AmigaOS compared to Windows (1990)

Hi all,

I'm doing a comparative document between AmigaOS and Windows in the past.
I would need small ideas to compare the 2 systems at the same date of course.
Like:
1990: AmigaOS2.0 premptive multitasking <=> Windows 3 no multitasking.

The goal is to say that at this time, Amiga was superior.

What I miss for example is how many colors max both system could display, sound channels ... etc.

Thanks.

Quote:
You don't mean the goal is to document these things?

@Thematic

This was 2 months ago.
I needed to have some details for my presentation at the Colmar show.

Okay, here's some thoughts from memory, so not checked:

Graphics and Sound: AmigaOS 2.0 and Windows 3.0 both supported whatever the hardware supported, though Windows 3.0 didn't initially ship with sound support.

AmigaOS 2.0 - pre-emptive multitasking microkernel architecture
Windows 3.0 - cooperative multitasking architecture (I think) on top of DOS

AmigaOS - no memory management support
Windows - supported memory management

AmigaOS - minimum of 256KB of RAM ?
Windows - minimum of 640KB of RAM ?

AmigaOS - minimum of 7.2 MHz 68000
Windows - minimum of 4 MHz 8086 ?

AmigaOS - fits on 1x 880k floppy disk
Windows - required 10 MB of hard disk space

AmigaOS - ARexx application scripting support
Windows - no scripting support except limited DOS scripts

AmigaOS - multiple screen capability each with independent resolution
Windows - single screen only, fixed resolution

AmigaOS - FFS supported 32 character filenames, max 4GB disk partition, max 2GB file size ?
Windows - FAT 16 supported 8+3 character filenames, max 2GB disk partitions, 2GB max file size.

Thread closed

Thanks for your comments. As I said, it was 2 months ago!

Hi Elwood,

If the CPU in an Amiga requests any byte from the 2 gigs of ram it can control, it receives the result immediately, while on the win*-dos mechanism (sic), is it the same? With the MMU, MP and the 640 K barrier, and even then, didn't it have a maximum of 16 megs (win 3.11) originally too? (Maybe at 4.77 MHz it didn't matter if it took a bit of extra time as the CPU was slow anyway.)

What was maximum ram capacity of win95? And virtual memory? And, Amiga not having VM, so what? Big deal. It was STILL the best OS.

You see, IF WE HAD the same speed CPU (and subsystems) as they do, we would, a) run circles around them, b) kick them to the curb, c) they wouldn't even be considered competition, it would be a SO futile and pathetic showing by them.

Imagine a pure 68 K AOS weighing in at 12-30 Megs doing MORE than vista! So small, it could fit in a BIOS chip! NO program over 1 Meg in size!!!!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!
('tis the season to be jolly.... )


* You never really "win" anything there.

@Elwood

True, but I haven't probably had the chance to say "microkernel" since my student days. I missed the thread the first time around... but looks like others did as well.