Path: sparky!uunet!decwrl!public!btr.btr.com!thad
From: t...@btr.btr.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Message-ID: <7367@public.BTR.COM>
Date: 12 Jul 92 23:34:31 GMT
Sender: t...@public.BTR.COM
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, Mountain View CA
Lines: 160
The premiere newspaper of Silicon Valley just dedicated half a page to the
following two items. From the San Jose Mercury-News' COMPUTING section,
Sunday, July 12, 1992, page 4F:
-------------------- [ ITEM 1, SIDEBAR ]
AMIGA, from Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 1200 Wilson Drive, Westchester,
PA 19380. (800) 662-6442
SUMMARY: The Amiga once had a great future, with special chips for slick
handling of graphics, video and sound and basic software more powerful than on
the Mac or PC. But obsolete hardware, few new programs and malignant neglect
from the parent company have killed the Amiga. Users already hooked on it can
stay for some years (though with increasing envy of PC and Mac owners), and
anyone interested in digital video will love the Amiga-based Video Toaster from
NewTek. But all others should avoid the Amiga.
-------------------- [ ITEM 2, ARTICLE ]
`` COMMODORE LETS AMIGA DIE SLOW DEATH
Phillip Robinson
The Amiga is dead. It's sad but true. But we shouldn't be surprised. The
poor Amiga has been at death's door for several years. It managed to live
because of its potent basic design and thousands of rabid Amiga fans who would
rather switch to a typewriter than a PC or Mac. The Amiga died because
Commodore denied it growth, support or even respect. And I watched this
eight-year-long execution, hoping a reprieve would come and marveling at how
much abuse the computer with the cute, friendly name could take.
Back in 1984 I was one of the first to write about an exciting new computer
that had special chips for sound, video and other "multimedia" work. Except
that back then no one said "multimedia" about computing. In fact, the slick
abilities with sound and images convinced many that the Amiga was aimed too
much at game players and not at serious computing types.
The Amiga appeared just as the Macintosh was failing, losing sales after the
initial enthusiasm. The PC was conquering corporate, word-processing and
spreadsheeting America. But the PC was laughably slow and clumsy with
graphics, sounds and other such creative elements. There was clearly room for
a machine that could live at first as an entertainer while building its chops
to tackle the more prosaic types of computing. A group of refugees from
companies such as Atari designed the Amiga, and then, needing money for
marketing, sold it to Commodore. Commodore needed the Amiga because its
phenomenally popular Commodore 64 home computer was faltering, unable to jump
to a new generation of computing power.
In those early days, the Amiga had a graphic interface like the Macintosh's but
backed up by a true multitasking operating system.
This computer was built to run more than one program at a time, something the
Mac and PC are only now growing into.
The Amiga also had the high-resolution graphic display of the Mac but with
color. It offered more colors and more graphics programming than the PC.
It had stereo sound in its heart, where the Mac could only produce simple
sounds and the PC could only beep or buzz.
Finally, the Amiga had video in its soul. Those special chips let it naturally
and easily overlap its images with standard TV and VCR images. To add titles
or special effects to a video, you could use an Amiga, or you could add
thousands of dollars of hardware to a Mac or PC and pray.
So what went wrong?
First, Commodore took too long to get the Amiga operating system software out
the door. It was always near completion, getting debugged, almost there.
Without stable system software and programming tools, no one could create good
software for the Amiga. (In retrospect, the Amiga's trouble attracting software
developers shows just how historic Apple's quest for Mac software was.)
Then Commodore waffled and missed its commitments to Amiga pheripherals. A
card was promised that would give the Amiga PC-compatibility. That would tide
you over, the story was, until Amiga software appeared. You could run your PC
programs from 1-2-3 to WordStar. This card was delayed and delayed and
delayed. Anyone who bought Amigas with that card in her plans looked pretty
foolish.
