So theory: The Apple, NEC, Amiga, are all the same exact computer?

[RegalSin]

If you haven't noticed a lot of NEC products are interchangeable, with Apple, and Amiga products. However when it comes to IBM and Intel, they are not.

Apple = USA
NEC = Japan
Amiga = Europe

However over time, they all seemed to adopt the Ms-dos type, not including Apple.
Apple was on it's way to failure until Jobs stroke back with his "Next" invention.
Also Apples were cheap lemons, that would break every often but did wonders for graphical users.

The Amiga also did wonders for graphical users, but the gamers prefered IBM, DOS
and the artists, prefered Apples. Then photoshop was released and that made the apple priceless for a time being, along with other desktop tools, that was presented in Amiga.

So why bring this up? They all have something in common, they did an extensive amount of graphical work. However they all bowed down to windows, why? Because it was cheap as dirt to use a MS-DOS computer, and then to use windows for multi-tasking, and as time moved on, more windows outranked apple programmers, leaving
us with god forsaken intel Apples.

Oh what about Unix? Well Unix was this other command line, like DOS, but could work in environment, not wasting as much memory, or resources, and work with larger files, like networking images, sounds, for example. Again networking, back in the 1990's.

So where did IBM leave off to? Well IBM had Lisa, and their warp two products, that served financial institutions, and bigger customer is that nation.

....................................

So why I brought this subject up? It seems in the long run without a respectable game library the original Apples stayed in the dust, or some paper weight, while the
Amigas had a library of some sort, they divided it into PAL vs NTSC standards.
Which make it a pain in the brain to collect for Amiga. Then finally  the NEC came out on top with a whopping library.

How are they the same? The connectors, and controllers. Back then it was all for one and one for all. Not oh look it is a cheaper brand. It was something I was thinking about, along with the Genesis and Atari as well.

Cheeri Bye

[SuperDeadite]

I'm not sure why I'm actually answering this post.  But the NEC computers used NEC V30 chips which are basically 286 clones.  It's totally different architecture from the Motorola 68000 in the Mac/Amiha....

[ApolloBoy]

What drugs are you taking today?

[thesteve]

now the apple2, C64 and TG16 i would agree to being the same basic system (all 6502 based)

[Arkhan]

If you're just going to use the CPU as the "sameness" indicator, then the atari 2600 might as well be the same thing too, lol.



None of the computers are the exact same.

Apple ][:  Shitty video capabilities, f*cked sound support, goofy quirks to using it in the first place
NEC: PC clone.
Amiga: Excellent at the time, pain in the ass today.   


PC / clones are the best choice.   The rest are fun to dick off with but ultimately are a waste of time.

[kazekirifx]

Um, no. NEC is definitely not Apple or Amiga. NEC machines were never known for their graphic editing software. They were basically the PC-clone that Japan used before they were forced to conform to the same PC standard as the rest of the world.

[RegalSin]

They all were high powered graphic machines, compared to IBM, DOS standard. Over time the OS wars took place, and Windows being on a cheap IBM, and eventually Intel won. The Amiga historically did it first, NEC followed because the OS was becoming popular, and Apple already was up against Amiga.

My original point on a level of equality they all reflected each nations need or desire for high graphic standards.

JAPAN = Manga, Comics, Videogames
EUROPE = Animation, 3d, and Video
AMERICA = Photogenic, identification

All three are absolute in their prolific usage, ( even if not listed ).

[kazekirifx]

They all were high powered graphic machines, compared to IBM, DOS standard.

PC-9801 resolution is 640x400 and original IBM DOS resolution is 640x480, so in the strictest of terms the IBM DOS is higher, graphically.

Still, I still can't see your original point. Not following the train of thought.
Yes, the software available for each machine reflected the nation's needs.
I wouldn't necessarily say so with the graphic hardware, cause, again, the graphic power of the NEC machines really wasn't particularly high compared to IBM. What's much more striking, I think, is the quality of the sound chips in the NEC machines. PC-8801 had FM sound back when both IBM and apple were still screwing around with beep sound. Clearly sound in video games was considered more important in Japan.

[Arkhan]

LOL, high powered graphics machines.

Yeah dude, 16 color PC-88 games.   Totally high powered!

[RegalSin]

Those 16 colored games are still more fun, then anything on the 360.

[thesteve]

thats because MS and games dont mix

[mac]

LOAD "*",8,1 . Will never forget lol

C64 rocked

[Drakon]

What drugs are you taking today?

Pretty much sums up how I feel about the first post.  I suppose you think all consoles that use a d-pad are the same.

"All these machines output sound therefore they're all teh same w00t!"

[SNKNostalgia]

I personally didn't care for PC games until the IBM PS/2 came out. Even then, it was a bit meh compared to firing up my NES.

It wasn't until around 1990 when I got a 386 SX with an Adlib sound card and games like Wolfenstein that I started to take PC gaming a bit more seriously. I played the hell out of the Sierra and Lucas Arts quest games. Some of the military simulator games like M1-Abram, 688 Attack Sub, etc... were pretty fun to play back then also.

Now, if I had maybe a MSX computer... I might have enjoyed PC gaming in the late 80's more. That was only in Japan though. A friend of mine had a C64 that I fooled with in 1989 and it was OK, but weak sauce compared to (guess again) my NES.

I just not a fan of the CGA, EGA game era of the US all that much.