Conference hydra::amiga_v1

    
    They have.  Leo posted the letter to BIX, where the senior editor
    mumbled some half-hearted apologies about not enough space in the
    magazine.  He did claim that a future 'special graphics issue' would
    have an Amiga-created cover, and that there would be a large feature
    article comparing the Amiga to other graphic systems.
    
    Skeptics on PLINK immediately started betting that BYTE would
    conveniently forget to credit the Amiga cover graphic.
    
    The general impression I get is that it all comes down to advertising.
    Most Amiga developers couldn't afford an ad in BYTE, whereas all
    the big PC houses advertise all the time.  How would it ok if all
    the advertisers were offering products for the wrong computer?
    
    Ed.

    
    People see to think that because there are so many IBM and IBM
    compatible computers out there that they have the best product.
    Amiga and Apple computers (i.e. windows and icons) have a superior
    interface and have proven themselves to be more than a match for
    the IBM and its clones.
    
    Magazines like BYTE claim to be for users of Personal Computers,
    however what they really mean is IBM.  PC means personal computer
    and should not automatically mean only IBM PC.  It is a shame that
    BYTE and other similar magazines do not show the public what is
    really out there instead of showing only what IBM can do now.  What
    about a computer like the Amiga which has good performance and graphics
    as good as the top of the line IBM and Apple Macintosh II?
    
    
    - Jeff C.
    
    
    RE .0
    
    It is true that the Amiga 2000 deserved to be on the cover of BYTE,
    however the Mac IIx had more than just a "single chip" difference
    with the regular Mac II.  The Mac IIx has a 1.2+ Meg disk drive
    which can read IBM formatted disks, 4 Meg of memory standard, a
    68030 cpu, 68882 math coprocessor, PMMU (paged memory mapping unit)
    which will enable it to handle virtual memory and Unix.
    
    However, even a machine as powerful as the Mac IIx might not have
    made it to the cover of BYTE if it didn't have that drive which
    can read IBM disks.
    
    - Jeff C.
    

    From Saturday's Usenet:
    
    Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.misc,comp.graphics
Path: decwrl!labrea!bloom-beacon!apple!well!ewhac
Subject: Re: Open Mouth.  Insert Foot.  BYTE.
Posted: 18 Feb 89 06:42:51 GMT
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link.
Xref: decwrl comp.sys.amiga:32242 comp.misc:5794 comp.graphics:5081
 
[ Note:  I have cancelled the original article. ]
 
	After posting my flame to BIX, there was a rather rapid response from
Fred Langa, Editor In Chief of BYTE Magazine.  It would appear that my
original posting was formulated with incomplete facts.
 
	Excerpts of his postings follow:
--------
[ ... ]
We would have run the gallery-type piece if we had had enough available
pages. I don't know who said we killed the piece *because* it was
mostly Amigan, but that's wrong. I know it's wrong, because I'm
the one who killed the piece.
 
Why did I kill it? Because we had more articles than we could fit, and I 
chose instead to run with a meaty technical feature that compares and 
contrasts Amiga graphics with PS/2s and Macs. My belief is that a
technical article has more lasting value than several pages of 
demonstration images, however good-looking. So, the technical article
on Amigas is running; the gallery of pretty screens is not.
 
We still will run one gorgeous screen on the cover of the graphics supplement.
I don't know if it's Amigan or not: I didn't ask. When the Art Director
and I selected the cover image, we went solely on visual appearance
and didn't even consider which pc architecture produced the image.
 
If anyone can infer an anti-amiga conspiracy in all this, my hat's off
to you.
 
Again: the LEAD ARTICLE in the whole d***** supplement focusses
heavily on Amigas. If that's not enough for you, I'm very sorry.
--------
[ In a later posting, Mr. Langa writes: ]
 
[ ... ]  Oh, BTW, I did go back and check; the Graphic
Supplement cover *is* an Amiga-generated image.  [ ... ]
--------
 
	I would emphasize that, at the time, I firmly believed that I had
all the relevant facts.  It appears that I was in error.
 
					Schwab

    Re:  Byte-bashing in general.
    
    Last fall there was a round of Byte-bashing on Usenet, here in this
    notesfile and in the small computer press in general.  Not wanting just
    to bitch, I wrote a letter to Byte's publisher, J. Burt Totaro,
    complaining about the narrowing of focus even as the magazine branched
    out into other outlets such as its weekly newsletter.  The letter
    said I owned a Different Brand of personal computer without mentioning
    the Amiga name.
        
    Totaro wrote back that he believed the changes in 1987-88 had improved
    the magazine and redefined, but not narrowed, its focus.  He also
    said, in part...
    
    "First of all, BYTE had to change.  It is not only a magazine, but
    also a business.  If the right number of advertising pages is not
    sold, then there is no one to foot the bill to produce the kind
    of editorial matter you'd like to read.  And as of April of last
    year [1987], the BYTE business was clearly in jeopardy."
    
    "Further, BYTE has changed to become better.  The great body of
    polled readers that we've been able to contact over the past half
    year have, by a huge majority, voted in favor of the changes of
    1987-1988."
    
    "And finally, BYTE has changed to secure its place among industry
    professionals as the most authoritative and technically relevant
    publication in the business.  This reputation had been tarnished
    in recent years and, in the view of many, BYTE was becoming
    obsolescent." 
    
    All this begs the question of serving us, the people who don't own
    one of the personal computers of the Dual Monarchy which has so
    captured the public and industry perception.
    