Next, Commodore didn't release timely Amiga upgrades. As PCs and Macs kept
leapfrogging in processor speed and random-access memory and disk drives, the
Amiga just waddled along. Eventually, the Amiga 1000 (the original model) was
succeeded by the 2000 (with more memory and a hard disk) and the 3000 (with a
68030 processor chip and more disk and memory). Even in graphics and sound,
where the Amiga was once the world's best, the Mac and then later the PC added
more colors, more resolution, more sound, while the Amiga stood still.
The Amiga 500 appeared as a sort of Amiga Jr., with less power and memory but a
$500 price. Too expensive to compete with Nintendo as a game machine, it was
too weak for serious computing, especially for the one kind of computing the
Amiga was best at: multimedia.
Commodore repackaged an Amiga as the CDTV (which stands for Commodore Dynamic
Total Vision, I think, though you can read pages of CDTV hype without finding
that expression). This "interactive multimedia" machine is supposed to be the
perfect tool for hooking to a television to play interactive video discs for
games and education. It competes with the Philips CD-I player (similar price,
less graphics and sound capability), and MPC systems (PC systems with added
multimedia hardware, which costs four times as much). Interactive multimedia
is still a questionable market, with more interest from sellers than from
buyers. But maybe the Amiga will have a future there.
The final insult to the Amiga has been Commodore's consistent lack of concern,
attention and contact with Amiga dealers, developers and owners. It's still
true today. I read in a local computing magazine how the loyal Amiga columnist
is giving up, unable to bear another year of prying information from Commodore.
I walk into a store that specializes in Amigas and ask about the latest
Commodore news, and the staff admits that "it's strange, we know, but" they
never get news from Commodore. All they know of plans and announcements is
what they read in the magazines.
But they're not much better off! The first article I read in the most popular
Amiga magazine is about a new "A570 CDTV Adapter" that converts an Amiga 500
into a CDTV machine. This is the lead article, the one hyped on the cover,
and the editors are humiliated by having to add this note: "Just as this issue
was about to go to press, AmigaWorld learned that Commodore officials were
expressing some doubts about the scheduled release of the A570 this summer and
about its suggested retail price of $499.99." I'll bet it wasn't even
Commodore that told them!
I know, too, that both times Commodore offered to send me an Amiga for a while
to review Amiga peripherals and software, the promised machine never arrived.
There's only one kind of life left for the Amiga: toasting.
NewTek's Video Toaster is the best way to build an inexpensive video effects
studio, and the Toaster requires an Amiga. In fact, the new Toaster models for
Mac and PC are really just a Toaster and Amiga that you connect to your Mac or
PC. You can see the popularity of the Toaster from the general computer
magazines -- where it is the only Amiga product mentioned -- to the Amiga
specialty stores -- where digital video and Toasters take up half the space.
If you have an Amiga, don't fret about this news. You've adapted to living in
the dark, being fed biodegradable stories about new models and upgrades. There
will be some new games, a few new accelerator boards and fellow enthusiasts to
club with for another five years at least.
If you're an Amiga owner in Europe, you have more company than in the United
States -- Commodore always has had a larger presence there. But the hardware
hasn't kept up to date any more than in the United States. You should consider
buying a mailorder PC or sneaking some Mac time to see what you're missing.
If you want to work with digital video, the Toaster is good enough to warrant
buying an Amiga. But don't think of it as your computer; consider it just a
power supply for the Toaster.
But if you're not already hooked on the Amiga or fascinated by video toasting,
don't even think of buying one. You'll be getting into a relationship full
of heartache and promises not kept. Maybe at least other computer companies
will learn a lesson of caring and respect from this sad affair.
--------------------
Phillip Robinson analyzes and writes about computers from Sausalito. You
can reach him at (415) 331-3973 or at P.O.Box 1357, Sausalito CA 94966 or
on the MCI e-mail service as "probinson" at mailbox 327-8909.
''
{end}
Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!olivea!apple!apple!ntg!ewhac
From: ew...@ntg.com (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Summary: The Correct Response
Message-ID: <1992Jul15.021601.8651@ntg.com>
Date: 15 Jul 92 02:16:01 GMT
References: <7367@public.BTR.COM>
Organization: Politically Incorrect Software, Ltd.
