Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: lassie on August 05, 2012, 09:19:59 PM
-
Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why
i like my amiga 4000 and amiga 600 the best, i find that almost all games run good on them. but i also like my old amiga 2000 that old girl still keeps going :-)
-
I like my A1200 as it is very expandable (it was even on release) and started using lower cost, industry standard parts e.g. IDE, SIMMS etc.
If I had the choice of a big box Amiga, it would be close between a 4000T and an upgraded A1200 in a tower case.
-
Amiga 4000 for me, definitely. It's the only way to have the compatibility of AGA and the expandability of the big box Amigas. The 2000 and 3000 were both very good, but the 3000 used ZIP RAMS and had limited space. The 2000 was great but only Zorro II. The 4000 has its faults but overall it's the most versatile, and it still surprises me some of the things it can do when it's pumped up enough.
Still have a soft spot for the A1200 though for a quick WHDLoad game, and the A600 is just cute. :)
-
It's almost a tie between my 4000T and 3000T, those don't have whacky problems and are expandable.
-
A3000 and A1000. Both incredible machines when they came out and made with little compromise.
-
My humble opinion:
I thought Commodore's shinning moment was the release of the Amiga 3000. Some of my thoughts:
-They pushed the consumer, education, and workstation market with it.
-They ported Unix to it and did a great job of it!
-They had premier support services to make it more attractive in the Workstation market.
-The manuals were very well done; both the Amiga and AMIX manuals.
-They actually had advertising and media events.
-It looked like a workstation computer with both a desktop and tower version.
-Inside, it was really a good computer with lots of nice components.
-The higher-educational push was a great deal and helped to get Amiga's into some really nice universities. AMIX did exceptionally well against A/UX and other unices.
-Amiga Vision was a great product to combine many of these items together.
I just thought Commodore was at their best during this period. The computer was great, the articles favorable, Commodore's stock did well, and it felt like a professional Commodore with a great machine.
By the time the 4000 shipped, the market was much different. The Amiga was loosing market share rapidly, Commodore looked confused, and all of it felt different. Windows was really taking off and Commodore didn't seem like a contender anymore.
I sold my 3000 and bought a 4000. I loved AGA but the rest of it seemed iffy. About a year (more or less) later I sold all my Amiga stuff as the writing on the wall was pretty clear.
I also felt the Amiga 1200 was a great replacement for the 500 on the low-end.
-P
-
Is Amiga 1000 rare? i dont see them for sale here in denmark. and they are not on ebay very often. are they easy to upgrade or is it hard
-
Definitely the A3000 was made at or close to the peak of Commodore's interest in the Amiga, at least compared to the 4000. There's loads of bits and pieces about the 4000 that were never finished (bugs in Buster, 2MB Chip RAM limit despite 8MB support on the motherboard). Interestingly there's also support for the 68020 on A4000 motherboards, which shows just how little idea Commodore had about what to do with the machine.
Doesn't change the fact it rocks though. :)
-
It a shame commodore went under in 1994, one would think they could keep it going with all the machines they sold over the years. but i think they made some bad choices. The amiga cd32 was a good console, but i think they should have shipped it with 040 cpu and 4 mb ram, so it could compete with the new pc and playstation. it was a time where 3d games took of
-
It a shame commodore went under in 1994, one would think they could keep it going with all the machines they sold over the years. but i think they made some bad choices. The amiga cd32 was a good console, but i think they should have shipped it with 040 cpu and 4 mb ram, so it could compete with the new pc and playstation. it was a time where 3d games took of
I doubt that would have been practical. The 040 was expensive, power hungry and hot and were only used by Commodore in their big-box systems.
What the system really needed was Fast RAM, even if it was only an additional 1MB. That and something better than akiko for chunky graphics support. If not a real chunky display, then at least an implementation of akiko that could both perform the C2P and write the result to Chip RAM directly, rather than being something you wrote to, read the results back from and then wrote them to Chip RAM yourself. All that data shuffling didn't do performance any favours.
-
I have to vote for the A500. It was the cheapest of all Amiga models, so it really brought Amiga to the masses. And it didn`t even sacrifice much expandability. When you got an A590 and a KCS-PC emulator you where as powerful as a reasonably expanded A2000. Furthermore, when the A500 was introduced, it`s technologoy was still ahead of virtually any generic machine on the market. Later models like the A3000 and the A1200 didn`t seem as superior to the newest (and most expensive) sound cards and graphics adapters.
