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>

[Edward S. Baiz Jr.]

Post by 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>

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.

[Daniel Mandic]

Post by 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>

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]

Post by 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>

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

[AlbaClause]

Post by qnr

Post by 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>

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.

[Daniel Mandic]

AlbaClause wrote:

ws.

Post by AlbaClause
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

[Ronald J. Hall]

Post by Daniel Mandic
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]

Post by Ronald J. Hall
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.

[p***@gmail.com]

How many visitors do you get daily on BBS?

Post by Ronald J. Hall

Post by Daniel Mandic
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. :-)
--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ Welcome To DarkForce! www.darkforce.org "The Fuji Lives!"_/
_/ The DarkForce BBS Sysop-DarkLord Telnet bbs.darkforce.org_/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

...

[AlbaClause]

Post by Daniel Mandic
ws.

Post by AlbaClause
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

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]

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

[AlbaClause]

Post by 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. :)
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. :-)

[qnr]

Post by 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.
--

[...snipped...]

Post by AlbaClause
I understood the context of your post, and I was building on it -- not
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

[Daniel Mandic]

Post by qnr
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