Order your A1 motherboard

[anarchic_teapot]

Wayne:

If Eyetech HONESTLY cannot produce this already antiquated board -- with processor -- for under $300, then they are incompetent. I don't think they are incompetent, so $250 or more must be profit.

Interesting proposition. Have you any idea how much the IBM 750CXe costs? I can't find anything on the web, but when I look at the price of G3 accelerator cards for the Mac I get the impression they don't come that cheap. Plus the board itself, plus fitting, plus carriage from the Far East to the UK, plus AInc's licence fee, plus a bit to pay for company overheads...

Also, it's a fairly high risk article - unlike cheap x86 boards which can generally be expected to sell steadily and reliably - so, yes, I  would expect the markup for both manufacturer and distributor to be a little higher than for mass-produced stuff (my definition of mass-produced does include runs of 1000 articles... but runs plural i.e. several, not just one or two with no guarantee of any more at present).

I'm not convinced the situation is as extreme as you think.

[Kronos]

@KennyR

A 600mhz G3 equals a 1ghz Pentium ? Dream on :-P

G4 with extensive use of Altivec maybe, but "we" won't have those.

Oh and 1-1.2ghz is mid-range ? Are we talking used computers or what ?

The slowest Intel offering I could find is a Celeron 1.2
>300Euro including mobo and german tax.

Pentiums start at 1.8 (only 110Euro more).

Let's face it: We're nuts, and don't care   ;-)

[KennyR]

A 600mhz G3 equals a 1ghz Pentium ? Dream on

I said competes with, not equals. And by the way, the difference isn't that great, either. Assuming a 850 AMD K3/4 equals the performance of a 1GHz Pentium4, and that a 700-800 MHz G3 can match the performance of the AMD, I'd say it was closer than you might think. And in a real world test - RC5 - Pentiums do very badly while PPCs excel.

Oh and 1-1.2ghz is mid-range ? Are we talking used computers or what ?

Well, it was 4 months ago ;-) It just shows how fast PC's move on. All the more reason to think that x86 fanatics have so much MHz in their heads they don't have room for anything else.

Pentium boards are cheap, but so are Ford Escorts. I'd still like a cadellac. :-)

[System]

Assuming a 850 AMD K3/4 equals the performance of a 1GHz Pentium4, and that a 700-800 MHz G3 can match the performance of the AMD

Assumption is the mother of all fsckups.

An 850 AMD K3/4 (was there such a thing?) is not even in the same fricking ballpark as even a 1.4Ghz Pentium 4.  There were no such things as 1 Ghz P4's, this, I know.  Even if there were, you can't buy them today.

Stop defending a bad idea.  The Pentium 4 is not the be all, end all of chips, but it's a damned site better than a piddly little laughably outdated, 3 generation behind, G3/600.  

Don't confuse my complete disdain for the AmigaOnce / PPC concept with my lack of support for the Amiga.

Hardware independence.  Anything else is just a red herring.

[Kronos]

@KennyR

Mmmm Ford Escort (should be Focus) RS3 or Cosworth ?

Or 2 tons of ami-scrap-metal ?

I'd allways take the Ford, and the extra change mabe enough
for an Toyata MR2 (~Laptop)  :-P

[Kay]

> For me, I cannot justify all that money for a hobby to run an antiquated OS (4.x) on a dead-end machine (PPC).

Well, if it gets the job done in a pleasant matter, it will beat any Wintel machine with any number of MHz as far as I'm concerned. Real life performance and user satisfaction is what matters. MHz are just a measure of how many cycles the system's CPU does every second.

And as for the Amiga being a "only a toy": It boots up, allows me to a bunch of stuff I need/want to do the way I want it done, and then I can shut it off again. That's a real computer fulfilling a real purpose in a satisfactory way.

But of course, if it doesn't work that way for you, it might just be an expensive toy as far as you're concerned. For me it's a useful item, and I am quite ready to pay for it.

Kay

[arcticandyb]

I don't know how fast a 600Mhz PPC powered Amiga will run, but what I suspect is somewhere close to a bottom of the range Celeron or Duron.  Ofcourse there is no real way of finding out as there is no dual OS software that could tell us, and even if there was, programming/compiling inefficiencies on one platform or the other could end up hexing the whole test - so bottom line is even if we had, say, Lightwave 7 for the Mac, PC and Amiga (I know v7 wasn't released for the Amiga, this is just a supposition) and rendered the exact same project, we still wouldn't know what "processor" was faster, because each of the different platforms uses a different set of development tools.

So is the 600Mhz A1 a ripoff?  I don't know, because no one apart from Eyetech knows how much they are paying for it.  Also it could be that Eyetech themselves are being ripped off - and are simply passing the price gouging down the line.

