If C= had produced an Amiga incompatible wonder computer would you have bought it?

[tone007]

For me it wasn't a question of brand loyalty, it was simply the fact the Commodore produced the best & most innovative machines for their time...

Way back end of 81 start of 82 what were the main choices a ZX80/81 which was nothing more than a big calculator or the VIC20 with full size keyboard, slightly better graphics & far superior sound... no brainer that one...

I've considered a Commodore tattoo, but Franko is more entitled to one than I.  I didn't get my first Commodore until at least '86 or '87!

...one day I'll pin down the exact date..

[commodorejohn]

They did release machines around that time frame that were incompatible with Amiga, PC clones including laptops.

Yeah, but the question was about an Amiga-incompatible system that was a step forward. Commodore's PC clones were basically just okay, nothing special even by PC standards.

[Digiman]

The A1200 and A4000 cost a lot of development time and the chipset took up a lot of space because they were trying to keep things compatible IMO.

C128 sold badly and wasn't a huge improvement, ditto A1200. So I get the point.

If Commodore had produced a machine with radically new technology that allowed triple parallax 256 colour screens with 256 hardware sprites with realtime scaling and rotation and 8 channel 16bit audio with realtime echo/reverb/modulation/filtering then YES.

I love my Amiga, but owning a C64 and Amiga was not a problem. Owning machine X + Amiga + C64 again not a problem.

Trouble is none of the OCS designers were in house employees ditto C64s VIC2 and SID designers. Maybe if they had ended up with the 3DO or Flair2 chip set rivals secured this would have been their 3rd wonder machine.

[Khephren]

can't say yes or no to this. It's about software support for me. will if get imagine, imageFX, lightwave?
what's the game publisher support? what's the OS like ,price? etc. Otherwise your left with a Sam Coupe or Acorn Archimedes.

[Digiman]

Yeah, but the question was about an Amiga-incompatible system that was a step forward. Commodore's PC clones were basically just okay, nothing special even by PC standards.

PCs were useless machines in 1992, even a 80486 with ISA bus VGA and Soundblaster could barely replicate A500 games from 1986 apart from 256 colours on screen....until they moved *puke*

[Digiman]

can't say yes or no to this. It's about software support for me. will if get imagine, imageFX, lightwave?
what's the game publisher support? what's the OS like ,price? etc. Otherwise your left with a Sam Coupe or Acorn Archimedes.

It's quite clear OP is talking the same core market as C64 and A500 purchasers. NOT C128D or A2000/3000 users being professional. So around the £300-350 mark INSTEAD of a stock A1200 that 1000s bought in the hope of playing texture mapped 3D games not OCS games with a few extra colours twice as fast . The reference to the technical superiority is to show the trade off. A1000 was compatible with nothing else on launch day....didn't care myself......wouldn't have cared in 1992/93 if they had the same technological leap as C64 to Amiga.

Nobody cared if their Amiga was C64 compatible, which is why I could never have been conned into the Commodore 128D for £500 instead of £570 for an Amiga 500. The extra 384mb of RAM alone was worth more than the £75 difference.

I got a machine in both cases better than consoles available on launch day too and still both could do other things (graphics/db/music/financial/wp etc).

[lsmart]

In 1994 I needed a machine that was good at LeTeX, GIF, JPeg and networking. Later Java became important. If Commodores wonder machine could have done that as good as Linux, I would have bought one for the equivalent of 900$, because this was my budget.

[Templario]

No, I'll think buy a PPC machine.

[jorkany]

The extra 384mb of RAM alone was worth more than the £75 difference.

Holy cow, that was one smoking A500!

[Digiman]

Holy cow, that was one smoking A500!

384kb ooops :roflmao:

[Belial6]

Yeah, I would have bought that 12GHz, 512MB Ram, 4TB hard drive system even if it wasn't Amiga compatible at under $300.

[Digiman]

Well the Acorn RISC based machine launched in 1987 with chunky pixel 256/4096 colour screens and 8 channel 16bit stereo sound and a CPU speed approx 16mhz 68030 speed.

A1200 was not cutting edge by a long shot, hell Acorn essentially built an Atari Falcon 7 years before Atari.

[runequester]

PCs were useless machines in 1992, even a 80486 with ISA bus VGA and Soundblaster could barely replicate A500 games from 1986 apart from 256 colours on screen....until they moved *puke*

Dont forget the joys of windows 3.1

[Digiman]

Dont forget the joys of windows 3.1

Never used it, just played DOS games and wrote Dbase 3 databases, ran Dpaint PC and Imagine 2.0 rendering

[Motormouth]

@dammy

I would have to have sold my Amiga to help fund the purchase of the new machine. Don't forget I was 13 in '93!

I am also trying to put my mind into te frameset that I ha back then... I think I would have struggled to justify jumping to a new platform with all my games and applications, plus most evenings I spent writing little programs... I was too invested in the Amiga platform to jump... I didn't jump until 2000!!!

You were 13.  Man, I am feeling old........
I though you might be older.
Your avatar picture reminds me of what some of the British New Wave Rock Stars from back in the early 80's dressed like.

[J-Golden]

I voted yes.  The thing that I loved about the Amiga was it's hardware and if Commodore kept putting out excellent pieces of kit, then I'd stay in!