Conference hydra::amiga_v1

    
    Unless you have a large investment in Apple II software, I can't think
    of one single reason why anyone would choose a GS over an Amiga.  (The
    Mac is another story, and for the technical professional, has many
    advantages over the Amiga, mostly in the availability of high-quality
    business application software.  However, the Mac is mighty pricey)
    
    School systems seem to be buying the GS, probably because of their
    large investment in II software, but I believe that for most hobbyists
    and home users, the Amiga is and will continue to be the ultimate
    machine.  If you doubt this, just compare the relative sizes of the
    Apple II/IIgs and Amiga conferences. 
    
    The Amiga has a vastly superior hardware design which has so many
    technical advantages over the GS that it's hard to remember them all. 
    The most impressive are it's intelligent graphics co-processors which
    offload the manipulation of graphics and sound from the 68000 cpu. 
    This results in unrivalled graphics performance in and above it's price
    range.  (For what it's worth, InfoWorld recently reported that Apple
    was buying Amigas in an effort to study and evaluate the coprocessor
    design)
    
    The Amiga is very easily upgradable to more powerful microprocessors
    from the 68000 to the 68010, 68020, 68030, & 68040 (when available). 
    Many power yuppies in this conference are running 68020 or 68030 Amigas
    that will outperform a MicroVax II.  The GS uses a unique 65816 cpu,
    which is a 16 bit implementation of the 6502 8 bit processor used in
    the Apple II, Commodore 64, and Atari XL.  As far as I know, other than
    upping the speed via a TransWarp accelerator board, there isn't any way
    to squeeze more power out of a GS.
    
    The Amiga's multitasking OS is at the forefront of microcomputer system
    software.  Aided by the custom hardware, the Amiga can seamlessly run
    multiple applications simultaneously, a feat that Apple has been
    striving mightily (without success) to achieve on the Mac.
    
    In terms of availability of software, I'll bet anyone a weeks pay that
    the Amiga can outperform the GS in any application imaginable, and at a
    lower overall cost.  Whether it be word processing, spreadsheet,
    database, Desktop publishing, music, video or games, the Amiga will
    simply blow away anything available for the GS.  I don't know how much
    native GS software is available now, but the Amiga has passed the 2000
    mark.
    
    The Amiga can also be configured to run Macintosh software with a $450
    emulation package that performs faster than a genuine Mac Plus, so you
    needn't fret over that one package that only runs on the Mac and you
    just have to have.  The GS will never be able to run Mac software,
    since they use radically different cpu designs.  (The Mac and Amiga are
    both 68*** based).
    
    In the final analysis, you should just get down to a good Amiga dealer
    (Omnitek, System Eyes or the Memory Location) and get a thorough
    demonstration of what an Amiga can do.  If you are not amazed. let us
    know.  I bet you'll forget all about the GS in about 5 minutes.
    
    Ed.
    

    re:-1
    
    The Infoworld quote I don't know about ... but the Computerworld
    quote is in note 3105
    
    Enjoy
    Happy Holidays
    

    Here's another point to remember about the Apple IIgs.  And keep in
    mind that I am a former Apple IIe man myself and was once faced with
    the decision of whether to go to the Amiga or the GS.
    
    The GS was never meant to be anything else than a way to extend the
    Apple II line a few more years.  If Steve Wozniak had not returned to
    Apple, I doubt if it would have ever been built.  I do not see any real
    corporate support for the II line and expect it to die out after the GS
    becomes obsolete (well, I think it's obsolete already.) so don't expect
    any upgrades or new processors.  I could be wrong, but I don't think
    so.
    
    As the II line dies, there will be fewer software titles coming out for
    it and support for present programs will diminish.
    
    My personal feeling is that if you do purchase a GS, you will be
    attaching yourself to a falling star
    
    Ken
    

    	As has been mentioned, the two computers are not in the same
    class. The Apple ][ GS is a good, solid upgrade to the Apple ][
    line and will most likely cost you a little less overall than a
    similar Amiga. It is also the very last extension ever of the Apple
    ][ line and cannot be significantly expanded. If it will do everything
    you want "your" computer to do then it might be the system for you.
    The Amiga, on the other hand, compares more closely with the Mac][
    than the Apple ][. The A500 is a bit wimpy in this class but makes
    up for that in price. The A2000 can go one-on-one with the Mac ][
    in every respect but price - and it wins that battle hands down.
    If you expect to be a "power user" or get into some serious graphics
    or video applications then you have no choice but the Amiga. If
    you expect to play an occasional game, write letters and do your
    taxes then any Apple ][ will do fine - as will the C=64 or C=128.

    re.4 Dave I had the pleasure of talking to several people that were
    in the IIgs market,and on a price comparasion level the 500 will
    win every time.However one thing to remember is that if a person
    buys,a 500 then moves to a 25000 he can take his software investment
    with him.This cannot be said for many product lines.Ask Mac users
    that have moved to color mac II systems.Even if Apple comes out
    with a coprocessor version all the current software will not work.
    (be able to use the coprocessor)
    	I also had the chance to run Macpaint on the Amax.It ran well
    but I would trade it for a copy of GraphiCraft today.I suggest anyone
    looking for a home system at least look at an Amiga re.1:
    								bill 

    Bill,
    	you are right that the A500 system costs less than an equivalent
    ][GS system. The games and other software - generic Apple ][ stuff
    for the most part - costs less. (it also offers less) Eventually
    the more capable A500 ends up costing more. This point is insignificant
    when compared to other considerations. If the owner has nowhere
    of interest to go, then the decision must be made on the grounds
    of which specific model bests suits the use. If the user is just
    starting and expects to grow then getting in at the bottom of a
    line is much better than at the end of a line. Apple might be able
    to deal with growth from a Mac+ to a Mac][cx but will anyone ever
    build an Apple][ emulator for a Mac? (pause for raucous laughter)
    An upgrade means that all that low-cost software can't even be used
    for scratch disks. Sell it or dump it.