What Wayne says is true about the Amiga however.  Amiga dealers have a long history of selling standard computer hardware at inflated prices.  Even when Commodore were in power I never bought simms or hard drives from an Amiga dealer - I never have been rich enough to pay twice as much for something, just because it would fill the wallet of an Amiga dealer, instead of giving a marginal profit to a PC dealer.

I think $600 for a processor/mobo combo is a hell of lot of money  (the 411 was in UK pounds Wayne, so add 1/2 that much again for the pound/dollar conversion) - especially considering that a 1.2Ghz Duron + mobo can be bought for under $200, and usually includes sound, graphics, modem, LAN and USB onboard.  However it is in keeping with Amiga history.  Hands up who paid $600 for 1/2MB A500 or worse, $3000 for an A3000.

The closest thing the Amiga has ever had to a value for money computer was a toss up between the A4000 '030 and a bog standard A1200.  They didn't have the monitor, as much ram or as large a hard drive as the similarly priced 486DX (A1200) or 486DX2 (A4000), but they did give about the same performance for a similar price.

I personally think that if CBM had priced the A3000 at the same price as a 386DX - which was it's main competitor at the time - they would have won the business world over in about a month.  Missed opportunities are the one constant in the Amiga's history, and it never ceases to amaze me how often they were missed.

[System]

Yeah, and my last four head, HI-FI VCR was $500, but that was 8 years ago. Now they are under $75 at any Wal-Mart.  

The Pentium 4 is not the be all, end all of chips, but it's a damned site better than a piddly little laughably outdated, 3 generation behind, G3/600.

Lets look at it this way,

On Power Computings Site, a Cyberstorm with an 060 and a PPC604@233Mhz will set you back 559ukp, then, a Mediator will cost 169ukp, total 728ukp. I cant justify that when a new PC with all the bits will cost the same if not a little less (if you shop round)

Now a brand new board, with a cpu almost 3 times faster than the cyberstorm, and almost certainly more stable, with AGP so i can use the latest gfx cards, onboard sound and networking for 411ukp. now thats something i can justify. Dont forget we're talking about a complete motherboard here, not just an accelerator.

Sure its not as cheap as a pc, but neither is Apple or Sun hardware.

I have an A1200T with a 1230-IV in it. Id love to run a RTG system, but i cant justify the cost
so my amiga doesnt get used as much as i'd like. UAE is not stable enough IMO.

With the A1, im finally going to get the amiga i always wanted, not some fake system running on intel hardware, or frankensteins monster thats held together with sticky tape.

I love the amiga. and i cant wait. As far as im concerned, if it runs Amiga OS natively then its a real amiga.

[bhoggett]

Thanks for the clarification... In that case, Eyetech is still clearly delusional. $550 is still rediculous for a 600 mhz machine. I might have given them $400 for one (if I had it) but $550 is just unreasonable.

It's $550 for the mobo and CPU only. You'd still need to add the rest of the kit to have a working system, at my estimate that would add another 50% onto the price.

I have to agree that looks like a silly purchase in VFM terms, which is why I won't be buying one.

[KennyR]

Assumption is the mother of all fsckups.

I can only assume. As you say, there were no CPUs of the type I mentioned clocked at those speeds. Simple sums are somewhat accurate, and anyway, it was a moot point.

Stop defending a bad idea. The Pentium 4 is not the be all, end all of chips, but it's a damned site better than a piddly little laughably outdated, 3 generation behind, G3/600.

There's no real choice. The Amiga could not compete on the x86 platform. There is simply no room. The company(ies) that run the Amiga now rely on hardware for their present income. There is no economically viable way of selling PCs - because the big companies are already doing it. So if its not x86, where then? PPC is the closest "rival", so its a natural choice. Without these Amiga companies, the AmigaOS would become a migrant - no stable base, and no future - and there is no money in selling emulators or OS's, since this is software and most people expect them to be free.

The point of this whole venture is that Amiga will become a name again, not just to supply present users with better machines, despite what many now think. The way to do that is custom hardware. It's 2-3 years behind current technology. It doesn't have to stay that way. But it does have to start that way. How many years is my current Amiga setup behind now? Five, six years? More? I could buy a fully up to date Amithlon PC but it would cost me probably as much as an A1 and I'd be forever trapped in OS3.9 and no WarpOS/Warp3D.

Hardware independence. Anything else is just a red herring.

There's no such thing. It's unworkable. Even if there were, PPC would be logical first step to establish a solid base to build into those areas later. x86 is not a solid base - ask BeOS.

