Computers that TRIED to be an Amiga

[Managarm]

But can't the Falcon accept a whopping 512mb RAM upgrade far more easily than an Amga?

[Hyperspeed]

How many programs were released for the Falcon? The thing could easily make do with a 512MB hard disk, what on Earth would it need 512MB RAM for?

I've heard talk of large RAM and a 100Mhz '060... if such a thing exists... but where's the software that could utilise this? Where's the graphics card?

[A3KOne]

Hyperspeed wrote:
How many programs were released for the Falcon? The thing could easily make do with a 512MB hard disk, what on Earth would it need 512MB RAM for?

I've heard talk of large RAM and a 100Mhz '060... if such a thing exists... but where's the software that could utilise this? Where's the graphics card?

Falcon not only had (or has) better upgrades than Amiga, they cost much less.  I remember running across an 060/100 board when I was looking for an 060 card for my A3000.  The Cyberstorm Mk3 was $600 or so from Software Hut at the time.  The Atari dealer had the 060 upgrade for the Falcon for less than half that.
There was a GFX card for it as well.  I don't remember the specs.

[Seehund]

Tomas wrote:

I understand what you mean, but sadly it is the owner that defines what an Amiga is. If AmigaINC decided to slap the Amiga logo on a wintel pc, it would still be Amiga just because they said so.
But for me neither AmigaONE or Pegasos comes close to the classic.

Actually, even the Amiga trademark owners have already defined that there are no more Amigas. Remember their trademark guidelines?

"2. Amiga trademarks must always be used as adjectives followed by a generic product name.
CORRECT:    You’ll love the next generation of Amiga operating systems!
INCORRECT:    You’ll love the next generation of Amigas!

3. Do not use the Amiga trademarks in the plural or possessive form.
CORRECT:    The new Amiga operating systems are more flexible than ever!
INCORRECT:    The new Amigas are more flexible than ever!"

"Amiga" according to AInc means either (1) a past computer platform from the 1980s-1990s, or (2) it's shorthand for a company called Amiga Incorporated.
Personally I agree with the obvious and undisputable (1), and I feel slightly nauseous when I see AInc use it the sense of (2).

Why would anyone think it's meaningful to refer to third party hardware sold through licensed dealerships as "Amigas"?
The trademark owners don't design hardware, they don't own or buy or license any designs, they don't have any specifications or guidelines, they don't produce any hardware, they don't sell any hardware, they have no control whatsoever over hardware or the hardware market and what it should or shouldn't do. What was a Teron or Pegasos or Mac yesterday could be an AmigaWhatever tomorrow. If for example the producers or design owners or whatever call it quits, then "the new Amiga" is gone and there's nothing that the company which supposedly would have "decided" that it was a "new Amiga" can do about it!

Any new Amiga trademark slapped on these products is meaningless. OK, in practice it means that the product is now more expensive than before and sold by a smaller and less reputable distributor, but other than that it's the same Teron/Pegasos/Mac/XYZ as before.

The Amiga is dead. People have had a decade to deal with that fact now. Nobody's trying to bring it back, other than in rhetoric and deceptive marketing.

Now if AmigaOS or any of its "clones" will survive is an entirely different question!

[koaftder]

Seehund wrote:

Tomas wrote:

I understand what you mean, but sadly it is the owner that defines what an Amiga is. If AmigaINC decided to slap the Amiga logo on a wintel pc, it would still be Amiga just because they said so.
But for me neither AmigaONE or Pegasos comes close to the classic.

Actually, even the Amiga trademark owners have already defined that there are no more Amigas. Remember their trademark guidelines?

"2. Amiga trademarks must always be used as adjectives followed by a generic product name.
CORRECT:    You’ll love the next generation of Amiga operating systems!
INCORRECT:    You’ll love the next generation of Amigas!

3. Do not use the Amiga trademarks in the plural or possessive form.
CORRECT:    The new Amiga operating systems are more flexible than ever!
INCORRECT:    The new Amigas are more flexible than ever!"

"Amiga" according to AInc means either (1) a past computer platform from the 1980s-1990s, or (2) it's shorthand for a company called Amiga Incorporated.
Personally I agree with the obvious and undisputable (1), and I feel slightly nauseous when I see AInc use it the sense of (2).

Why would anyone think it's meaningful to refer to third party hardware sold through licensed dealerships as "Amigas"?
The trademark owners don't design hardware, they don't own or buy or license any designs, they don't have any specifications or guidelines, they don't produce any hardware, they don't sell any hardware, they have no control whatsoever over hardware or the hardware market and what it should or shouldn't do. What was a Teron or Pegasos or Mac yesterday could be an AmigaWhatever tomorrow. If for example the producers or design owners or whatever call it quits, then "the new Amiga" is gone and there's nothing that the company which supposedly would have "decided" that it was a "new Amiga" can do about it!

Any new Amiga trademark slapped on these products is meaningless. OK, in practice it means that the product is now more expensive than before and sold by a smaller and less reputable distributor, but other than that it's the same Teron/Pegasos/Mac/XYZ as before.

The Amiga is dead. People have had a decade to deal with that fact now. Nobody's trying to bring it back, other than in rhetoric and deceptive marketing.

Now if AmigaOS or any of its "clones" will survive is an entirely different question!

I wonder if anybody has ever blasted themselves when they came to the realization that amiga was over.