Lines: 32
[ food ]
I just read the article in question. I really feel sorry for the
reporter, as he's going to receive a lot of hate mail he doesn't deserve. I
don't agree with his assertion that everyone should stay away from the
Amiga. It's still a fine graphics workstation, a magnificent software
development system, and has many tools that are largely unmatched on any
other platform.
However, the main reason I dropped in was that I wanted to briefly
suggest what I feel is the correct response to this situation. It is *not*
to flame the article's author to a crisp. It Ain't His Fault.
Write to Irving Gould and Medhi Ali. Enclose a copy of the article.
Enclose some words of your own, if you wish.
While I still love the Amiga, and will never let it go, there is no
denying the reality of the situation. PC's suck, but they're cheaper than
sand. Windows 3.[01] is selling 1 million copies per month. Amiga's
failure to take over the industry lays squarely at the feet of Commodore's
management. The conclusion is inescapable:
They fucked us.
I encourage you to let them know. I sure as hell am (in my own
devious way...).
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape ew...@ntg.com
\_ -_ Recumbent Bikes: ..or.. ew...@well.sf.ca.us
O----^o The Only Way To Fly. (pronounced "EH-wack")
"Work FOR? I don't work FOR anybody! I'm just having fun." -- The Doctor
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: sparky!uunet!tronsbox!dfrancis
From: dfran...@tronsbox.xei.com (Dennis Heffernan)
Subject: Re: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Message-ID: <1992Jul15.204637.12649@tronsbox.xei.com>
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
References: <7367@public.BTR.COM> <1992Jul15.021601.8651@ntg.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 20:46:37 GMT
Lines: 50
In article <1992Jul15.021601.8...@ntg.com> ew...@ntg.com (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab)
writes:
|[ food ]
Haven't seen one of those in years....
| While I still love the Amiga, and will never let it go, there is no
|denying the reality of the situation. PC's suck, but they're cheaper than
|sand. Windows 3.[01] is selling 1 million copies per month. Amiga's
|failure to take over the industry lays squarely at the feet of Commodore's
|management. The conclusion is inescapable:
|
Let's see if we can get something straight here.
Commodore could not have taken over the computer market with nuclear
weapons. It doesn't MATTER what they do, what they sell, what they make,
how they advertise. The PC market was owned by IBM (and cohorts) the day they
entered it. Even Apple, which has its praises sung here on a regular basis,
hasn't done more than dent their market share. At this point, it would take
an act of the gods for either Commodore or Apple, or anyone else, to
dethrone the MS-DOS machine.
It's even more laughable when people start talking about Amiga UNIX.
Right, if I had ten grand to blow on a UNIX box I'm going to get it from
some bunch of shnooks like Commodore, instead of buying from someone who's
been pumping out UNIX workstations since they were invented. That doesn't
mean Apple either, BTW. A/UX is another joke in bad taste, from what I've
seen.
I bought an Amy because it stomped all over the MS-DOS machines. IMHO,
it still does. Yes, you can get some blazing fast 486 from NoName Clones
Inc. for dirt, but tying a jet engine onto a Yugo doesn't make it a Ferrari.
It's been seven years, and they're STARTING to catch up. That's not too
shabby, if you ask me. I'm willing to stick around and see what happens
next. Someday the Amy will be too far behind to be upgraded and won't have
anyone developing for it...but not today.
If the only way you can feel good about your computer is if everyone
else in the world has it too, then scrap your Amy and go buy a clone. There
are damned few markets in which the most popular brand is also the best.