-
A3000 (T) was a super machine, best I ever owned.
I liked my A4000 with '060 and graphics card, but I'll always be partial to my first, the A3000. If I ever buy another classic Amiga, it'll certainly be an A3000.
I always disliked the wedge Amiga systems and AIO PC's, still do.
-
So little love for the 1200?
With the humble 1200, you get:
AGA (you can use various tricks to run old software on your 1200, but nothing will get an AGA title to run on an ECS machine)
2 megs chip RAM built in.
A wealth of reasonably priced upgrade options for processors and RAM today.
Hard drive interface already in the machine
PCMCIA interface, making for extremely easy file transfers and networking.
On top of that, back in the day, the 1200 was quite affordable, even on a budget. Sure, a 3000 or 4000 was great but you'd pay through the nose.
-
I wish i had an Amiga 1200 but mayby i will get one in the future :-) it sounds like a cool machine.
Right now i have my Amiga 4000 and 3 x 2000 and Amiga 600 and the good old 500 :-)
and the only console amiga made the cd32. hope i can save up to a 1200 soon.
-
Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why
A new classic Amiga 8).
What the system really needed was Fast RAM, even if it was only an additional 1MB. That and something better than akiko for chunky graphics support. If not a real chunky display, then at least an implementation of akiko that could both perform the C2P and write the result to Chip RAM directly, rather than being something you wrote to, read the results back from and then wrote them to Chip RAM yourself. All that data shuffling didn't do performance any favours.
I agree. Just 1 MB of fast ram (in a SIMM slot preferably) would have been much better than the Akiko.
-
A1200 definitly.
-
I love my 600. Perfect size for sitting next to my PC's keyboard. Also some nice modding options.
-
Hi yes it is a cool little Amiga :-) i have 4 mb ram and 4 giga hard disks, but do you know if that is good for whdload? many of my games frezzes when i try to load them
-
I doubt that would have been practical. The 040 was expensive, power hungry and hot and were only used by Commodore in their big-box systems.
What the system really needed was Fast RAM, even if it was only an additional 1MB. That and something better than akiko for chunky graphics support. If not a real chunky display, then at least an implementation of akiko that could both perform the C2P and write the result to Chip RAM directly, rather than being something you wrote to, read the results back from and then wrote them to Chip RAM yourself. All that data shuffling didn't do performance any favours.
And above all, proper developer support and a disk drive standard built-in so that shovelware would be discouraged (and being neat for savegames and backwards compatibility).
Anyway, my vote goes to the A500. Still ahead of it's time (though not that much as the A1000) AND affordable for many.
-
A1200 definitly.
A3000 and A1000. Both incredible machines when they came out and made with little compromise.
I have a commodore 128d and i think from the pictures i have seen of amiga 1000 that they look a lot alike
-
My vote is for the A1000 and A4000. The A1000 because it was the First Amiga I owned and was expanded all the way up to WB 3.1 using a Rejuvinator with 1MB Fat Agnus, Comspec SA100 SCSI Controller and 2 AX1000 2MB Ram Expansions.
Although I liked the A3000 Case and features I hated the use Of Zip RAMs for Memory Expansion.
-
I would be hard pressed to own just one. The 500 was my first and only for 4 or 5 years and I'm still impressed with all that it could do. I liked its looks, too.
It would be easier to like list models I've never owned: 4000, CDTV, & CD32. I wouldn't mind a CDTV. I have multiples of most of the rest. I enjoy expanding them for different purposes and uses.
-
Hi yes it is a cool little Amiga :-) i have 4 mb ram and 4 giga hard disks, but do you know if that is good for whdload? many of my games frezzes when i try to load them
Some worked and some didn't. I ended up buying an accelerater for it in the end.
-
I would say the 4000T. But, I still have a soft spot for the old A2000. The A2000 or 2000HD can be molded into many tasks. Damned good machine!
-
The Best C= Amiga technologically speaking, is the Amiga 4000, although not was improver the audio features, like said the same Jay Miner(RIP), back in time. The problem nowdays with the A4000, its very hard find cards, and other thing for expansion.
