Talk:Amiga software

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

It hardly reads like an encyclopedia article.

"Many Amiga programs were so well designed for their age"

"The adventure of Amiga continues"

"or a gorgeous demonstration of capabilities of Amiga"

odin 14:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the user Raffaele Megabyte has been spicing up the article. He seems to be knowledgeable about the platform, just a bit too passionate I guess. I'd make corrections but last time I butted heads with him the whole thing ended badly.
--Anss123 21:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry. As I wrote many articles on magazines in the past I have the habit to use a reporter style, by "emphasizing" about the machine.

Now I am organizing this article about a precise scheme of software related section topics, and squeezing my head about recalling all Amiga programs which are representative of the platform, then next move will be to "shake the carpet", and make a big cleaning of it all, links, style, etcetera. See you. --Raffaele Megabyte 00:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@ Odin about first quote:

"Many Amiga programs were so well designed for their age"

Well. It is difficult to formulate this statement in a different way. However I will try.

At least this is true indeed. Many Amiga programs were so well written that you could continue using it nowadays being still productive, Final Writer, for example it is of 1999, but still it is a good Wordprocessor. The same is AmigaWriter 2.2 aged since 2000/2001. And the features these programs have, are still the same of all wordprocessors of today. Maybe they do not have internal VBA (Visual Basic for Applications) like Word x Windows, or they do not use XML as default structure to build the document file... ...but who cares of these features?

http://www.geocities.ws/paris/3834/fw01.jpg

http://www.scimics.de/flm/amiga/pics/fw3.gif

The same we could say of programs like Art Effects, etcetera...

http://www.geocities.ws/paris/3834/ae_gemue.jpg

It has no very recent features as Adobe photoshop CS2 or CS3 like HDR painting or mixing vector with bitmaps, but it is still good for any normal works on images with a certain degree of professionality.

Lightwave 5 it is still a beautiful piece of software...

http://www.geocities.ws/paris/3834/modeler.jpg

With respect, --Raffaele Megabyte 01:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. User:Raffaelle Megabyte knows more about Amiga software than I can ever hope for, and I was an avid Amiga user for almost a decade. But really, Raffaelle Megabyte's style of writing is too hobbyist and fanboyish. The article could well do with some serious trimming, mentioning every program there is but not glossing over them. JIP | Talk 19:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why offending?

Do you sense that using the word "fanboyish" here makes you a bit offensive? Don't you?

At this point of the various editions I made then I just corrected any personal comment from mine and I made also a big cleaning of it. So what is your point claiming me fanboyish, NOW that the article it is almost "neutral"?

And perhaps I do not mentioned EVERY Amiga program as you said...

mentioning every program there is but not glossing over them

--Raffaele Megabyte 06:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In defense of my complete scheme of categories

I just made an incomplete but rational survey on about any aspect of software categories, and IMHO I think that any historical computer platform or any OS articles covering all aspect of the software park, it should enlist almost any category of software in a rational scheme to be precise for being a considered a serious Encyclopedia article.

IMHO I think that in the future we will see more and more articles relating to other OSs than Amiga, built up from the same scheme I used for the Amiga Software (here it is: General Overview, then Productivity subdivided into: Office, Paint, 3D, CAD, Music, etc.; then System and Recovery tools, then Entertainment, General Purpose, Multimedia, WWW, Science and Special Uses, and in the end the Games).

It may vary the order of software topics list, but that it is the scheme to follow to write a serious complete article, regarding these kind of subjects.

I made a survey that was "extended" with "large meshes" expecially when the topic was related with Amiga wordprocessors, and Paint Programs but there are still more and more I did not mentioned at all (Amiga WP programs are about 20, 25, [perhaps 30?])...

All software names I mentioned are there just to historically demonstrate that Amiga had enough software. STOP. --Raffaele Megabyte 06:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Too few programs to show the readers a complete categorized scheme!

The only section that mentioned the almost all the foremost used Amiga programs it is the WordWideWeb section.