The PC market ain't one of them. I have no problem dealing with the idea
that the Amy is never going to be anything more than a niche machine with a
limited market. There was never a chance that it would be anything BUT.
dfran...@tronsbox.xei.com ...uunet!tronsbox!dfrancis GEnie: D.HEFFERNAN1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't understand why you make such a big deal out of everything...haven't
you learned; if it's not happenning to me it's not important?" -Murphy Brown
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!qdpii!davidme
From: davi...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au (David Meiklejohn)
Subject: Re: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Message-ID: <1992Jul16.102852.3737@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au>
Organization: Qld Dept Primary Industries
References: <7367@public.BTR.COM> <1992Jul15.021601.8651@ntg.com>
<1992Jul15.204637.12649@tronsbox.xei.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 10:28:52 GMT
Lines: 79
In article <1992Jul15.204637.12...@tronsbox.xei.com> dfran...@tronsbox.xei.com
(Dennis Heffernan) writes:
>
> Commodore could not have taken over the computer market with nuclear
>weapons. It doesn't MATTER what they do, what they sell, what they make,
>how they advertise. The PC market was owned by IBM (and cohorts) the day they
>entered it. Even Apple, which has its praises sung here on a regular basis,
>hasn't done more than dent their market share. At this point, it would take
>an act of the gods for either Commodore or Apple, or anyone else, to
>dethrone the MS-DOS machine.
I agree. It's unreasonable to have expected the Amiga to have taken over the
computer market, and I never expected it to.
When I first started in computing, back in high school in 1978 or so, there
were various types of microcomputers from different manufacturers, all
incompatible with each other. By 1981, we would eagerly rush to the
newsagents to get the latest mags, which would always contain news of some
new system, literally some new and totally incompatible system every month.
One of these systems was the IBM PC. At the time (early eighties), it was
very exciting to be "into" computers - so much new, so much innovation.
However, I can see that those who simply wanted to use computers, rather
than being impressed by the latest graphics resolutions or whatever, were
getting fairly sick of the situation. It was quite clear at the time that
the industry desparately wanted to settle on just one platform, and the IBM
PC was it.
By the mid eighties, there was a strong rejection of anything new for
mainstream computing. We had entered a new era. The PC's MSDOS, but not
IBM compatible, competitors, such as the DEC Rainbow, the Sirius 1, or the
NEC APC, had been soundly defeated. It seemed to the industry that we had
finally reached a single-system world. There was the Macintosh sniping from
the sidelines, but sales of it, too, were falling off.
Then came the Amiga from a company previously known for selling "toy"
computers. The atmosphere at the time was that no one really wanted to know.
Suggestions that people should move to a new platform, simply because it was
technically superior, were seen as simply rocking the boat. The problems
with DOS and the PC architecture that we see today weren't obvious at the time
to most people. The Amiga was a solution to an invisible problem.
So, in that environment, I don't believe that the Amiga, or anything else,
could have made it really big, no matter what Commodore did.
I see the Amiga as the last of the great proprietary architectures of the
early to mid eighties. One of the reasons I continue to support it is that it
maintains the spirit of times gone by. But, because times have moved on, to
open systems and vendor independence, we can't expect a machine like the Amiga
to do really well.
But, there's no reason why it can't be moderatly successful as a niche machine,
even if that niche is only old-style enthusiasts. It has sold over 3 million
units. Ten years ago, that would have been great. I think it's still
acceptible, and should be able to justify reasonable third party support.
> I bought an Amy because it stomped all over the MS-DOS machines. IMHO,
>it still does. Yes, you can get some blazing fast 486 from NoName Clones
>Inc. for dirt, but tying a jet engine onto a Yugo doesn't make it a Ferrari.
>It's been seven years, and they're STARTING to catch up. That's not too
>shabby, if you ask me. I'm willing to stick around and see what happens
>next. Someday the Amy will be too far behind to be upgraded and won't have
>anyone developing for it...but not today.
>
> If the only way you can feel good about your computer is if everyone
>else in the world has it too, then scrap your Amy and go buy a clone. There
>are damned few markets in which the most popular brand is also the best.
>The PC market ain't one of them. I have no problem dealing with the idea
>that the Amy is never going to be anything more than a niche machine with a
>limited market. There was never a chance that it would be anything BUT.
Exactly. I actually _like_ having a machine no one's heard of. Sort of like
being in an elite club. You pay extra for the privelege, but it's enjoyable
being here...
