Another Retro Computer returns from the ashes

[ferrellsl]

Wasn't the cost of the beta board supposed to be subsidised? But yeah.



Its a fine way to go if you've both the product and the name to brand name to justify it.

Given the reaction even of no small number of hardcore supporters though...

Anyway, the reason I put this up, beyond a slight desire to feed my inner troll, is that this is the sort of cool tech that keeps me interested in computers.

Look at the size of the system. If I were to guess I'd say a little bigger than nano-itx. So a bit more than the floor space a box of kitchen matches takes up.

Yet has as much CPU umph as G4 powermac, possibly more graphically.

Doesn't that realisation absolutely blow you away?

Oh no, now you're inciting the X1000 clowns who will start flaming you, because to them, the X1000 is obviously a better system because it just has to be!  I mean heck, a 1500EUR computer just HAS to be better than one costing 125EUR? Right?  The X1000 even has that Booing Ball logo on the front and everything! And SATA ports, and that Xorro or Xena thingy...and...and...

Sarcasm off:

OS4 could just as easily be ported to a Beagle Board or a PandaBoard, but then the hard-core Amiga loyalists couldn't be gouged as deeply!  The X1000 is ridiculously overpriced and underpowered for the cost.  The X1000 "IS" about the money in spite of what A-Eon and Hyperion are saying.  The prices for comparable systems or for developer boards such as the Beagle and Panda prove it.  Building the X1000 "out of love" or "for the community" is a bunch of baloney.  I'll stick to MorphOS and a Natami for my Amiga-fixes.  Too bad Hyperion hasn't figured out they'd be more successful selling cheaper hardware (bundled with OS4) to the masses than bundling with hardware that's so obscure and expensive that only a handful will ever CONSIDER buying it.  Economies of scale anyone........

[ferrellsl]

Most people said this about the Amiga 3000 by the time it was new. Or look at apples prices in the 90s. But wait for the machine to arrive first, then we will see how powerful or cool it really is.

No, I remember quite clearly when the A3000 was released and it wasn't so overpriced or underpowered as the X1000.  It was comparable in price and performance to 68030 based Macs, even a bit more capable actually.  Compare the hardware specs of the X1000 to any available platform out there and you'll see that it's about 5 years behind.

As for waiting for the X1000 to arrive, I think you have a lot more waiting ahead of you.  A-Eon has already missed their summer release deadline.  After what I saw at AmiWest, or rather didn't see, I'm sure they'll miss this Fall/Winter deadline as well.  The X1000 is just another failed hardware fiasco and is so similar to what Adam Kowalczyk of ACK Software Controls was cooking up in 2007, that I'm starting to think that the X1000 is just the same project in a different wrapper ala 2010.  I doubt the X1000 will ever see the light of day.  But at least Adam's pricing was reasonable!  It's "funny" that Adam could offer hardware at similiar specs to the X1000 in 2007 for half of what A-Eon wants in 2010.  See:  http://www.osnews.com/story/17866

[ferrellsl]

1990: Commodore announces the Amiga 3000. Prices start at US$4100 with a monitor. (16Mhz 50MBHD 2MB RAM)

1990: 386 PC (25 MHZ 50MB HD 1MB RAM) with a monitor -> $2000

Mac pricing in the 90 was a joke, so I won´t compare that.

No, now you're comparing apples to oranges.  My point was that the Commodore A3000 compared quite favorably in price and performance to Apple 68030 Macs.  And you have to remember that back in those days, 1 MB of RAM went for several hundred dollars.  So comparing a 386SX 25Mhz, 1 MB RAM running MS-DOS with CGA graphics and 1 MB RAM isn't directly comparable in price or performance to a 68030 25Mhz, 2MB RAM, and multi-tasking OS and graphics above an beyond anything available to the x86 world.

