Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 4th Aug 2012 00:54 UTC
Google This tweet from Tom Warren made me smile. So, it's 2012 and tablets are finally able to do what the Amiga did in 1985. Seems like a bit of a stretch to be excited about that, right? Sure, until I caught myself getting excited - only a bit, but still - by this piece of news. Update: removed me being an annoyed child.
Thread beginning with comment 529600
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Random idea
by CajunArson on Sat 4th Aug 2012 05:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Random idea"
CajunArson
Member since:
2009-07-16

My reading comprehension is just fine, but the writing quality of the posters on this site leaves much to be desired. Any rational person who reads the actual words posted in the article in this site would come to the conclusion that Thom is saying that ancient Amiga's had multi-user support that is just now being implemented for the first time ever in a mobile device... which is wrong but not the point.

Thom also posted a link to some random guy's twitter account showing two windows on a Windows 8 tablet... So what....

1. Some idiot "twittering" that he managed to use Windows doesn't mean that earlier mobile devices couldn't multitask since they have been doing it for decades (yes, much much longer than Android or iOS have been around, and yes iOS *does* support pre-emptive multitasking even if Apple prevents garden variety apps from taking full advantage of it),
and

2. The useless Twitter post (aren't they all useless?) that is not part of the text of this story is a logical non-sequitur to the remainder of the story... it looks like you could use some work on reading comprehension and logical reasoning instead of me.

P.S. --> To everyone still holding irrational nostalgia for Amiga, please direct me to all the multi-touch-enabled Amiga devices that had high-speed wireless data connectivity, OpenGL acclerated graphics, and support for 1080p H.264 playback. Amiga was a completely proprietary platform that only worked because Commodore exerted a level of control that makes Apple look like a hippy open-source startup.

The Amiga platform was doomed from the start because it assumed that no improvements to hardware or software were physically possible after 1985, while the "primitive" PC was designed from day 1 with the understanding that technology would progress forward.

Edited 2012-08-04 05:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Random idea
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 4th Aug 2012 05:27 in reply to "RE[2]: Random idea"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Uhm, you failed utterly and completely at reading comprehension. My god, this must be me some sort of new record.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[4]: Random idea
by flake on Sat 4th Aug 2012 09:03 in reply to "RE[3]: Random idea"
flake Member since:
2012-08-04

It's not a matter of reading comprehension when the material in question doesn't actually state its meaning. You only referred to a tweet obliquely, you didn't actually mention what the tweet was about.

I read that bit about the Amiga the same way. You can't expect everyone to click on every link you post. If people did that, anyone who visited Wikipedia would die of exhaustion after spending 5 days at their computers reading every article that branched off the first one.

When one writes as casually as you do (let's face it, your writing is a far cry from any sort of journalistic standard), their readers are bound to misinterpret something every now and then.

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[4]: Random idea
by Carewolf on Sat 4th Aug 2012 09:53 in reply to "RE[3]: Random idea"
Carewolf Member since:
2005-09-08

Well, I had an Amiga and know it had multitasking and never saw any multiuser aspects of it, and am ashamed of agreeing with an obvious troll, but still in my first reading of the article I also thought you were talking about multiuser in Amiga.

Perhaps it is due to the title which makes you think about multiuser features, so the intro a slgihtly different subject end seeming out of place? I dunno, but it was easy to be mistaken.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[4]: Random idea
by sbenitezb on Sat 4th Aug 2012 15:45 in reply to "RE[3]: Random idea"
sbenitezb Member since:
2005-07-22

The article has both multiuser and multitasking thrown in in the same paragraph. It's all mixed in and very confusing. I followed the first twitter link expecting multiuser related stuff and found a picture of two Metro apps running at the same time. There is no coherency between the article and the title.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Random idea
by Morgan on Sat 4th Aug 2012 05:27 in reply to "RE[2]: Random idea"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

So I'm irrational because I happened to grok the meaning right away and you didn't? You blame your lack of comprehension on the writing skills of a language arts major with a master's degree, who has been writing in English (his second language to my knowledge) for many years, and is far better at it than me and many other native English speakers.

Face it, you misunderstood the article's segue and are scrambling to blame someone else for what, quite honestly, doesn't even matter. No one cares that you didn't catch the meaning right off, except perhaps you.