--
David Meiklejohn | Internet : davi...@qdpii.comp.qpdi.oz.au
Computer Systems Officer, QDPI | Fax : +61 70 92 3593
Mareeba, Australia | Voice : +61 70 92 1555
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!gumby!destroyer!fmsrl7!lynx!nmsu.edu!dante!dleland
From: dlel...@nmsu.edu (LELAND)
Subject: Re: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Message-ID: <1992Jul18.160041.18642@nmsu.edu>
Summary: I can tell them in person...
Sender: Queen of Swords
Organization: New Mexico State University
References: <7367@public.BTR.COM> <1992Jul15.021601.8651@ntg.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 16:00:41 GMT
Lines: 13
A couple of big Commodore bigwigs are scheduled to show up at our Amiga
lab this Tuesday for a looksee. I don't know who they are yet, except that
one is a fellow I met briefly once before (and who was very nice by the way)
from the West Coast sales division. The other is a VP in charge of Education.
I'll certainly try to tell them, in as diplomatic terms as possible, what I
think they need to be doing.
Darrell Leland //
dlel...@nmsu.edu ()=========>>=========================--
\\ Queen of Swords
"There is no absolute truth, and that is absolutely true..."
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!rutgers!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmden!
kehlet!kehlet
From: keh...@kehlet.adsp.sub.org (Jesper Kehlet)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Message-ID: <kehlet.05ky@kehlet.adsp.sub.org>
Date: 19 Jul 92 20:29:03 GMT
References: <7367@public.BTR.COM> <1992Jul15.021601.8651@ntg.com>
<1992Jul15.204637.12649@tronsbox.xei.com> <1992Jul16.102852.3737@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au>
Organization: Compos Mentis Software Systems
Lines: 53
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16e (7/4/92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
In article <1992Jul16.102852.3...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au> davi...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au
(David Meiklejohn) writes:
> I see the Amiga as the last of the great proprietary architectures of the
> early to mid eighties. One of the reasons I continue to support it is that it
> maintains the spirit of times gone by. But, because times have moved on, to
> open systems and vendor independence, we can't expect a machine like the Amiga
> to do really well.
One of the "last great proprietary architectures of the early to mid
eighties"? Hey, you should be writing articles on ancient history!
I do not agree, that it "maintains the spirit of times gone by" -- doesn't
that count for the peecee clowns as well? The peecee architecture is much
older than the Amiga, the Macintosh is in the same line of concept, that
created the Amiga -- and all you do, is sound like a true peecee clown
owner, trying to flame out Amigas and still cover up your back -- you're a
coward!
I do *NOT* see the Amiga architecture as ancient & old -- for like a good
platform to build on. It has the expandability and the will to grow, so
why shouldn't it? You can't really say that thing with peecees, eh? Their
assumed compatibility issue is still just an excuse for not being able to
admit, that they have goofed when they made the first IBM/PC...
> But, there's no reason why it can't be moderatly successful as a niche machine,
> even if that niche is only old-style enthusiasts. It has sold over 3 million
> units. Ten years ago, that would have been great. I think it's still
> acceptible, and should be able to justify reasonable third party support.
Old-style enthusiasts? Niche machine? You sound, like you're working on
some Cray II or something like that -- having problems with controlling
your ego?!?
> Exactly. I actually _like_ having a machine no one's heard of. Sort of like
> being in an elite club. You pay extra for the privelege, but it's enjoyable
> being here...
You're out of your mind! Elite club? You get the Amiga cheapo and with a
lot more features than e.g. the peecee clowns. With a lot better
operating system than e.g. the Mac. Etc. etc. etc.
