As to the value of their current machines, yes I think they are pretty good value for money especially the C64x, barebones and the lower end AIO systems like the Vic Slim. The new Amiga Mini - while has good spec for the size (it uses more powerful Intel Desktop quadcore chip instead of mobile chip in the Mac Mini) original pricing @ $2495 I felt for sure at first was a bit steep. It is now better at $1495 with the base Intel Core i3 configuration, and $1995 for the top i7 with 16GB) after the public outcry - but historically speaking as a brand it always has been (expensive)! According to Oldcomputers.net the original A1000 when it first came out cost $1295 without a monitor which at todays prices work out roughly as $2590. The new machine costs far less than that, is far smaller and is packed to the brim with tech, to cater to a generation now used to doing things in HD.
This debate should probably be split into another thread, but so long as it's here:
that is completely ridiculous and utterly false. Various members here have assembled complete systems equivalent to the "Amiga Mini" $1995 configuration (a.k.a. the one that was originally $2495) for roughly $900-1100 - anywhere from
81% to 177% markup! With the $1495 base configuration? You can buy a Mac Mini with an
i5 and an equal amount of RAM for
half that, and that's at
Apple prices.
Comparing the Amiga 1000 to modern computers is ridiculous on the face of it, but let's take that assumption and run with it, just for fun. The A1000 came with a reasonable amount of RAM and a very capable CPU for its time, and featured a chipset that was not simply top-of-the-line for a personal computer in 1985, it
redefined the top of the line. $1295 was also not that expensive by the standards of the day, especially for what it provided - the roughly-contemporary IBM 5170 went for
multiple times that and offered only a 6MHz 286 (deliberately gimped by the addition of a wait-state to the memory so it wouldn't impact sales of their high-end business machines,) a similar amount of RAM, a Hercules monochrome card, and only the PC speaker for sound. (The only obvious advantage it had was a 20MB hard drive.) The high-end configuration cost an astonishing $5795 - and that's
in 1986 dollars! (And like the A1000, it did not include a monitor.)
So if we want to look at it like that, the Amiga 1000 blew away machines costing three to four times as much, had an
infinitely better operating system,
and set the standard for personal computer A/V capabilities for years to come. The "Amiga Mini?" In its high-end configuration it has a capable CPU, a large amount of RAM, and a sizeable hard drive. It's also yoked to an entry-level GPU from two years ago and has a PSU that can't possibly power the whole thing,
and it costs something close to
twice what an equally-specced system can be had for. The operating system is a lightly-customized version of a free commodity operating system that brings absolutely nothing new to the table, and the primary achievement of which is making a 1970s mainframe OS into a usable desktop OS. The "budget" $1495 configuration is a middling laptop in an HTPC case - again, probably more than twice the typical cost of such a system.
"Value for money," my ass.
For those who believe I only like modern machines, well I like the classic ones too. My personal opinion about the future of Amiga is that I actually I believe if the brand can be rebooted, it can exist as two formats - one as a Classic platform ie. PPC/Power7/Natami, and one as a Future platform ie. x86. Why does people always have to insist a modern Amiga CANNOT be an x86? x86 is the platform which has everything a new Amiga needs ie. Ivy Bridge, Thunderbolt, 3D etc. If implemented properly with the right customization of system and OS, it CAN be the machine we've always wanted and more. This is why I have, as an independent IT user of over 30 years computing experience, been following and supporting CUSA for the past year....because I believe they will come up with the goods. But my view is, the community has to be realistic with what can be approached from a production perspective. They have to consider whatever designs/options will be made into new gear, that it can be recreated and sustained by modern manufacturing methods AND somehow is able to supported by a strong software development community. Unfortunately at the moment the Amiga community is no Apple community. But with genuine support from all perhaps we will eventually get there…wherever 'there' might be….
This is utter pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking. CUSA has revealed no plans to do anything like this at any point in the future; their only concession to people who aren't happy with commodity PC hardware being labeled as "Amiga" is to send Leo out to make soothing noises and say "we'll see what happens as things develop." You talk and talk about "eventually getting there" if we all just button our lips and pitch in without question, but you admit yourself that you have no idea where "there" is. People aren't going to throw money at a company that has revealed no plans they'd be at all interested in on the off chance that it might change its mind.