In this times, the best is the Amiga 1200, becouse its more easy to expand, and keep updated.
The Amiga 600, its very nice machine design, you know, could be great with A1200 power in any A600 case.
The Amiga 3000, was a great machine, the internal scandoubler and VGA conector.. that feature should be incluided in the A600, A1200 and A4000.
The A2000, the king of Amiga Big Boxes!!. For the time very expandible and very good quality. Not AGA.
The A500, the most popular Amiga ever. Nice back in time, for a 80s & 90s hoping boy!
And the Queen Ever! - The Amiga 1000. Say no more!
-
I love the look of the 3000T and thought it had some great expansion options. If I could I would get one for sure. I just think the case looks great.
-
I have owned at least one of every Amiga model ever produced, and my favorite is the Amiga 2000. I also like the Amiga 500. I have owned several Amiga 1200 computers in like new condition, with their original boxes. They were very low quality, poorly made crap, so I sold them. I owned several Amiga 4000 computers, also in like new condition. Again, very low quality and poorly designed crap. Sold them too, before I started having problems with them. Do not even get me started on the Amiga 600 junk. The only zorro 3 Amiga I like is the Amiga 3000, but, it has major design flaws too, and the quality is not as high as the Amiga 2000 or the 500. Remember, the most popular and number one selling Amiga model is the Amiga 500.
PERSONAL EXPERIANCE: I always have problems with "surface mount" Amiga models. I almost never have problems with the "thru-hole" Amiga models. I never have any problems with Workbench 1.3 to 3.1. I always have problems with Workbench 3.5 and 3.9. I think it is because these particular Workbenches were NOT done by Commodore, but by greedy jerks that just wanted to continue making money by bringing out "newer versions" of the old Amiga OS.
SUMMERY: Amiga 2000 or 500 with KS / WB 1.3 to 3.1 equals almost no problems, works great. Anything newer, nothing but problems. So, you decide which is the best Amiga models, and BE HONEST (do not let personal ego interfer with your judgement).
-
Why, the Mil-Spec (tm) Amiga 2000, of course.
Seriously, I'm not certain I can name a favorite. I have one of each of the desktop models (no towers and no special editions,) and each one has been great for its particular purposes. My 4000D is my main machine, but a favorite? Can't really say. I love all my children equally ;)
-
It a shame commodore went under in 1994, one would think they could keep it going with all the machines they sold over the years. but i think they made some bad choices. The amiga cd32 was a good console, but i think they should have shipped it with 040 cpu and 4 mb ram, so it could compete with the new pc and playstation. it was a time where 3d games took of
It's easy to forget how costly an '040 was back in 1993. However I do agree that both the A1200 and especially the CD32 should have come with fast RAM by default, and the A1200 should have been configurable out of the box with 4MB and 6MB options (an easy upsell from the base price). A 20MHz '020 would have made a difference, but I guess the CPU selected was restricted by Motorola's pricing at the time.
-
Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why
i like my amiga 4000 and amiga 600 the best, i find that almost all games run good on them. but i also like my old amiga 2000 that old girl still keeps going :-)
While the Amiga 500 was the most successful one, and definitely the one who meant the most for the Amiga's success, I like the A1200 better. But IMHO it arrived a couple of years too late...
-
It's easy to forget how costly an '040 was back in 1993. However I do agree that both the A1200 and especially the CD32 should have come with fast RAM by default, and the A1200 should have been configurable out of the box with 4MB and 6MB options (an easy upsell from the base price). A 20MHz '020 would have made a difference, but I guess the CPU selected was restricted by Motorola's pricing at the time.
Mind that this was also during a time when the competition was paying a tonne of money on custom-designed consoles with not-so-inexpensive processors: the Sony PlayStation, the Nintendo 64, and the ill-fated Sega Saturn. While everyone was clamoring for more powerful consoles, the Sega Genesis still held quite a field four years after release with its 68000 processor and Z80 co-processor. As well, the NeoGeo was still a powerful game machine with the same processor specs as the Genesis. The CD32 could have been much more than it was when released, IMO.
It amuses me that Atari was approached by both Nintendo and Sega to market their consoles and Atari couldn't agree with either. Whoops!
