Re: [MiNT] Future of MINT

["Fred Horvat" <fmh@netzero.net>]

I was not trying to put down the Falcon.  I read my posting over and can see
where there may have been some confusion on my statements on the Falcon.  I
stated that the minimum for MINT should be a standard 14 Meg Falcon and I
still stand by that statement.  Then I questioned if any C-Lab Falcons where
still made?  If not then the lowest hardware available new is the Milan 040.
I was not trying to state that the minimum should be a Milan 040.  I
honestly forgot about  accelerated Falcons and what can be achieved that way
with memory and CPU.  You also brought up a good point that I completely
missed, used equipment.  Falcons and TT's are cheap these days and ST's are
basically free here in the States.  I also agree 100% there are not as many
Hades or Milans out in the wild as there are real Atari  Falcon and TT
computers and that's where the focus should be.
      Thanks.

 ----- Original Message -----
From: SWE/YesCREW <jvalant@m42.cx>
To: Fred Horvat <fmh@netzero.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 1999 1:17 AM
Subject: Re: [MiNT] Future of MINT


> > I'd like to address the hardware issue first.  When discussing the
future
> > that means upcoming and current hardware.  Currently 68000 ST's are no
> > longer made.  Currently produced Atari clones are minimum 68030 but
mostly
> > 68040 and 68060 CPU's.  If a 4 Meg ST works fine with the current kernel
for
> > a user then great.  I don't see though that the future of MINT is in a 4
Meg
> > 68000 CPU.  My TT030 to upgrade hardware wish list consisted of TT RAM,
hard
> > drive, video, and Ethernet was too cost prohibitive.  I ended up
ordering a
> > Milan040 which was easier and cheaper plus a lot faster (bummer I've not
> > received it yet though).  Granted my upgrade list was the complete
system
> > and most users may only want to upgrade only RAM or a hard drive so
> > everyone's mileage may vary.  To me the current minimum hardware for the
> > Atari platform should be a 14 Meg Falcon.  Which I don't even know if
C-Lab
> > makes them anymore?  So that leaves the Milan040 (which will cease
> > production soon), Milan060, Hades060, and maybe Centek060 which is a lot
> > more muscle than the 68030-16mhz Falcon minimum I suggested above.
>
>   U should think on few more issue before think Falcons out:
>
> 1.  There is FAR the most Falcons arround, a LOT more as Hades's (VERY
> expensive so hardly any more), Milan's (quite more of them as Hades's)
> Centek prolly won't run MiNT and Milan 060 also isnt out yet (but it will
> be any day)
>
> 2.  There are a lot of accelerated Falcons.. Mine Ct2 can compete without
> any shame with friend's Milan.. generalay a bit slower only + a LOT of
> sofware which WONT run on Milan's (if we are talking bout MiNT: virtual
> consoles for example) and lotsa of that software is faster as any GEM soft
> on Milan and work very well undr MiNT.
>
>   I realy dont see the reason to use Milan as minimum for MiNT, due to
> fact there aint eactly lot of them, comparin to TT or Falcons.. I do
> dislike banning St's, but i agree 68000 and 4mb is to weak.. But now to
> bam less "muscular" Falcons, TT's.. etc.. i was proud Atari comunity wasnt
> Microsoft.....
>
>
>
>   Ppl buy new machine and then rest with weaker ones (we could say ppl
> with TRUE Ataris, sudenly may either buy compatibles or.... that is not
> the right aproach...
>
> Semper Fi, SWE!
>
>
> P.S. btw, its 7 am, im a bit grouchy, read that with reserve :)
>
>
>

__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html