Atari ST vs Amiga vs Apple 2gs vs PC

[PDog]

While the 16-bit console wars were on the horizon, the 16 bit computer war waged on in the late 80s. Which was the best 80s computer in the following categories:

 

Graphics

Speed

Sound

Gaming Library

Business Library

Cosmetic Design

Expandability

Price

and overall best computer

[OldSchoolRetroGamer]

Heh Heh............in before the lock.............if you were not a new member I would think you are Trolling.....still not sure.....

 

 

Seriously though, here is how it goes, opinions very, everyone has their favourite, fanboy rage will ensue. Not to mention, this type of thing....... BEEN DONE TO DEATH.

I see you've just two posts, just a heads up....VS threads do not generally go or end well...........mostly because in the end all those things you ask are true for different computers to different people sometimes due to availability, region etc. So there is no right answer just opinions. Even though some from a technical standpoint might have a valid answer it does not matter to the end user.

Edited February 18, 2013 by OldSchoolRetroGamer

[PDog]

Heh Heh............in before the lock.............if you were not a new member I would think you are Trolling.....still not sure.....

I posted an 8-bit version of this question a few months back which was extremely helpful for me to decide on a computer to get. I'm certain its helpful for others too. If you ask me, it's you who are coming off as quite a jerk. Just because you feel it's pointless and subjective (which aside from the cosmetic design aspects, it's not) doesn't mean others won't find it helpful and informative.

[+Gemintronic]

I prefer the eXsorbeo. At least it could play One Eyed Monster War.

[high voltage]

Should't that be Mac and not 2gs?

Anyway, Amiga was best in all categories, except MIDI (Sound) where ST was used by musicians all over the world, Graphics also are very good on ST, oh and the ST ran MAC better and faster than the MAC, ST was faster than Amiga too, ST was faster than IBM, ST looked gorgeous too, ST had many many games, ST looked cool too when compared to IBM, and ST was 'POWER WITHOUT THE PRICE', so yes, Amiga (Which was made by an Atari bloke)

[Segataritensoftii]

Should't that be Mac and not 2gs?

Anyway, Amiga was best in all categories, except MIDI (Sound) where ST was used by musicians all over the world, Graphics also are very good on ST, oh and the ST ran MAC better and faster than the MAC, ST was faster than Amiga too, ST was faster than IBM, ST looked gorgeous too, ST had many many games, ST looked cool too when compared to IBM, and ST was 'POWER WITHOUT THE PRICE', so yes, Amiga (Which was made by an Atari bloke)

The Mac wasn't aimed at competing with the Amiga or the Atari ST. That was the Apple IIGS's job. And the IIGS was indeed a 16-bit system. it used the 65816, a 16-bit CPU. Edited February 18, 2013 by Segataritensoftii

[OldSchoolRetroGamer]

I posted an 8-bit version of this question a few months back which was extremely helpful for me to decide on a computer to get. I'm certain its helpful for others too. If you ask me, it's you who are coming off as quite a jerk. Just because you feel it's pointless and subjective (which aside from the cosmetic design aspects, it's not) doesn't mean others won't find it helpful and informative.

 

Did you notice where I added "seriously though...." yeah I was joking at the start.............

Lighten up man and don't be so serious. I gave you my honest opinion. Geez 2 posts and you know it all don't you? Untwist those panties and you will do better here. My points stand whether you agree or not, speaking as a long time member and conveying my experiences and observations in this community Perhaps yours have been different elsewhere.

 

Best overall computer = Commodore AMIGA. There.

Edited February 18, 2013 by OldSchoolRetroGamer

[akator]

I vote yo' mama as better than the Atari ST, Amiga, Apple IIgs, or PC.

[scotty]

I had a couple of ST's (520, 1040, Mega 2), Amiga 500 and 386SX PC back in those days. While I grew up an Atari fanboy, I loved my ST. That being said, Jay Mnor (the guy who designed the Atari 800) made an awesome machine in the Amiga. There were things I liked about both. Multitasking, graphics and sound were all better on the Amiga. PC was still a few years away yet. Mac was black and white, so I would not even put that one in the same league. Both the ST (Magic Sac, Spectre GCR) and Amiga (Shapeshifter) could run MAc software faster than a real Mac for less than half the price, yet, you still had Mac fans swearing by their Macs while those in the know laughed at their ignorance. Both ST and Amiga could run PC, but it was sloooooooow.

[+wood_jl]

Generally, these kinds of threads have been done before, and often do not lead to any meaningful results.

 

Here's an example (this one was on 8-bit Atari vs Commoddore) : http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/134852-atari-v-commodore/

 

That thread ran on for 464 pages, and probably changed very few opinions.