Even when comparing like-processors such as a discontinued MAC G5 with the X1000, anyone can see that the X1000 is vastly overpriced and underpowered.  The X1000 fails to light any fires or blaze any new trails, except in the outrageously overpriced hardware department.  It's doubtful that it will even reach the market.  It's funny that Adam Kowalczyk of ACK Software Controls was developing an almost identical platform as the X1000 in 2007 at nearly half the price of an X1000.  Matter of fact, I believe that the X1000 is Adam's 2007 project in a different wrapper and a higher price.  See specs here:  http://www.osnews.com/story/17866

[ferrellsl]

Maybe you shouldn't think so much. ACK Software Controls has nothing to do with this project. Perhaps Treavor picked that particular CPU because it appealed to him, or he thought there was some contunuity in that choice. I discussed PPC designs with the head of the firm that designed Xena for A-eon. At the time he suggested Freescale communications PPC processors (rather than PA Semi's PA6T).  
the only real mystery (beyond why they choose a dead end processor) is where A-eon is getting these processors?
And the power comparison isn't as valid as what is pointed to by your post.
The Amiga 3000 was procuced for a more limited market by one company. 386 motherboards/systems were produced many manufacturers for a larger, more competive market.

I don't know why you guys expect PPC motherboards produced in comparitively TINY quantities to even come close to the prices mass marketed X86 systems.

It's not going to happen. Even if we had a market as large as Apple's, our costs would still be higher than X86 producers.

My level of thought in this matter is just fine.  Maybe it's your lack of research and your lack of thought that has you believing that the X1000 is such a wonderful deal?  And I don't care if ACK has anything to do with the X1000 project or not.  But ACK was able to come up with a design similar to the X1000 three years ago at half the price!  If anyone believes that A-Eon is developing the X1000 out of the goodness of their hearts or "for the good of the community" they are gravely mistaken.

Once again, you want to keep comparing apples to oranges.  I don't care about the cost performance comparisons between a 386 and a 68030 based system from nearly 20 yrs ago.  But when someone tells me that $3500 USD for an X1000 is a good deal and the price to performance ratio is also good, I know they're full of baloney.  Just compare the X1000 to other similar hardware offerings (apples to apples) and you'll see that.  And the economies of scale argument you're using doesn't hold true either.  Low-volume development boards (the X1000 is now being "pushed" as a dev board after being critisized over its pricing) such as the Panda and the Beagle cost a fraction of the asking price of an X1000 and they're available now, not vaporware.  You must have some financial interest in A-Eon or Hyperion for you to cling so valiantly to your "belief" that the X1000 is such a fabulous deal......Believe what you want, because those of us on this forum who've put a great deal of thought and research into the X1000 aren't buying it, pun intended!

[ferrellsl]

I'm in love. I must have one. Damn you man why did you show me that, now I have to to rework my entire budget.

And only $399!  That's a bargain, especially for a narrow, low-volume market.  Makes the argument for the X1000's high price look like the bad joke it really is.....

[ferrellsl]

Actually Byte magazine raved about the A3000 and proclaimed it as the system to beat.  Sun tried desperately to license build A3000UX's and market them with a Sun badge.

Finally, someone who actually remembers the A3000 and isn't trying to be a historical revisionist!

[ferrellsl]

@Iggy

Well, I acutally think we're in violent agreement!  No hard feelings and I actually enjoy a spirited exchange, even the one I've had with you.  Amiga.org is anything but boring and it's one of the reasons, aside from my fondness for Amigas, that I'm here.  And don't get me wrong, I hope Trevor is successful.  I hope he goes on to sell thousands of boards and that the Amiga is once again a useful platform to more than just the hobbyist-cult found here.  I'm just more than a bit jaded by all of the past hardware failures and broken promises and outright scams.

[ferrellsl]

Sorry if my response seemed a little harsh.
Do I remember the Amiga?
Are you guys kidding?
When it was introduced,  I was convinced the 68000 processor was completely superior to anything else on the market (because it was).
Was the Amiga high priced? Hey, this was before circuit libraries from companies like VLSI were available and it had how many custom chips? All focused on relieving the processor from tasks that the coprocessors could handle so that an already remarkably able multi-tasking processor could focus on program code. Amazing stuff.
Today's NG Amiga like systems have only become more PC like because PCs have become so much more like the Amiga.
Myself, in the late '80s and early '90's, I was managing a company that sold multi-user 68K based systems that out of the box supported four users and could support a fifth (that could use an X-Window based windowing system called G-Windows) by adding a video card, keyboard, and mouse.
We weren't aimming at the Amiga market, we were selling to business.
The base price for our systems started at under $1000. We also offered a V30 card for the system that gave it PC compatibility.
I can remember demoing our POS system to IBM engineers and getting favorable comparisons to the mainframe systems.
Its funny, at the time they still considered their own PCs as little more than smart terminals.
Via these same connections, we obtained beta copies of Win 3.0 (no, not 3.1 - 3.0). I had this GUI running on our machines (along with our own software) when PC could barely be considered multi-tasking capable (let alone multi-user).
It makes you wonder how IBM and Motorola could allow a second rate manufacturer of calculator processors to overtake them and become the leading producer of PC processors. I mean Intel processor were SO bad at first.
If IBM had just produced their own processor (but then all the original PC components - hardware and software - were outsourced) or if IBM had gone to a larger company (like Motorola) then everything would be so much different today.