-
I liked my A4000D a lot. I just love the case, as I don't like large towers. It was nice to see everything fit in from my CSPPC to the Mediator and PCI cards. Originally I built it to try OS4 but then I sold the most "valuable" parts (csppc, mediator) even before it came out.
Nowadays I quite like my A1200/030, which was my second amiga after the A500+ back in the early 90s. Again I like how many expensions fit in the nice looking case. Today I use it for some whdload retro gaming using an Indivision and a flash card. Its cool to have a completely silent computer after all.
So even if they were by far not as technically ahead of their time anymore(probably even slightly oudated) as the original amiga when it came out, from my personal "amiga experience" A1200/A4000D are the best.
-
Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why
An A4000 or A4000T as both are quite expandable without sandwitch cards. A1200 is great if you don't plan to add too many cards: e.g. just accelerator and flickerfixer... it's kinda "portable" too. When you start to add PCI/Zorro slots to 1200 I prefer to use A4000 as it's more stable and expansion is much better OOTB.
If I only could have one miggy I would probably have a desktop A4000D: it offers me RTG, 060, USB2.0, network, enough space for a pair of HDs and DVD... all in a nice case.
-
i love my a1200 ..has everything i need aga upgraded 030 heaps ram ..runs everything i throw at it ..more or less ..love my cd32 cause it can play movies with the fmv card ..which for its time was a very good bit of hardware ..before dvds came along..but for most time just playing with my computer has to be my a500 ...still got my original workbench 1.3 model bought for 800.00 aust dollars brand new ..have added harddrives ..dvd drives superfat agnes wb 2.04 an now 3.1 ..ran pctask an got 286 games plodding along ..games till 4am some nights ..still in fully working condition ..a500 had the most ports you could do anything to it it seems..vortex pc emulator a570 cdrom parnetted networked even put it online ...best computer a500 ....most used now a1200 ..
-
Mind that this was also during a time when the competition was paying a tonne of money on custom-designed consoles with not-so-inexpensive processors: the Sony PlayStation, the Nintendo 64, and the ill-fated Sega Saturn. While everyone was clamoring for more powerful consoles, the Sega Genesis still held quite a field four years after release with its 68000 processor and Z80 co-processor. As well, the NeoGeo was still a powerful game machine with the same processor specs as the Genesis. The CD32 could have been much more than it was when released, IMO.
It amuses me that Atari was approached by both Nintendo and Sega to market their consoles and Atari couldn't agree with either. Whoops!
Hi yes i think the Amiga cd32 is a cool console, i have 2 myself :-) but it is a shame that it was mainly old Amiga games they put out on it ( not that they are not good ) but i think they could have make some cool games for it. mayby it was because commodore went under 7 months after the released that they did not make new games for it. But still i think its a fine console, and i have almost all the old consoles from sega and nintendo. take sega cd, the amiga have 4 or 8 times the ram the sega cd has, and 20 times the colour.
-
i love my a1200 ..has everything i need aga upgraded 030 heaps ram ..runs everything i throw at it ..more or less ..love my cd32 cause it can play movies with the fmv card ..which for its time was a very good bit of hardware ..before dvds came along..but for most time just playing with my computer has to be my a500 ...still got my original workbench 1.3 model bought for 800.00 aust dollars brand new ..have added harddrives ..dvd drives superfat agnes wb 2.04 an now 3.1 ..ran pctask an got 286 games plodding along ..games till 4am some nights ..still in fully working condition ..a500 had the most ports you could do anything to it it seems..vortex pc emulator a570 cdrom parnetted networked even put it online ...best computer a500 ....most used now a1200 ..
Hi i dont have fmv card in my amiga cd32 but i have it in my Philips cdi so i watch old movies on that :-) yes its quite cool to see movies on a cd 5 years before the dvds came along
-
It a shame commodore went under in 1994, one would think they could keep it going with all the machines they sold over the years. but i think they made some bad choices. The amiga cd32 was a good console, but i think they should have shipped it with 040 cpu and 4 mb ram, so it could compete with the new pc and playstation. it was a time where 3d games took of
No way they could've used 040 in a console in 1993. 020 was good for a console but they should've used 1 MB Fast RAM instead of Akiko. Remember that Playstation was released more than one year later than CD32. You should compare CD32 to SNES, MegaDrive, PC CDROM and CDi.