[scotty]

Btw... I still have 2 Amigas (my original, and one I got at a flea market) in a storage locker, along with some Atari 8-bits, Vic 20s, C-64s and various other machines. Because I live in a small condo, I do not have the space to set them up. My wife and I have our PCs side-by-side in the living room, and we had to get rid of some furniture for that. Thankfully emulation of both ST and Amiga is almost flawless, or close enough that you will not notice any difference. I run dual monitors with one being a 21" CRT for emulation authenticity. Some day we will have a bigger place, and I will be using real hardware again, but untill then, emulation suits me just fine. Not to mention, hard drive space is a lot nicer than having THOUSANDS of floppy disks all over the place. I think and emulation vs real hardware debate would be more productive.

Edited February 18, 2013 by scotty

[Tanrunomad]

There's been lots of threads on this before, but nice to see the IIGS and PC in the mix. Here's my thoughts:

 

Graphics: Amiga - 4096 colors with 32 available for single screen display. Though the STe had similar capabilities.

Speed: Atari ST had the faster CPU if memory serves right (8 Mhz). Though I can't recall which generation PC was out at that time.

Sound: Apple IIGS hands down. Ensoniq with its 32 channels (16 stereo voice) and unlimited sampling space. Basically a 16-channel MOD player.

Gaming Library - Both Atari ST and Amiga had several hundred, if not thousands of games.

Business Library - PC

Cosmetic Design - Ha, subjective as hell. All were sexy in their own ways.

Expandability - IIGS had 7 slots + memory slot and lots of awesome peripherals.

Price - Atari ST was the best bang your buck.

[yell0w_lantern]

Unless money is no object, a more practical question might be how easy is it to obtain each one?

[DesertJets]

You could include the Mac in the question if you looked at the LC line. Though out later in the 16-bit home computer era that we are looking at, it is worth some consideration. As to how it stacked up vs everything else (let alone the other Apple product) is debatable.

 

I think PCs of that era are funny -- a 286 was our only computer from ~1991 to 1997. Out of the box your random beige box PC is a pretty underwhelming thing (if we are comparing them to the Amiga, ST and IIGS). Grahpically the VGA standard was reasonably good. But the PC speaker was bad -- not two ways about it. Sound cards were becoming somewhat common in the early 90s -- but it would be a few more years with the rise of the multi-media PC to see that the norm and you'd already be looking at 386 if not 486 class machines (ie not 16 bit). That said a properly set up 286 class PC isn't anything to sneeze at, and I certainly don't remember the game library for PCs being lacking by any stretch of the imagination. It just wasn't good as the other three at it.

 

That said I think the Amiga makes a pretty good case of it. Even though my A500 is currently collecting dust I still can't think of how amazing a machine it was for its time. For something that cost $599 in 1987 that could do what it does it pretty amazing -- especially in contrast to the XT clone PC we had at the time.

[atarian63]

Atari ST, most versatile, least expensive,great graphics,ok sound,lots of software,best of the emulators for various machines,best mono display,most popular for music due to built in midi.Amiga had to scamble to make a cost reduced model two years after the the ST was released in order to compete(a500).Sales were 2-1 ST up to that point

Amiga, great graphics and sound, took a couple years for software to be primarily written for it and not ported from Atari ST,excellent with a 2000 model and video toaster

PC, weak, awful sound, 8 bitvga just released (85/86) as an add on,most games cga, 128mb top hat memory upgrade for 286 to reach 640k, awful memory management,terrible games,no playable arcade games,crappy analog joystick,great for word processing ,spreadsheets and other boring stuff of that nature

Apple IIgs, just an also sort of ran in the 16 bit era, little software support compared to ST and Amiga, slow 8/16 cpu,just never really made it in the 16 bit wars

Mac, the system that made it in spite of itself, due mostly to good marketing and a stable company. mono only games,some great though,great DTP but not much better than ST,WAY TOO Expensive

Edited February 19, 2013 by atarian63

[Segataritensoftii]

Atari ST, most versatile, least expensive,great graphics,ok sound,lots of software,best of the emulators for various machines,best mono display,most popular for music due to built in midi.Amiga had to scamble to make a cost reduced model two years after the the ST was released in order to compete(a500).Sales were 2-1 ST up to that point

Amiga, great graphics and sound, took a couple years for software to be primarily written for it and not ported from Atari ST,excellent with a 2000 model and video toaster

PC, weak, awful sound, 8 bitvga just released (85/86) as an add on,most games cga, 128mb top hat memory upgrade for 286 to reach 640k, awful memory management,terrible games,no playable arcade games,crappy analog joystick,great for word processing ,spreadsheets and other boring stuff of that nature

Apple IIgs, just an also sort of ran in the 16 bit era, little software support compared to ST and Amiga, slow 8/16 cpu,just never really made it in the 16 bit wars

Mac, the system that made it in spite of itself, due mostly to good marketing and a stable company. mono only games,some great though,great DTP but not much better than ST,WAY TOO Expensive

Please put a space between all of your commas and the words after them next time. Thank you.