But just in case you need it for future reference, here is a breakdown of the article flow in layman's terms, with my explanation in braces:

This tweet from Tom Warren {regarding proper multitasking on a tablet} made me smile. So, it's 2012 and tablets are finally able to do what the Amiga did in 1985. {the Amiga could multitask in 1985} Seems like a bit of a stretch to be excited about that, right? Sure, until I caught myself getting excited - only a bit, but still - {here's the segue} by this piece of news. {about multi-user support on Android}

I find it really sad that I had to do that, but I hope it helps you in your future attempts at reading.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Random idea
by vocivus on Sat 4th Aug 2012 09:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Random idea"
vocivus Member since:
2010-03-13

When I RTFP, I thought it was all about mutli-user too. After your clarification I now understand. Admittedly, I'm no genius!

No offense or sarcasm or flaming intended.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Random idea
by sbenitezb on Sat 4th Aug 2012 15:56 in reply to "RE[3]: Random idea"
sbenitezb Member since:
2005-07-22

You blame your lack of comprehension on the writing skills of a language arts major with a master's degree, who has been writing in English (his second language to my knowledge) for many years, and is far better at it than me and many other native English speakers.


A language arts major should know how to properly write a sentence, how to separate topics in different paragraphs and how not to push "Submit" without letting the "writing" settle for a bit.

This "article" of his looks more like an amateurish "publish something" post, no different than a tweet, and completely violates the neutral-view policy of professional journalists. IMO, it's totally out of place for a news site.

Thom, you should take your time to write and review before posting. This is not a blog of yours and I believe all personal opinion on part of the journalists should be in comments, not in the article. State the facts and leave all else to the comments section.

I'm also not a native english speaker, so I apologize if I'm not writing properly.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Random idea
by ncafferkey on Tue 7th Aug 2012 10:22 in reply to "RE[2]: Random idea"
ncafferkey Member since:
2006-09-15

Amiga was a completely proprietary platform that only worked because Commodore exerted a level of control that makes Apple look like a hippy open-source startup.


Nonsense. Anyone was allowed to write apps, games or even OS extensions for the Amiga without any interference from Commodore. No payment or permission was necessary.

The Amiga platform was doomed from the start because it assumed that no improvements to hardware or software were physically possible after 1985, while the "primitive" PC was designed from day 1 with the understanding that technology would progress forward.


If anything, that's the wrong way around. Everyone knows the original IBM PC was a cobbled-together POS. 640k limit anyone?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Random idea
by zima on Thu 9th Aug 2012 23:15 in reply to "RE[3]: Random idea"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Anyone was allowed to write apps, games or even OS extensions for the Amiga without any interference from Commodore. No payment or permission was necessary.

Arguably, that's exactly what killed the Amiga as a platform - it had very console-like dynamics (most people didn't ever upgrade beyond 500-generation, didn't see the need ...since devs were targeting mostly
500-gen, because that was the fixed baseline everybody had), but without a matching business model: Commodore was expected to sell the largely ~fixed (tech-wise) Amigas at ever lower prices, new models mostly ignored, meanwhile being unable to extract money from dev houses.
Basically just what nearly killed Atari and brought the entire North American market down in the video game crash of 1983 (and C= was largely responsible for this one - it seems they didn't really realise what happened, didn't learn from it the way Nintento did)

> The Amiga platform was doomed from the start because it assumed that no improvements to hardware or software were physically possible after 1985, while the "primitive" PC was designed from day 1 with the understanding that technology would progress forward.

If anything, that's the wrong way around. Everyone knows the original IBM PC was a cobbled-together POS. 640k limit anyone?

No, all its tightly-integrated "niceness" is what killed the Amiga. How PC was cobbled-together is exactly the point: it wasn't so fixed, could improve much more readily. And oh boy it did.
Mixed with economies of scale ( http://arstechnica.com/features/2005/12/total-share/5/ and the next 5 ...if you squint, you can see the share of Amiga there, I promise), R&D distributed among many PC-companies, there was nothing C= could do against such onslaught (maybe except for releasing, early on, an Amiga-derived gfx & sound PC expansion board, and try to make into a standard - but that would be heresy to many Amigans)
PC just turned out to be the better way of doing things - even the present Macs and Amigas are just PCs, really (only, the latter with some weird CPUs for no good reason)

Reply Parent Score: 2