    I think that to get more Amiga focus in Byte, instead of occasional
    half-hearted mentions, three things have to happen, addressing Totaro's
    three points.  First, Amiga product advertisers should be encouraged
    to run ads in Byte.  Some of the big mail-order houses are starting
    to include Amiga products in their ads and inserts this year.  Second,
    let Byte's management know what you want.  The above is a sample
    of one data point that shows polite and focused complaint letters
    are read and answered.  Third, Amiga has to be shown to be valuable
    to "industry leaders" as a machine capable of real work.  Write
    articles!  The worst Byte can say to an article is "No, thanks."
    
    Reading this notesfile, a few examples come to mind.  There's enough
    expertise here to submit articles on low-cost newsletter publishing,
    adapting Amy for various grades of video production, writing killer
    video games... those are just a few of the top of my head.  Any
    of you software hotshots want to help me adapt the Byte benchmark
    suite to Amiga?  An apples-to-apples comparison with the Big Name
    68000-based brand (no pun intended) would sure make interesting
    reading, IMHO.

    Somewhat along the same lines, there is some "free" Amiga advertising
    being done in the Clone shops -
    
    I was in a local Heahkit store over the weekend and stopped to watch
    the demo running on one of the in store uints with a Zenith 1490
    Ftm monitor.  The demo was of a package called Shadow F/X which
    is a PC based animation package.  One graphic displayed a waterfall
    with running water.  The caption at the top read -
    
    		This is not an Amiga.  This is Shadow F/X.
    
    
    Bob

Re: "Amiga 200 on the Cover"

Although I would have liked to see the 2000 on the cover, I think that
Byte did have consistent and non-biased editorial policy in not putting
it there.

The Mac IIx is a somewhat flawed product: it isn't the machine it should
be--it's a stopgap '030 machine so that Apple could steal some of NeXT's
thunder.  However, it was the first '030 machine out of Apple, and Byte
editorial policy has been to give covers to products using new microprocessors
or faster clock speeds.

Byte didn't put the Mac SE on the cover (as far as I know: I did check).
The SE is pretty much just a Mac Plus with an extra internal drive bay and
a single expansion slot.  The Amiga 2000 is just an Amiga 1000 with two
extra drive bays and 8(?) expansion slots.

Byte's editorial policy is that speed or new microprocessors that should
be faster deserve a cover, expansion doesn't.  (The "should be faster"
must be part of the policy since the Mac IIx only manages to squeeze a
small performance boost out of the '030.)

    I stopped reading Byte shortly after they took the Amiga out of
    the best of Bix section.I may be narrow minded but I own an amiga
    an in all honesty cannot find time to wade through all the Amiga
    specfic magazines.I coulden't care less what Byte is doing,and am
    amazed at how many people still bother to read it.My personal thoughts
    are all the developers, etc for the Amiga that support bix would
    do well to find an alternate forum,and avoid Byte if it gives them
    heartburn.It is not that I don't feel outraged when someone runs
    down amy (heck I still can't buy Antic software),but I don't really
    believe the editor's of Byte are smart enough to realize what they
    are doing.I guess I am just to busy reading amiga mags to get involved
    in a Holy War at this time.I also have enough faith in the Amiga
    to feel it can,and will overcome in the end.After all, I remember
    when All I had to read was Amiga World,all I had for software was
    Graphicraft,textcraft,and mindwalker,and the death of the amiga
    was a popular topic in many magazines.Meanwhile Byte regards every
    complaint about there mag from an amiga user as more revenue,or
    might I say FROSTING on THE CAKE.
    

    
    Unfortunately, many people consider BYTE to be 'the' place to look
    for computer related information.  
    
    Just yesterday I received e-mail from someone who wanted to look at
    an Amiga before buying an IBM.  The first place they looked was
    BYTE, where, of course, they found no mention of it, except for
    maybe Jerry Pournelle still trying to figure out the code wheel
    in Interceptor.
    
    This person immediately concluded that the Amiga was dead, or at
    least, comatose.  How could it be a real computer if BYTE didn't
    even mention it?
    
    Ed.
    

    What is the problem with BYTE???? 
    
    
    folks down my way have been avoiding it for YEARS!!!!
    
    after reading a couple of issues I understand why!!!!

    
    I still buy BYTE, did drop the subscription though.  But not
    for Amiga news.  I enjoy reading about the strange contortions
    the ibmpc and mac users go thru to run multiple programs at
    the same time.
    
    I still can't believe Jerry P. convinced Sun to send him
    a $20,000 Sun386i.  In the Feb 89 issue he mentioned how nice
    Flicker Master is for interlaced mode, I guess that means he
    is finally using the 2000.
    
    -Dave

 Computer Mice - How popular are they?
   Microsoft sold its millionth mouse last June and say it now sells more mice
 than any of its other retail computer products. Logitech took seven years to
 sell two million mice, a mark it reached last September. It expects to sell a
 million more by the end of 1989. Businessland Inc., a retailer based in San
 Jose, Calif., says mice represent a "substantial part" of its computer
 accessories sales, and mice account for five of the 10 best-selling
 accessories on distributor Softsel Computer Products list. Various estimates
 are that from 10% to 15% of MS-DOS machines are equipped with mice. Every
 Apple Macintosh has a mouse attached, and most new Apple II models do as well,
 not to mention other personal computers like Commodore Amigas and many work
 stations.
	{The Boston Globe, 21-Feb-89, p. 48}

RE: .12
>not to mention other personal computers like Commodore Amigas and many work
> stations.

As a regular reader of the Globe I was pleasently surprised to see that one 
too!  It is a bit of an after thought, but where is Atari, C-64 with GEOS
etc?  A few months back they would have written the article without mentioning
Amiga, or would have lumped it with the others.
Dave