 

Anyway, the ST had a larger library of games in its early lifespan, if that's anything to go by. There were also some nice games that didn't show up on the Amiga, such as Oids, Super Sprint, Gauntlet 1, etc.

Edited February 19, 2013 by Segataritensoftii

[potatohead]

I skipped out on this era. Did have PC machines, and was still running Atari 8 bit, Apple //e and CoCo 3 up through about 94.

 

I ended up gaming on a 386, speaker at first, sound about a year after. Loved all the DOS games I could find on FTP sites around the world. Anyone remember ftp.funet.fi? Yeah baby! Anyway, I was console gaming mostly, exploring the net on the PC, and playing some games on it. LAN DOOM was awesome, and of course the WOLF3D, classic FPS twitch. Still play that one.

 

Was really envious of the Amiga and ST titles I saw, but I really wanted to invest in connectivity at that point. That put the PC front and center. A PC was cheap, and a little wheeling, dealing for a reasonable graphics card, sound and modem and getting online was a reasonable experience!

 

So that's what I did, right along with run CAD and other manufacturing related apps I pirated to gain job skills on a cobbled together 386/25 with 5MB RAM. If you had 4, a bunch of stuff would not work. If you had 5, most things marked for 8MB would work anyway, but flog the disk a little more than they would otherwise. No worries.

 

Ditched the CoCo 3, only to have to track one down again. Shut down the Apple, and gamed on Atari stuff. Jag, VCS, 800 XL, and various rented things. Fun time. The decision to get online and build skills made me a lot of $$$, so I've no regrets.

 

All I can contribute to the thread is "that boring stuff" paid a lot of people off, if they were getting after it for work, career, etc...

 

The peers who had 16 bit computers?

 

I knew one person with a GS. At the time it was kind of spiffy, but for some reason, just odd. I really liked the Apple 2, but the GS just didn't stick. Not sure why. I knew a few people with ST, one doing music. Thought that was damn cool and still do, but what I really wanted was an Amiga, tricked out, toaster, the works for doing video related things and of course gaming.

 

About the time I really started to consider getting a 16 bitter to experience that era a bit late, I jumped on SGI computers through work. Frankly, I wanted one of those at home instantly, and got one the moment I could too. R5K Indy, 3D graphics, 256MB RAM, fast disk...

 

If I were to pick one, and maybe that's a way better way to do this thread, I would jump for an ST because I think it had the best bang for the buck. If price was no object, I would have got an Amiga and stoked it up for doing lots of media related things.

[Seob]

look at the reviews of "lgr" on youtube under hardware reviews.

[Keatah]

The dawning of 16-bits was when I got out of the what-we-call-retro-today systems. I wanted a real computer and not some gay ass toy like the amiga.. With the PC real work could be done. And not only that, the PC is a thriving platform today, unlike the dead amiga. Best choice I ever made - dumping the amiga.

 

the only thing the amiga was good for was as a front end for the toaster. And then you had to be a production guru to make use of it.

[Keatah]

I vote yo' mama as better than the Atari ST, Amiga, Apple IIgs, or PC.

 

I just about spit out my McGriddle reading that.

[Hatta]

In the late 80s, the Amiga was definitely better than the PC. In the early 90s, the PC was definitely better than the Amiga.

[FastRobPlus]

Even on a site where all of us owned STs, I think it would be nearly impossible to argue that there was a PC in the 1980’s that was better than Amiga. Rather than rehashing a lot of debate, check out the ST vs Amiga thread here

[atarian63]

other than the ST...

[Zap!]

While the 16-bit console wars were on the horizon, the 16 bit computer war waged on in the late 80s. Which was the best 80s computer in the following categories:

 

Graphics

Speed

Sound

Gaming Library

Business Library

Cosmetic Design

Expandability

Price

and overall best computer

 

I wonder what would have happened if the X68000 had been included here. Would it have won the "hat trick" of graphics, speed, and sound?

[JamesD]

The Mac wasn't aimed at competing with the Amiga or the Atari ST. That was the Apple IIGS's job. And the IIGS was indeed a 16-bit system. it used the 65816, a 16-bit CPU.

A 16 bit cpu with an 8 bit data buss and instruction timings mostly the same as the 6502.