> David Meiklejohn
--
Jesper Kehlet, Compos Mentis Software Systems -- A Kind Of Magic
(uunet|pyramid|rutgers)!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmden!kehlet!kehlet
cbmehq!cbmden!kehlet!keh...@cbmvax.commodore.com
"Yet another emotional suicide, overdosed on sentiment and pride"
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!qdpii!davidme
From: davi...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au (David Meiklejohn)
Subject: Re: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Message-ID: <1992Jul21.042452.24680@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au>
Organization: Qld Dept Primary Industries
References: <1992Jul15.204637.12649@tronsbox.xei.com>
<1992Jul16.102852.3737@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au> <kehlet.05ky@kehlet.adsp.sub.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 04:24:52 GMT
Lines: 85
In article <kehlet.0...@kehlet.adsp.sub.org> keh...@kehlet.adsp.sub.org
(Jesper Kehlet) flames severely:
>In article <1992Jul16.102852.3...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au> davi...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au
(David Meiklejohn) writes:
>
>> I see the Amiga as the last of the great proprietary architectures of the
>> early to mid eighties. One of the reasons I continue to support it is that it
>> maintains the spirit of times gone by. But, because times have moved on, to
>> open systems and vendor independence, we can't expect a machine like the Amiga
>> to do really well.
>
>One of the "last great proprietary architectures of the early to mid
>eighties"? Hey, you should be writing articles on ancient history!
In computing terms, ten years ago IS ancient history!
>I do not agree, that it "maintains the spirit of times gone by" -- doesn't
>that count for the peecee clowns as well? The peecee architecture is much
>older than the Amiga, the Macintosh is in the same line of concept, that
>created the Amiga
Firstly, by "times gone by", I meant the computer industry as it was before
most of it was forced into IBM conformity. I enjoyed those times - they died
in the mid-eighties, just after the Mac, ST, and Amiga were released. The
Amiga was the last of those, and is just the last of those proprietary
architectures. I should have added - the last such machine to make any real
impact. There have been more recent, yet still interesting, machines like the
Acorn Archimedes, and the MM/1, but they haven't made any great impact. Then
there's the NeXT, which is an important machine, but which tries to be a
mainstream Unix box, so I'm not calling it proprietary, although it's a
borderline case.
>-- and all you do, is sound like a true peecee clown
>owner, trying to flame out Amigas and still cover up your back -- you're a
>coward!
Now I know how poor Colin Adams felt when some ignorant cretin called him a
PC owner. I don't have to defend myself to you, so let me just say it once.
I've been and Amiga owner and advocate for more than six years now. In fact,
I own two Amigas - my original A1000, which I couldn't make myself part with,
and an accelerated A2000, complete with bridgeboard and display enhancer. I
have never owned a PC, and don't plan on buying one anytime soon.
>> But, there's no reason why it can't be moderatly successful as a niche machine,
>> even if that niche is only old-style enthusiasts. It has sold over 3 million
>> units. Ten years ago, that would have been great. I think it's still
>> acceptible, and should be able to justify reasonable third party support.
>
>Old-style enthusiasts? Niche machine? You sound, like you're working on
>some Cray II or something like that -- having problems with controlling
>your ego?!?
No, I'm just a humble network manager. My ego's fine, thanks. Is your ego so
fragile that you can't handle someone pointing out the facts about the Amiga?
Face it, it's a niche machine - i.e. it's not mainstream. It's not even close.
I'm saying that that's ok - it doesn't worry me. We're fooling ourselves if
we believe that the Amiga can take over the PC universe - it's a pipedream.
>> Exactly. I actually _like_ having a machine no one's heard of. Sort of like
>> being in an elite club. You pay extra for the privelege, but it's enjoyable
>> being here...
>
>You're out of your mind! Elite club? You get the Amiga cheapo and with a
>lot more features than e.g. the peecee clowns.
Doubletake here. Amigas are cheaper yet with more features than PC clones?
Where on Earth do you live? I can buy a 486 with SVGA, .28 pitch monitor,
4 megs ram, and a 100 meg HD for the same amount as an A3000 without monitor.
The only area where the Amiga is cheaper is at the extreme low end if you want
an A600 with hard drive (US$500 in Australia) and you don't buy a monitor.
Even so, I could almost buy a 286 with VGA for that...
No, Amigas are more expensive, but I don't mind paying the extra for them. It
does mean, though, that I find it hard to recommend to others.
>With a lot better
>operating system than e.g. the Mac. Etc. etc. etc.
Whether it's better than OS/2 is another question, but I still prefer AmigaOS
to anything else I've used.