CDTV and A600 shouldn't have been released at all, with a extended availability of the A500 Plus 6-12 months longer.
A1200 should have been configurable to 2 MB chip or 1 MB chip and 1 MB fast (expandable to 2 MB chip and 4 MB fast).
I agree that A3000 was released when Commodore/Amiga peaked.
-
Interestingly there's also support for the 68020 on A4000 motherboards, which shows just how little idea Commodore had about what to do with the machine.
Doesn't change the fact it rocks though. :)
I guess the plan was to have a really cheap 020-based A4000 (or a big box A1200, maybe called A1400 if you want) but as the A4000 was based on A3000 (which used 030) they lately discovered how much changes they would have to do on the cpu card and/or motherboard.
-
I have to vote for the A500. It was the cheapest of all Amiga models, so it really brought Amiga to the masses.
Agreed. The A500 is the winner by a mile if the criterion is contemporary price/performance ratio. Never again would the the Amiga have such a crushing advantage over the competition as in 1987. The 2000 had a nice big expansion case but was very expensive relative to the 500 (more than double the price in Europe).
-
Mind that this was also during a time when the competition was paying a tonne of money on custom-designed consoles with not-so-inexpensive processors: the Sony PlayStation, the Nintendo 64, and the ill-fated Sega Saturn.
There were massive leaps made during the mid-90s for consoles, the CD32 was just a little too early and underpowered (the RAM configuration really didn't help), and AGA wasn't good enough for a mid-90s console, especially as it was a full bitmap display compared with the competing Genesis and SNES tile-based graphics, and then underpowered compared with the Saturn, Jaguar and Playstation. Then again, AGA was a hack because AA was dead. The nature of computer games was changing at the time and adding a chunky "byteplane" mode would have really helped for the Doom-likes and 3D games.
As for my favourite Amiga, it would have to go to the A500 - the one that brought the Amiga to the masses. I had a KS1.2 Amiga 500. Then an A1200, which didn't have the same feel to it. I just wish that the A1200 had also come in a more expandable A1000 style case.
-
Agreed. The A500 is the winner by a mile if the criterion is contemporary price/performance ratio. Never again would the the Amiga have such a crushing advantage over the competition as in 1987. The 2000 had a nice big expansion case but was very expensive relative to the 500 (more than double the price in Europe).
The A500 was perfect for 1987. The A2000 wasn't good enough to justify the extra price.
By 1989 they needed one Amiga board with at least 8 bit chunky graphics modes. The all in one computer was out of date by then & it killed the market having two ranges of expansions.
Milking the a500 until 1991, when it was only marginally upgraded to the a500 plus was commercial suicide.
-
No way they could've used 040 in a console in 1993. 020 was good for a console but they should've used 1 MB Fast RAM instead of Akiko. Remember that Playstation was released more than one year later than CD32. You should compare CD32 to SNES, MegaDrive, PC CDROM and CDi.
CDTV and A600 shouldn't have been released at all, with a extended availability of the A500 Plus 6-12 months longer.
A1200 should have been configurable to 2 MB chip or 1 MB chip and 1 MB fast (expandable to 2 MB chip and 4 MB fast).
I agree that A3000 was released when Commodore/Amiga peaked.
Hi yes your are right when i think about it, 040 cpu in 1993 was quite expensive i can imagnine, but if they change the ram as you talked about, do you think they could run doom clones better? still with the 020 cpu.
-
Hi yes your are right when i think about it, 040 cpu in 1993 was quite expensive i can imagnine, but if they change the ram as you talked about, do you think they could run doom clones better? still with the 020 cpu.
Not really - maybe with a 28 MHz '020. Chunky graphics would also have helped. Even with this, getting textured floor/ceilings probably wouldn't have happened, as they're a CPU hog in a ray-casting engine.
-
I have owned almost every amiga over the last 20+ years and to me the best is the Amiga 3000 Desktop.
It has the best quality feel of any Amiga. Some of the reasons already mentioned are great ones, here are a few more reasons:
1. The 3000 Keyboards were the best that commodore ever made, Even a 4000 Tower Keyboard, which looks almost identical, doesn't have the same quality mechanism. IMHO, the 3000 keyboards feel the best.