I never expected Intel based PCs to become a standard. But then, the way they became a standard is pretty odd, an totally unintended anyway.
IBM didn't insist on an exclusive license to MS-DOS (aka IBM-DOS)
Bill Gates was smart enough to retain his right to sell MS-DOS.
And since IBM assumed that with a patented BIOS limiting compatiblity to  their hardware and software no one could clone the PC that they would retain control of their own market.
Between their BIG loss (controlling the PC market) and their second loss (as a supplier of processors to Apple) is it any wonder that IBM doesn't want a part of the PC market today?
Did any of you consider that those losses might have somrthing to do with their reluctance to market the Cell, its derivitives, or future PPCs toward the personal computer market?

Its funny, the company actually builds pretty good products, they're more open than some companies (Ie Marvell or Applied Micro), and they've managed to get the contracts to supply all three of the major game consoles with PPC related processor (two of which work faster than their last G5 desktop processor).

Do I remember the Amiga? Yes, everytime I look at a PC and more importantly ever time I see a game console.
What does a PS3 or an XBOX360 remind you of? Me? There CD32's in need of a keyboard and mouse.

The thing that TOTALLY pisses me off is this. Amiga? Heck its all around us.

Steve Jobs acts like everything he's introduced since he took over while Woz's Apple II was dying a prolonged death wasn't handed to him via Xerox's PARC program.

Bill gates likes to pretend he did steal his original product (not only did he, but what he didn't pay for was still just a shoddy CPM rip off).

And the first real multimedia computer marketed to the consumer market? Lorraine just gets no respect.

Yes, it's sad and frustrating to see superior technologies fall by the wayside.  The 68K WAS superior to the other processors out there in its day.  Unfortunately, the best doesn't always succeed or get adopted my the consumer.  I remember the days when Betamax was superior to anything VHS had to offer, but due to marketing hype, Betamax fell into obscurity even though VHS was inferior.  I see the same thing today with Apple.  Steve Jobs is constantly on the offense telling the world how his products are superior and how Apple did it first, blah, blah blah...And just like politics, if you say it loud enough and long enough people will begin to believe it, at least the un-informed people anyway.  I'm amazed even by some of my Apple-fanatic friends, who will insist that a MacBook is superior in every way to a comparable Windows laptop even though the components are identical in both systems.  Perception is everything.....unfortunately.

[ferrellsl]

I woke up to this today.
Thanks for making my day start on a high note. Amuzing and Oh so very true.
Apparently politicians  and their backers think if the throw enough money into an election, they can buy our vote. They even think they can lie with impunity, waffle on possitions, and distort their opponent's records.
The funny thing is, I think their turn it up to 11 strategy may be back firing Americans can be lazy and ignorant at times, but we don't like be taken for stupid too often. You know in my State, the Tea Party (whoever the heck they really are) managed to rout the only Republican I was voting for this year (Mike Castle) and replaced him with national embarassiment Christine O'Donnell. (and I wish she would stop saying "I'm you", its goving me an identity crysis)
We, as a peoplw, can make some bad choices, but this year I feel pretty confident that altough its been taken for granted that we can be easily manipulated - WE aren't that stupid.


OH, wait a minute! This is an Amiga forum.
Your point about computer and electronic trends was dead on too. Often the best technology doesn't succeed. I hada friend with a Super Beatmax. Neat final gasp for that system. Unbelievably good sound quality, but very few commercial tapes available.

I don't believe that Americans are all that stupid either.  I think most Americans are just too distracted most of the time to pay attention to what their elected officials are REALLY doing.....It's a near total lack of oversight and accountability.  But your remarks bring to mind mind a funny quote that I heard recently that applies to democracies, lynch mobs, rugby matches, etc...., "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups."  Probably attributable to some conniving politician!  LOL