Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Tue Apr 23 14:16:45 2002

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Hellige" <jhellige_at_earthlink.net>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)


> >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.
>
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
Received on Tue Apr 23 2002 - 14:16:45 BST