2. The footprint and look of it, I owned a 3000T and I still prefer the Desktop. It seems the right size to me.
3. The metal, buttons, screws, and all the components were a better quality. It feels like quality in using one.
It is a very subjective thing, but to me a decked out 3000D is the perfect package for an Amiga computer.
Lastly, if a user properly cared for a 3000 from the beginning they will last forever. Sadly many 3000's have battery damage. Leaky batteries will hurt a 3000, faster than most any other Amiga because of where the battery is located.
3 Tips for a 3000D owner.
1. Don't let the battery leak.
2. Keep powersupply and vents clean for good airflow.
3. Keep in open area with good cool air. Lifting a 3000 on it's rubber legs will better cool the bottom.
-
I have owned all models except for A3000T, so I can't speak to that model.
IMO the A2000 & A1200 were the best models. The 2000 because of its expandability and reliability - a beast of a machine, the 1200 because of its price point (after its initial release cost was lowered). You got AGA and soon after the ability to expand in many ways if you wanted.
The desktop A3000s and A4000s - they were nice, but weren't much of a departure from standard Amiga fare, really, other than the bus speed / processor slot architecture.
I had an A1200T/blizz060/ppc in a tower - was only zorro II, but I ran many of the same things comparably fast in relation to A3000/A4000. Only thing that made it choke was that Picasso IV wanted more bus.
Even if you look at it from a Toaster standpoint - The A2000 sort of wins as the toaster 4000 wasn't that much of a different beast than toaster 2.0/3.x or what not. Essentially a video switcher + effects. AGA aside, to me, you're basically in the same video land with the Toaster 2000 + some 030 or above processor.
Although the A3k and a4k offered easier access to graphics enhancements, 24bit was becoming commonplace around that time, and although Amiga had the upper hand with great gfx/paint software (TVpaint, many others), it was easy to see even as a user at the time that RTG and graphics addons for the amiga was a dead end.
-
T... then underpowered compared with the Saturn, Jaguar and Playstation.
To be fair.
CD32 - September 1993
Saturn - November 22, 1994
Playstation - 1994 (Japan)
Jaguar - November 23, 1993
So, only the cartridge based Jaguar was released around the same time.
And although "doing the math" showed it to have lots of BITS, not a lot of the games took advantage of it...
In fact, there are a lot of Amiga looking games on the Jag...
Without the XOR patent issue and if they would have just added 1M of true FAST RAM, who knows what would have happened...
(That and stopping those lazy ports.. Seriously, a controller like that, and you still have games that you have to press the joypad UP to jump :rant: ).
The best Amiga to me is still the A1000. The original. It was a huge jump.
All of the others are incremental updates, and too slow and not enough for the time at that. Doesn't mean they weren't great. I love my A1200.
But I gotta go with the 1000..
desiv
-
To be fair.
CD32 - September 1993
Saturn - November 22, 1994
Playstation - 1994 (Japan)
Jaguar - November 23, 1993
True. I know this doesn't reference my post, but I do want to point out that while those machines were released later than the CD32, the development occurred during the same time-period. For instance, what we know now as the Sony PlayStation actually started development around late-1992, with four years of prior concept and joint development with Nintendo.
The best Amiga to me is still the A1000. The original. It was a huge jump.
All of the others are incremental updates, and too slow and not enough for the time at that. Doesn't mean they weren't great. I love my A1200.
But I gotta go with the 1000..
Yeah, I could see this. The 1000 was definitely a giant leap forward in home computing (arguable against the Mac-heads.) I would also say that the 500 and 2000 were also fairly good leaps forward: the 500 solidified the Amiga concept and the 2000 gave the Amiga a PC-worldly affect.
-
Your own one.....:drink:
-
With the CD32, I think the intention was just to get it to market, interest an existing audience and then work on something later.
From what I recall from an old post by Haynie, the CD32 basically sold out in the UK. Commodore's inability to build and sell enough was part of sealing the coffin.
So yeah, it'd have been doomed very shortly, but at the time, it was well received.
-
With the CD32, I think the intention was just to get it to market, interest an existing audience and then work on something later.