[FarQuad]

There's no real choice. The Amiga could not compete on the x86 platform. There is simply no room. The company(ies) that run the Amiga now rely on hardware for their present income. There is no economically viable way of selling PCs - because the big companies are already doing it. So if its not x86, where then? PPC is the closest "rival", so its a natural choice. Without these Amiga companies, the AmigaOS would become a migrant - no stable base, and no future - and there is no money in selling emulators or OS's, since this is software and most people expect them to be free.

So I should pay 200% for 50% of the machine simply because Amiga dealers can't figure out how to gouge the price of an x86 machine?  More than likely Amiga Inc can't figure out how to make money from it than anything else.  

I've been quiet for a while because, well, first of all, I have been on travel, and secondly -- in all honesty -- I wanted to see who would be the next one to blindly sit around and defend Amiga Inc's stupidity without actually being able to back it up.  I don't think they make "cupie dolls" any more, but if they do, you would win the prize. ;-)

In regards to benchmarks, It's a VERY simple test.  I think, if I am not mistaken, that Lightwave 5 was the last made for each of the platforms.  Using that version and rendering the same object with the same light sources and settings would give you an EXACT benchmark of what each CPU is capable of.  Luckily NewTek's already done this for us, and even the Macintosh with a G4 gets completely dusted by Pentium IV machines.  The G3/600 isn't "competitive", it's pitiful.  For those of you who bought G3 accelerators earlier, stick with them.  for those of you who are paying the ransom for a "new" AmigaOne, good luck but I wish I had your disposable income.  For those of you teetering on the line, you'd be better off and have a hell of a lot more support just buying a good (and cheap) PC and running BeOS.

// FarQ

[Kay]

> So I should pay 200% for 50% of the machine simply because Amiga dealers can't figure out how to gouge the price of an x86 machine?

No, feel free not to buy it.

> I've been quiet for a while because, well, first of all, I have been on travel, and secondly -- in all honesty -- I wanted to see who would be the next one
> to blindly sit around and defend Amiga Inc's stupidity without actually being able to back it up.

Gee, that really makes you sound intellectually superior.

> In regards to benchmarks,

Screw benchmarks. I think an AmigaOne with a G3 will do what I want it to in a satisfactory manner. And it will do so without MS Windows. That's what
I want from my computer. If you want a regular PC, you can just get a regular PC. I won't stop you. I won't even question your choice.

Now, I'd like to know: All those who constantly bicker about Amiga Inc., AmigaOne and AOS4, what are you trying to achieve? If you don't want the
product, don't buy it. I get the impression that some of you are doing your very best to discourage the rest of us from getting what we want. Why
is that? Does it give you some sort of kick? The AmigaOne and AOS4 are coming. Most of the work has been done, and discontinuing it would mean a
great loss to all parties involved. Why not just let us poor feeble minds who wants it in peace?

Kay

[KennyR]

So I should pay 200% for 50% of the machine simply because Amiga dealers can't figure out how to gouge the price of an x86 machine?

No-one's forcing you to buy the A1. And small companies competing against big corporations have no chance. That much is inarguable. Comparing the price of the A1 to a PC m/b is both unfair, and to be brutally honest, stupid.

would give you an EXACT benchmark of what each CPU is capable of

There's no such thing! CPUs all differ in abilities and specialities. Some might be better at number crunching for Lightwave5. You simply cannot compare different families of CPU in a specific test like that.

And as Kay said, benchmarks suck. You can get them to say whatever you want. There are other benchmarks - such as RC5 - that show just as "conclusively" that the PPC range smash the x86 into oblivion.

or those of you who bought G3 accelerators earlier, stick with them.

Er, none of us did. Looks like you deserve that doll more than I do. Dear dear, yet another non-amiga user who thinks he can dictate or even judge what happens in a community he isn't part of.

For those of you teetering on the line, you'd be better off and have a hell of a lot more support just buying a good (and cheap) PC and running BeOS.

BeOS is dead. Deader than Amiga.

[vortexau]

In 1908 Henry Ford charged $825 for a T-Model. By 1916 the price had dropped to $360 although he sold EVERY one he built!

Are those 'A1 Price Wingers' of the opinion that FORD was "gouging" the American motorists $465 in 1908?

I have an Australian Amiga price list from 1985...... the 1000 (A1000) heads the list at $3500.
The (A)1010 External 3.5" 880k ds/dd drive is number three on the list at $850.
The (A)1050 256k RAM expansion cartridge is $575.

The 1985 Amiga Pioneers bought their 'kit' inspite of THOSE prices. Without their committment the Amiga would have never outlasted 1987!

Amiga Diehards are growing extremely tired of the 'A1 Price Wingers' and the 'x86 Droolers'...... maybe arstechnica is YOUR kind of place?