CommodoreUSA CEO Interview Answers

[billt]

What do you (or any of your employees with computer
hardware/systems backgrounds) think of this computer/OS
architecture?
From what I can understand, it sounds wonderful, but would likely be
outdated before it ever came to fruition.

I assume that THIS in the question was a link to something interesting. What was THIS?

[billt]

Why should we ask any questions to a producer/assembler of a
regular PC computer when the only connection between this
system and Amiga is by UAE?
We are re-releasing computers bearing the famous Commodore and
AMIGA brands that many people cut-their-teeth with and loved.

But they are not re-releasing computers. They are re-using names. The computers have nothing else whatsoever to do with their name predecessors, so I just can't see this as re-releasing anything.

We don’t want to put all our eggs in the replica basket.

They did one replica, the C64. There's not ANY "Amiga" eggs in this basket at all. Mustangs, Minis and Beetles are at least inspired by their classic designs. Other than for the C64 casework, I don't see any related inspiration at all. I agree that they need to go with the times, and today things are different than back in Amiga Classic days. Giant towers are out, tiny Mini-ITX is in. But saying that their designs are inspired by the classics is a bit of a stretch. It's like when I was trying to figure out how the first new Dodge Chargers related to the classic Charger. It just didn't. The last year or two they've at least made it better, but I still don't see the lineage. The Challenger I'd call a success in being inspired by the classic lineage, but they kindof lost it with the Charger.

He said a number of times that there are no discussions with Hyperion or etc. I'd like to know if CommodoreUSA has made legitimate attempts to contact Hyperion or other named companies in the questions to initiate such discussions, or if they are so disinterested in such things that no contact has been attempted and CUSA do not intend to try.

[billt]

They are NOT "Amiga products".

The problem here is that, legally, they are. As far as visible or experiencable content, in our opinions, they are not. While we don't have to accept these "things" as what we believe "Amigas" to be, if we went to court and asked the judge to prevent CUSA from using the Amiga name in the way that they do, we would lose and CUSA would keep the right to do that, so long as they are not breaking some terms of all the contracts involved. (including those contracts not signed directly but CUSA but which Amiga Inc. is bound to restrict their sublicensors to)

[billt]

The 30 million dollar budget was an invention of the advertising agency we are no longer affiliated with.

I wonder how that happened... (imagining things get all wavey as we transition to my imagination...)

Ad agency: Yes, this all looks great. Our standard fee for this service is 30 million $.

CUSA: Uh, OK.

time passes

Ad agency: We'd like to be paid now. Where's our 30 million $??

CUSA: What?! You think we have 30 mil to spend on advertizing? You're freakin nuts!

(wavey transition back to reality)

CUSA: Yea, those crazy ad agency people completely made up this figure.

[billt]

It may be a legaly Amiga branded chinese Wintel PC but it will NEVER be an Amiga, that's what Mr BS doesn't understand.

And this comes down to what each of us thinks an "Amiga" is or should be. We in the Amiga community expect an "Amiga" to provide something of the experience we think of when using our classic Amigas.

To me, that's the OS interface, the way I interact with it. I don't care if it's 68000, PPC, x86, ARM, some weird "custom chips" or standard PCI equivalents, Zorro, ISA, PCI-Express, or whatever. Give me the OS, without some other OS involved, and I'll happily believe I'm using what I consider to be an "Amiga".

Some people think that some weird "custom chip" that isn't present in any other computer is an absolute requirement. I don't understand that today, but they are welcome to their opinion. These people would cry foul if I called my own computer design an "Amiga" because it would lack something "custom". And I'd say they were wrong to discredit my invention because it is designed to run AmigaOS4. (The only thing about my mental design that is NOT a bog standard PC is the PowerPC processer. Other than that I embrace mass market off-the-shelf hardware, and only that because I have no other choice)

Barry seems to think is "Amiga" concept is what he believes to be a high-end PC running modern OS features. Not everyone has agreed that the boards/CPUs he has chosen to sell are what they all believe to be "high end". Barry doesn't seem to think that the OS or user interaction needs to have any resemblance whatsoever to the user experience we remember and desire, and that's my biggest problem with his "Amiga". I'm happy to see that they all seem to have come to their senses regarding the $25000 luxury computer BS. I don't think any of us remember reading about that as a crazy video editing rig any more than he seems to remember saying some of the other BS things that went around.

He has a legal license to go around telling us that his "concept" is indeed an "Amiga". Sure, we can all grumble about it, but we can't really say he's wrong, no matter how much we hate the situation. If your philosophy disagrees with his concept, yes do not buy it. Maybe it won't sell enough to continue, and we'll see the situation change again in a couple years. Maybe enough outsiders will agree with his concept for his business to do well, and they'll all think we're a bunch of weirdos for holding on to 1987. (Because so many are ignorant that "legitimate" things lasted after that)

What happens if we're right and his business fails? Does the name go into legal limbo, with bitter people unwilling to release rights to newcomers, keeping it locked out of anyone's reach? Might we see something new and agreeable come up? We'll have to see.