From what I recall from an old post by Haynie, the CD32 basically sold out in the UK. Commodore's inability to build and sell enough was part of sealing the coffin.
So yeah, it'd have been doomed very shortly, but at the time, it was well received.
Yes you are right for what i read :) i have 2 Amiga cd32 and i think they are some fine machines, sure they could not handle 3D very well, but still there are some cool games for it, i use mine a lot :)
-
Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why
i like my amiga 4000 and amiga 600 the best, i find that almost all games run good on them. but i also like my old amiga 2000 that old girl still keeps going :-)
A3000 with SCSI hard drive and deinterlacer.
Most PRO Amiga by standard, A4000 with IDE and no flicker was just tower A1200 with better CPU.
A3000 introduced ECS (Productivity) as well as AmigaOS 2.x which is most revolutionary. A3000T came as first real tower and A3000U with UNIX.
Sadly A3000+ was discarded - 040 CPU, DSP, AGA, KS 3.x
-
A3000 with SCSI hard drive and deinterlacer.
Most PRO Amiga by standard, A4000 with IDE and no flicker was just tower A1200 with better CPU.
A3000 introduced ECS (Productivity) as well as AmigaOS 2.x which is most revolutionary. A3000T came as first real tower and A3000U with UNIX.
Sadly A3000+ was discarded - 040 CPU, DSP, AGA, KS 3.x
I have never seen an Amiga 3000 in real life. Are you lucky to have one?
-
I have never seen an Amiga 3000 in real life. Are you lucky to have one?
No. Now have a better one, at that time it was way too expensive.
http://www.efunzine.com/efnz.php?a=pro&id=95&sid=1f562b296860350decaa3e30f87706f7
http://www.efunzine.com/efnz.php?a=pro&id=215&sid=1f562b296860350decaa3e30f87706f7
CDTV was more revolutionary and stylish then cheap CD32
Out of Classic clone, DraCo is far superior (neva had one, too!)
http://amiga.resource.cx/mod/draco.html
http://www.gregdonner.org/workbench/wb_draco.html
From
http://anticusa.wordpress.com/amiga-resources-2012/
-
In my opinion the A4000T, best of the breed at the time. Anyone know the details of the AAA chipset that was in development? And any known future chipsets that were more or less just ideas or sketches etc..? I wonder how far in the future Commodore was planning..
-
In my opinion the A4000T, best of the breed at the time. Anyone know the details of the AAA chipset that was in development? And any known future chipsets that were more or less just ideas or sketches etc..? I wonder how far in the future Commodore was planning..
Read Hombre and AAA articles on Wiki as orientation.
That WOULD NOT be Amiga in way Classics want it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Hombre_chipset
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_chipset
Its good AmigaOS went PPC and they went busted knowing that.
CUSA calls on it as well as CommodorePC when needed to distance from Amiga, but forgot it contributed to fall of Commodore.
Best was supposed to be Falcon like scrapped A3000+
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_3000
An enhanced version, the Amiga 3000+, with the AGA chipset and an AT&T DSP3210 signal processing chip was produced to prototype stage in 1991. Although this system was never released, Commodore's negotiations with AT&T over the proper way to bundle their VCOS/VCAS operating system software in a personal computer environment helped Apple Computer deliver their AV-series Macintosh systems, two years later.[2]
-
So little love for the 1200?
With the humble 1200, you get:
AGA (you can use various tricks to run old software on your 1200, but nothing will get an AGA title to run on an ECS machine)
2 megs chip RAM built in.
A wealth of reasonably priced upgrade options for processors and RAM today.
Hard drive interface already in the machine
PCMCIA interface, making for extremely easy file transfers and networking.
On top of that, back in the day, the 1200 was quite affordable, even on a budget. Sure, a 3000 or 4000 was great but you'd pay through the nose.
the 1200 is a cut down machine with a ton of bottlenecks,bad psu stock,silly clock port and unbuffered ide. you got what you paid for.It was intended to be a simple machine without much expansion.