--
David Meiklejohn | Internet : davi...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au
Computer Systems Officer, QDPI | Fax : +61 70 92 3593
Mareeba, Australia | Voice : +61 70 92 1555
Path: sparky!uunet!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmden!kehlet!kehlet
From: keh...@kehlet.adsp.sub.org (Jesper Kehlet)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Message-ID: <kehlet.05pb@kehlet.adsp.sub.org>
Date: 23 Jul 92 02:09:43 GMT
References: <1992Jul15.204637.12649@tronsbox.xei.com>
<1992Jul16.102852.3737@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au> <kehlet.05ky@kehlet.adsp.sub.org>
<1992Jul21.042452.24680@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au>
Organization: Compos Mentis Software Systems
Lines: 82
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16e (7/4/92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
In article <1992Jul21.042452.24...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au>
davi...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au (David Meiklejohn) writes:
> In article <kehlet.0...@kehlet.adsp.sub.org> keh...@kehlet.adsp.sub.org
(Jesper Kehlet) flames severely:
>
> >-- and all you do, is sound like a true peecee clown
> >owner, trying to flame out Amigas and still cover up your back -- you're a
> >coward!
>
> Now I know how poor Colin Adams felt when some ignorant cretin called him a
> PC owner. I don't have to defend myself to you, so let me just say it once.
> I've been and Amiga owner and advocate for more than six years now. In fact,
> I own two Amigas - my original A1000, which I couldn't make myself part with,
> and an accelerated A2000, complete with bridgeboard and display enhancer. I
> have never owned a PC, and don't plan on buying one anytime soon.
In the stuff, I have cut out, you provided reasonable explanation for the
terms you used when calling the Amiga a computer from ancient times.
I didn't get the right angle on it. I apologize. Sorry, OK?
> No, I'm just a humble network manager. My ego's fine, thanks. Is your ego so
> fragile that you can't handle someone pointing out the facts about the Amiga?
> Face it, it's a niche machine - i.e. it's not mainstream. It's not even close.
> I'm saying that that's ok - it doesn't worry me. We're fooling ourselves if
> we believe that the Amiga can take over the PC universe - it's a pipedream.
Sure it's a pipedream, but still it has the option of becoming one real
good machine for all purposes, including the workstation/UNIX ones.
Even when you consider it to be a niche machine, it has the capabilities of
growing.
Think about it: UNIX, networking, video processing etc. etc. -- that must
"be worth something" to those who make the trends -- i.e. the buyers.
So even if it's a niche machine now, it sure isn't going to stay that way!
> >> Exactly. I actually _like_ having a machine no one's heard of. Sort of like
> >> being in an elite club. You pay extra for the privelege, but it's enjoyable
> >> being here...
> >
> >You're out of your mind! Elite club? You get the Amiga cheapo and with a
> >lot more features than e.g. the peecee clowns.
>
> Doubletake here. Amigas are cheaper yet with more features than PC clones?
> Where on Earth do you live? I can buy a 486 with SVGA, .28 pitch monitor,
> 4 megs ram, and a 100 meg HD for the same amount as an A3000 without monitor.
> The only area where the Amiga is cheaper is at the extreme low end if you want
> an A600 with hard drive (US$500 in Australia) and you don't buy a monitor.
> Even so, I could almost buy a 286 with VGA for that...
>
> No, Amigas are more expensive, but I don't mind paying the extra for them. It
> does mean, though, that I find it hard to recommend to others.
It must be because I'm living in Denmark. Things are different here. You
can get an A3000 configured the way you describe, but WITH a monitor at a
much lesser price, than a 486 in your configuration...
Still, don't consider buying one here... they're awfully expensive
compared to any other country in the world (maybe except from
Sweden/Norway -- they actually come to Denmark to buy hardware!)...
> >With a lot better
> >operating system than e.g. the Mac. Etc. etc. etc.
>
> Whether it's better than OS/2 is another question, but I still prefer AmigaOS
> to anything else I've used.
I'll vote for that!!!
