Mega ST vs. Mac Commercial
Top Comments
All Comments (117)
-
There's more to computing than colour and screen size. Did they compare resolution?
-
AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWRK!
-
@kidonlyle So you would have rather used a computer that costed twice as much, does the same job but only in black and white?
-
@R33Racer Don't be so credulous.
-
@eIectrostatic - actually, the Atari ST used the same Motorola CPU as the Macs of the day had... it's all in the OS... (Granted, the Amiga - despite using the same CPU - knocked the ST and Mac out of the ballpark/planet/universe/multi
verse by having innovations, but that just goes to show that innovations minus marketing equals inevitable collapse.) -
1/2 less... just like Macs of today vs PCs of today...
And the cool thing was, back when the Atari ST was in its prime, it used the same CPU (Motorola 68k series).
And yet the Mac survived to this day. Probably because they cost 2x as much as the ST... :( (or 2x the cost of a Windows PC... and, in each case, the same hardware architectures were used... (save for MIDI))
-
Mega ST wins. Mac sucks.
-
@RaggedTiger70 Yeah, it really is a shame.
-
Where did it all go wrong? :-(
-
Hey guys. Just a comment from me (maybe not relevant but) I got ST1024 running Cubase and few other things. After that got Apple after Apple. Today I have MacPro. I'm afraid of the speed how Apple discontinuing they products today (that was not the case before). On the other hand the old ST still playing important role in my studio ;-) how many years after?;-);-)
ha? there was commodore 64, there was Amiga which was again another commodore, there was mac then as well!
And PC is such a generic term! It was coined by IBM but now anything is actually a PC. Your Mac is also a PC!
Wiilovewii 2 years ago 12
@Theretrogamingroom
Only because Atari screwed up the USA marketing. In Europe, the ST actually did outsell the Mac.
gamewizard 1 year ago 4