> Most people who never used one are confused completely about what
> Amiga was.
> No, it wasn't a grown-up Atari,
Hardware/architecture wise it sure was. The Atari was the first such
machine to have custom processors (four) designed specifically to handle
video and audio processing, as well as
--Original Message--
From: "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yeah, and the Atari did the same thing...before the Amiga!
..
Two things: 1) I've said before, I'm not a "hardware head" nor an engineer
("but I play one on television"
> As I recall, Atari 1200 (I think it was called) and Amiga were in
> development at roughly the same time.
Atari had a number of computers out before the 1200. The 800 and the 400.
They were out in at least 1980. I have original Atari documentation that is
dated 1980, so that's a pretty safe b
Autin writes ...
>
> > Amiga had the patents on the
> > co-processors,
>
> I find no patents given to Amiga for any co-processors. ...
The patents were probably awarded to the small group from Los Gatos
who invented the Amiga ... Commodore simply took over later and
proceeded to provide n
Austin Franklin wrote:
>> Most people who never used one are confused completely about what
>> Amiga was.
>> No, it wasn't a grown-up Atari,
>
>
> Hardware/architecture wise it sure was. The Atari was the first such
> machine to have custom processors (four) designed specifically to han
than in the Mac).
Cool computer at the time, but poorly marketed.
Guy "showing his age" Clark
-Original Message-
From: Lynn Allen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 4:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: OT: Co-processors & Amiga
--
> Austin Franklin wrote:
>
> >> Most people who never used one are confused completely about what
> >> Amiga was.
> >> No, it wasn't a grown-up Atari,
> >
> >
> > Hardware/architecture wise it sure was. The Atari was the first such
> > machine to have custom processors (four) designed spec
Austin Franklin wrote:
>>
>> Actually, you are both right, and wrong.
>
>
> OK, Arthur, nothing you said contradicted anything in my statement, so I
> don't get where I was "wrong".
I thought it would be beneficial for you to see the word "wrong", so
you'd recognize it, in the very unlike
> >>
> >> Actually, you are both right, and wrong.
> >
> > OK, Arthur, nothing you said contradicted anything in my statement, so I
> > don't get where I was "wrong".
>
> I thought it would be beneficial for you to see the word "wrong", so
> you'd recognize it, in the very unlikely case you might
> >>
> >> Actually, you are both right, and wrong.
> >
> > OK, Arthur, nothing you said contradicted anything in my statement, so I
> > don't get where I was "wrong".
>
> I thought it would be beneficial for you to see the word "wrong", so
> you'd recognize it, in the very unlikely case you might
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 10:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: OT: Co-processors & Amiga
>
>
> > >>
> &
11 matches
Mail list logo