Sure covering all aspects of WWW related topics then it is necessary to be precise and pedantic in any subsection and it is necessary create a sub-scheme of categories (Browsers, mail, RSS, internet radio, Internet TV, etc.) in order to cover any aspect of any WWW related programs, discussing any program for any subsection of the vaste world of WWW it has been divided into...

BUT again I remember you all that I made really a survey keeping myself almost using "large meshes" when choosing "how many" and "What" programs to introduce in it.

Think of fractal programs into "Special Use Programs" Section. I just mentioned only Elena Novaretti ZoneXplorer, but sure to make a short of that... ...Else I had to mention best Free Fractal Programs: MandeVroom and IMandelVroom, Fractint, Xaos, Fractal Universe, Fractal Clouds and Fractal Mountains, Landscape Generator, Scenary Generator, ApfelKiste, FFEX, Scenery; and best Fractal Commercial Programs: MandelVision, Fractal Pro, Fractuality, Scenary Animator and Vista Pro.

And this will not cover "ALL" Fractal Programs for Amiga, just the best of it... Should I just had mentioned it all???

And for another example in "Special Uses" section I still never mentioned special uses of Amiga at NASA and sure I it deserves a mention!

It has been reported of Amiga used at NASA and special programs for Amiga realized from scratch by the technicians of the amercian space agency, in order to read radar signals and keep track of low orbit satellites... (See also here).

Or perhaps just think for example the Amiga Tracker list... It is far to be complete... I just mentioned best tracker programs...

And I could make more and more mentions on almost all section regarding Amiga software.

So don't blame me for having enlisted a big list made of many programs. These are there for historical reasons and to give readers an ALMOST PRECISE GENERAL OVERVIEW on all kind of Amiga software BY CATEGORIES. With respect...--Raffaele Megabyte 06:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article Tone[edit]

I join the others who have commended Raffaele Megabyte for his work on this article.

I have removed some copy and reworded some parts of article introduction, as the first steps towards making the tone of the article one that is fit for Wikipedia. Granted, there is a wealth of software available for the Amiga, but we don't have to list half of it in the introduction as an example. Also, the POV has been removed and unsourced claims have had a citation tag added.

I hope that Raffaele Megabyte will continue adding content to the article, if he will allow others to word it more appropriately. :) ZeroP~(talk) 13:41, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split[edit]

I split the three longest sections into their own articles: Amiga productivity software, Amiga support and maintenance software, and Amiga Internet and communications software. Feel free to edit them as you please. JIP | Talk 18:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Java is not JavaScript[edit]

There is a possible mix up between Java and JavaScript in the Multimedia section. They are completely two different things. --Marko75 (talk) 20:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OctaMED[edit]

It seems new version of OctaMED for Amiga is cancelled. Can anyone confirm?Xorxos (talk) 17:15, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strange Bias[edit]

Considering that games were the main attraction for many Amiga users and that most units were sold in department stores and not obscure hobby shops, essentially ZERO mention of games in the timeline is extremely revisionist or biased. Angry bee (talk) 21:18, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is Amiga games article. Xorxos (talk) 05:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amiga software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:51, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References needed...[edit]

Almost nothing in this Behemoth Article is referenced by third party sources (not even speaking about reliability). However, it shouldn´t be that hard to provide needed references for most of mentioned software as many Amiga magazines were published up until early 2000s and we can consider them (with some caveats) as independent reliable sources for Wikipedia. The hard task is to find reviews among (literally) thousands of pages. If someone has links to index/summaries of content of various Amiga (and older non-Amiga) magazines, such help would be really appreciated. With enough references we can move content to new articles and lighten this one. Well, enough work for next years...Pavlor (talk) 09:29, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose that TransADF be merged into Amiga software. TransADF article is in permanent stub state without hope for expansion and there probably is not enough reliable sources to estabilish its notability for stand-alone article. Your opinion? Pavlor (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed and  Done Klbrain (talk) 10:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amiga software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:23, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Amiga_software&oldid=1198613927"