> David Meiklejohn
--
Jesper Kehlet, Compos Mentis Software Systems -- A Kind Of Magic
(uunet|pyramid|rutgers)!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmden!kehlet!kehlet
cbmehq!cbmden!kehlet!keh...@cbmvax.commodore.com
"Yet another emotional suicide, overdosed on sentiment and pride"
Path: sparky!uunet!cbmvax!daveh
From: da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Obituary [Amiga's] in Silicon Valley newspaper
Message-ID: <33324@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 23 Jul 92 20:17:35 GMT
References: <7367@public.BTR.COM> <1992Jul15.021601.8651@ntg.com>
<1992Jul15.204637.12649@tronsbox.xei.com> <1992Jul16.102852.3737@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au>
<kehlet.05ky@kehlet.adsp.sub.org>
Reply-To: da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 64
In article <kehlet.0...@kehlet.adsp.sub.org> keh...@kehlet.adsp.sub.org
(Jesper Kehlet) writes:
>In article <1992Jul16.102852.3...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au> davi...@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au
(David Meiklejohn) writes:
>> I see the Amiga as the last of the great proprietary architectures of the
>> early to mid eighties.
>One of the "last great proprietary architectures of the early to mid
>eighties"? Hey, you should be writing articles on ancient history!
Sounds that way. I think maybe that vision needs a little Windex, though. The
Amiga wasn't released until the fall 1985, which clearly places it in the latter
half of the 80s, not the early 80s.
>I do not agree, that it "maintains the spirit of times gone by" -- doesn't
>that count for the peecee clowns as well?
If only the PC had maintained the spirit of CP/M, but it instead went back to
times before that, when a strict adherence to the underlying hardware had to be
maintained. That's not such a big deal for a proprietary architecture, but the
fact that the PC really was a proprietary architecture that became a standard
by industry proclamation rather than design has set the computer business back
like nothing else.
Back to the point, though. I think the intent above was to point out that the
"spirit of times gone by" in the Amiga relates to the fact that, back then, you
could introduce a new computer hardware and software architecture and have some
chance that it would succeed. That's pretty much impossible now -- growth is
only really possible in small increments. Part of the reason for that is that
far fewer of the people using computers really know that much about them, so
they aren't interested in using anything new. Also, the various elements in a
computer have been catching up to human needs, at least in-so-far as the user
interfaces exploit those resources. If you have a 50MHz '486 or 25MHz '040,
your OS or hardware doesn't really need to be all that clever, efficient, well
designed, etc. to appear sufficiently so for the average user's needs.
>I do *NOT* see the Amiga architecture as ancient & old -- for like a good
>platform to build on.
Some of the Amiga implementations, like the ECS chip set, are certainly old.
None of the underlying architecture is dated. In fact, if you look at IBM's
XGA, Intel's DVI, or any number of new graphics-related architectures, you'll
see quite a bit of the same ideas that have comprised the Amiga architecture
since "ancient times". If you look at expansion buses, most of the modern
ones have caught up to where the Amiga has been since way back went, few have
gone beyond that except in performance (well, Amiga did too with Zorro III).
If you look at the latest PC systems, the buzz word these days is "Local Bus".
We provided an open Local Bus slot, the Coprocessor Slot, in the A2000 way back
in 1987. I even called it the Local Bus.
Software still has some catching up to do in some areas, but in other ways the
Amiga OS is as modern as anything else out there. The hot word these days in
executive kernels (eg, Exec) is "microkernel architecture", as in the Mach
kernel for UNIX systems or WindowsNT. Amiga's DOS has always been device and
filesystem independent, something MS-DOS is still working on (or did MS-DOS
V5 finally get that right). AmigaOS in general is a very efficient OS for
small computers -- most of the beyond-MS-DOS attempts are just new kinds of
big OSs waiting for computers to catch up with them. Computers are catching
up, but unless you're the guy selling the OS, there's not a whole lot of reason
to need a new big OS, UNIX as a big OS has been around and stable much longer.
--
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
{uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh BIX: hazy
"Work like a horse, drink like a fish" - Psychefunkapus