or to be as big and
bloated as you want. With Windows, it's a take it or leave it kind of
thing... You're stuck with the bloat and wasted resources whether you want
it or not.
With Linux you can remove damn near everything you don't want or need...
you can streamline and tighten the parts that you do want or need, and you
can have yourself an OS that is pretty damn close to being tailored to your
specific desires. You get no such options with Windows.
Anyway, this forum is about the Atari... Which Linux can emulate quite
well, by the way.
qnr
> qnr wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 12 May 2006 06:35:44 -0400, AlbaClause wrote: [...snipped...]
>>> The whole point of using an Atari, is not to run Windows. The whole
>>> point of using an Amiga, is not to run Windows. The whole point of
>>> using a Mac, is not to run Windows. The whole point of using Linux, is
>>> not to run Windows.
>>>
>>> And even Windows PCs suck at running Windows natively.
>>>
>>> --
>>
[...snipped...]
> I understood the context of your post, and I was building on it -- not
> detracting from it. For example:
>
> You said that Atari's suck at being boring... That's a good thing! Why
> would you want a computer that excels at being boring?
>
> You said that Atari's suck at making a good cup of coffee... That too, is
> a good thing! Why would you want a computer that makes coffee? After
> all, those types of computers are typically called coffee machines... and
> they're special purpose.
>
> I understood that your message was to point out that the Atari's are good
> at doing the things you want them to do, and that they suck at the things
> you don't want them to do. I was merely building on the theme that you
> had initiated. :-)
>
> --
Yeah... That will teach me not to post before my first cup of coffee hehe
