Dave Haynie Talks About Developing The Commodore Amiga

[save2600]

Loved the vid! Some tidbits in there I was unaware of and glad to see people like Herd and Haynie are still around to talk about this stuff that is so important to us.  

[RobertB]

Dave talks about the past again.

Dave Haynie's talk was limited to CBM from 1986-1994, and he barely finished his presentation within his alloted time.  Hardly, any time for questions and no time to expound on the current state of Amiga.

Back from VCF East in New Jersey,
Robert Bernardo
Fresno Commodore User Group
http://videocam.net.au/fcug

[matthey]

Dave's done plenty of talking about software, which might be the core of why I resent his opinions.
Although the point about being negative about negativity sounds pretty valid.

As far as there not being any new Amiga hardware...
What's the stuff the runs OS4 (when you're not running it on modified legacy hardware)?
Then again, I don't feel like arguing that point yet again.

So you think Dave has an arrogant attitude toward AmigaOS 4 because he doesn't recognize it as a true successor to the Amiga? He has a history in and a connection to what once was a big technology leading achievement in computing. Even though the Amiga is rarely recognized, it was an early innovation in multimedia computing that sold millions. Dave has no connection to AmigaOS 4. What did AmigaOS 4 achieve? How many hundred active users are there? You have a right to your opinion but I don't agree. Dave Haynie and Bil Herd are both really kool and nice guys. It's not like they are getting rich going to these shows.

[Kremlar]

So you think Dave has an arrogant attitude toward AmigaOS 4 because he doesn't recognize it as a true successor to the Amiga? He has a history in and a connection to what once was a big technology leading achievement in computing. Even though the Amiga is rarely recognized, it was an early innovation in multimedia computing that sold millions. Dave has no connection to AmigaOS 4. What did AmigaOS 4 achieve? How many hundred active users are there? You have a right to your opinion but I don't agree. Dave Haynie and Bil Herd are both really kool and nice guys. It's not like they are getting rich going to these shows.

I could be wrong, but if I recall what I've read in the past accurately I don't think Dave doubts OS4 is a true successor. I think he just doesn't really see the point of the current path OS4 and related hardware are taking. Not that it matters, but I agree.

I also think he has made comments in the past indicating that he suspects MorphOS uses or used illegally obtained AmigaOS source code, which may be Iggy's big issue with him.

I could very well be wrong however, so if anyone can correct me please do.

I do have this to say - I have never thought he was one to run his mouth or lie or even exaggerate. He seems very down to earth, very nice, and very well informed. If he has an issue with something I think there's probably something there.

[matthey]

I could be wrong, but if I recall what I've read in the past accurately I don't think Dave doubts OS4 is a true successor. I think he just doesn't really see the point of the current path OS4 and related hardware are taking. Not that it matters, but I agree.

I also think it was the wrong path but that is easier to say now that PPC is becoming less competitive and new AmigaOS 4 hardware costs thousands of dollars and sells in the hundreds of units. Ironically, it was the arrogance of some of the people behind AmigaOS 4 that turned me off to going that route. The AmigaOS 4/MOS split and the high price of hardware also turned me off. It was never the choice of PPC although I do like 68k better.

I also think he has made comments in the past indicating that he suspects MorphOS uses or used illegally obtained AmigaOS source code, which may be Iggy's big issue with him.

I could very well be wrong however, so if anyone can correct me please do.

I heard the same. I recall that Piru challenged him on it which he basically ignored. Dave may have regretted he said it but everyone listens to a celebrity. It's not like it matters at this point anyway.

I do have this to say - I have never thought he was one to run his mouth or lie or even exaggerate. He seems very down to earth, very nice, and very well informed. If he has an issue with something I think there's probably something there.

I agree again .

[pwermonger]

The entire reason for these talks was the history of development of the computers.
Chuck Peddle back in 2007 was brought in to talk about the PET. no one expected him to talk about the current state of the PET. Bob Russel and Bill Herd were also there to talk a bit about post Peddle and PET 8Bit
Bill Herd in 2012 was brought in to talk about the development of the 8bit line he was involved in through the 128.
Dave Haynie was brought in to talk about Amiga development he was involved in under Commodore.

Are there other people who could have talked about these things? Yes. Haynie gets a lot of buzz since he goes out and talks about it. Herd is the same, he goes out and talks about it.

I don't see a reason to be negative about the guy for, when asked, saying yes he will go give a talk about the time at Commodore

Evidenced by the people who attend these, there are folks interested in Computer history like this. Not just people who were into the scene back then but also people who are new to it or were owners of competing computers back then.

Don't bust on the guy because he doesn't talk about OS4 or MorphOS (and I do use and love MorphOS on my PowerBook) since those aren't what he was involved in engineering for.

He talks about what I expect him to. Amiga 2000-4000 era and AAA which was in development when Commodore went under.

And finally, Dave gave his explanation about the MorphOS statements back on April 2011. Seem pretty cut and dry to me.
 Far as I've seen, not that my research is exhaustive on it, the MorphOS folks haven't exactly come out and stated they have not used any Amiga code, or Phase5 code which is the code in which Commodore owned code was seen

[psxphill]

I also think it was the wrong path but that is easier to say now that PPC is becoming less competitive and new AmigaOS 4 hardware costs thousands of dollars and sells in the hundreds of units.

Custom hardware in small units is always going to be less competitive. If they were selling millions of units then PPC could be competitive, it worked for the PS3/360. The only way to be as cost effective as a PC is to use an off the shelf PC motherboard.
 
I think Dave didn't mention post commodore because he went off and lived his life and did other non-commodore things.
 
The talk was interesting, but like most of these talks a lot of the information has been talked about before.

[Iggy]

And finally, Dave gave his explanation about the MorphOS statements back on April 2011. Seem pretty cut and dry to me.
 Far as I've seen, not that my research is exhaustive on it, the MorphOS folks haven't exactly come out and stated they have not used any Amiga code, or Phase5 code which is the code in which Commodore owned code was seen

No your "research" on this is pretty lame.
And Dave's comments were based on hearsay.

When you consider the differences in hardware and the basic structural differences between Amiga OS and MorphOS, the idea of using any Amiga code is pretty ludicrous.

OS4 made that attempt and that was probably a large part of the delay in releasing it.

While you all seem enamored by the "huge" developments of the past (none of which were particularly original), I stay in the present.

BTW - Maybe its just that I was never that impressed with Commodore, its hardware, or its engineers.

[Bif]

I for one enjoyed the talk and learned or relearned a few things, always interesting to hear about the history, particularly the models that never made it public. Don't see how these talks can be a bad thing in any way.

[Kremlar]

Don't see how these talks can be a bad thing in any way.  

 
 Some people are just never happy!  

[bloodline]

Dave's done plenty of talking about software, which might be the core of why I resent his opinions.
Although the point about being negative about negativity sounds pretty valid.

Hehehe :-)

As far as there not being any new Amiga hardware...
What's the stuff the runs OS4 (when you're not running it on modified legacy hardware)?

Very boring commodity hardware with an overpriced, underpowered CPU originally designed for embedded applications.

[/quote]
Then again, I don't feel like arguing that point yet again.[/QUOTE]

I have loads of different platforms, including a bunch of PPC machines (and a BlizzPPC), so I'm happy to discuss the point.

[matthey]

While you all seem enamored by the "huge" developments of the past (none of which were particularly original), I stay in the present.

BTW - Maybe its just that I was never that impressed with Commodore, its hardware, or its engineers.

Those who don't learn from the past end up repeating the same mistakes. The Amiga was very innovative out of the box. The technology was amazing in 1985. The Amiga had high resolution blitter (Amiga coined the term and had patents) accelerated gfx with 4096 colors possible on screen, 4 voice stereo sound which still sounds good today and pre-emptive multitasking in a near real time OS with bitmapped graphical GUI in color. Compare this to the 1st Macintosh which came out less than a year earlier and the PC of the time.

Dave talks about the Amiga 3000+ with AGA, 68040 and AT&T DSP the engineers had ready in 1991 but C= management killed it. The Amiga engineers approached AT&T and added the DSP before Apple or Atari but C= management killed it. The AAA chip set would have been industry leading but C= management delayed it by being cheap before they killed it. Dave and another engineer were able to slip a few extra lines for video in the expansion/video slot of the Amiga 2000 fortunately as that allowed the Video Toaster to happen which C= management had nothing to do with and couldn't even figure out what kind of machine to sell for it (they cut SCSI from the 4000 which was commonly used for video hard drives and it barely had a big enough power supply). C= engineers were able to slip a few ideas past the incompetent management. The initial Jay Miner Amiga was tremendously innovative before C= bought them. What has AmigaOS 4/Hyperion innovated? What patents do they hold? What OS features have never been done before?

[Iggy]

Original?
Not really.
Xerox laid the ground work for this type of system, and then over priced their systems (as did Apple with the Lisa).
The Amiga was also slightly over priced, but in comparison it was much more of a commodity priced appliance.

Inevitably everything went in this direction.
Ease of adoption and intuitive use sold this approach.

But again, original?
No.

[paul1981]

Original?
Not really.
Xerox laid the ground work for this type of system, and then over priced their systems (as did Apple with the Lisa).
The Amiga was also slightly over priced, but in comparison it was much more of a commodity priced appliance.

Inevitably everything went in this direction.
Ease of adoption and intuitive use sold this approach.

But again, original?
No.

There's nothing new under the sun, but at the time it was made and even a few years thereafter, the Amiga was untouchable for the price. Nobody can deny that. If they do they're lying.

[bloodline]

Original?
Not really.
Xerox laid the ground work for this type of system, and then over priced their systems (as did Apple with the Lisa).
The Amiga was also slightly over priced, but in comparison it was much more of a commodity priced appliance.

Inevitably everything went in this direction.
Ease of adoption and intuitive use sold this approach.

But again, original?
No.

The Amiga brought together a bunch of different technologies in a single well thought out package in a format that people found useful to use. I consider that original.

There was nothing original about the components that made up the iPad, but until Apple put the right parts into the right package, no one was even slightly interested in tablet computing.

Engineering is always about compromise, and it takes a while to get the balance right.

The Amiga was a breath of fresh air when released and was such a strong design, it held its own for almost 6 years with little or no serious upgrades!

[Iggy]

The Amiga brought together a bunch of different technologies in a single well thought out package in a format that people found useful to use. I consider that original.

There was nothing original about the components that made up the iPad, but until Apple put the right parts into the right package, no one was even slightly interested in tablet computing.

Engineering is always about compromise, and it takes a while to get the balance right.

The Amiga was a breath of fresh air when released and was such a strong design, it held its own for almost 6 years with little or no serious upgrades!

"with little or no serious upgrades" - funny, most A.org posters would object to that, but I'd agree. Dave and company's enhancements were minor.

The iPad isn't that impressive. And, as stated before, the elements that made up the Amiga had their foundations in other company's research.

Edit - Then again, looking back over my posts, my attitude in this thread has been pretty fecal eyed.
I like old Sun systems for similar reasons, and they didn't invent a great deal of their earlier technology either.