I own many amiga's and love them all BUT..the 4000 is a better value from the get go because you got a 040,could expand to 16MB ram,150watt psu,room for a cdrom,and Zorro3(room for a gfx card etc),easily switched pal or ntsc defualt with a jumper. Its simply a matter of you get what you pay for. The 1200 even with a mediator has a tiny 8Mb window(bottleneck) compared to the 3000/4000 mediator which is 256/512 window.the pcmcia is handy however!. Even a fully expanded 1200 is about half the speed of a 4000 expanded and there is no real options for gfx cards other than the bvision which needed a ppc or a mediator(read : slow).The most max expanded 1200 is still slower than a max expanded 4000.By the time you expand a 1200 to 4000 specs you have spent a good deal of money and usually have a not so reliable machine with many dongles(because it doesn't have a proper expansion bus). It all comes down to what you intend to do with it of course.
Someone mentioned the buster on the 4000 was not finished,but this applied to the 3000 also,they use the same buster. Many 3000's came with buster 7 which meant no working zorro3. changing to buster 9 or 11 solved this.The 3000 was a great machine(other than slow ecs),zip ram,case and the old now tarnishing sockets. The 3000T and 4000T are really great machines. The only upgrade a 3000T could of used is a engine and wheels to move it :rofl:
-
In my opinion the A4000T, best of the breed at the time. Anyone know the details of the AAA chipset that was in development? And any known future chipsets that were more or less just ideas or sketches etc..? I wonder how far in the future Commodore was planning..
take a look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Hombre_chipset
Mech
-
I've had upgraded 1200's, but honestly have had the most fun with them when they're modestly expanded ('030 and large HD) and used for gaming. For any type of serious expansion, you'll be much happier starting with a 3000 or 4000, heck, even a 2000.
-
I've had upgraded 1200's, but honestly have had the most fun with them when they're modestly expanded ('030 and large HD) and used for gaming. For any type of serious expansion, you'll be much happier starting with a 3000 or 4000, heck, even a 2000.
Then i am lucky since i have 3 Amiga 2000 and 1 Amiga 4000 :)
-
Then i am lucky since i have 3 Amiga 2000 and 1 Amiga 4000 :)
Yes, very lucky. :pint: My first big-box was an A2000 I picked up some years ago, and spent a long while hunting down various expansions making it perfect for me. (The 2000 is definitely one of my favorites!) Up until that point, I had always had 500's and 1200's. I really enjoyed being able to buy cards, then plop them in the huge case without any fuss, or worry about cooling or power. My first RTG card was a CV64/3D, which was simply amazing compared to AGA.
Expanding the 1200 much beyond an accelerator and a few do-dads always felt like a complete hack-fest, not to mention the sheer terror of the clockport, and mounting challenges increasing the risk of frying something. Even the accelerator can be a pain, since most of them have the CPU facing down - I really despised having the 1200 "up on blocks" when I had the Blizz 1260 in there, simply ridiculous when you can't close the trapdoor and call it good.
-
Yes, very lucky. :pint: My first big-box was an A2000 I picked up some years ago, and spent a long while hunting down various expansions making it perfect for me. (The 2000 is definitely one of my favorites!) Up until that point, I had always had 500's and 1200's. I really enjoyed being able to buy cards, then plop them in the huge case without any fuss, or worry about cooling or power. My first RTG card was a CV64/3D, which was simply amazing compared to AGA.
Expanding the 1200 much beyond an accelerator and a few do-dads always felt like a complete hack-fest, not to mention the sheer terror of the clockport, and mounting challenges increasing the risk of frying something. Even the accelerator can be a pain, since most of them have the CPU facing down - I really despised having the 1200 "up on blocks" when I had the Blizz 1260 in there, simply ridiculous when you can't close the trapdoor and call it good.[/QUOTE
Yes there sure is some space in those Amiga 2000. And they are some heavy machines, they sure did not Compromise when they build them :) i am glad to have mine, even if they take up a lot of space in my apartment :) What Amigas do you have now?
-
Amiga 1000, the only Amiga that was the best desktop computer, AND best looking, in the world on the day it was launched. Downhill all the way from A500 really.
A1200 once reduced to £299 was a good machine too, not at £399 without SIMM slots for fast ram though. 2.5" IDE was a classic cockup.
Rest were either ugly, overpriced, cheaply made or had zero improvements over A1000 OCS worth nothing.
The A4000/030 was a special dead turkey, all people wanted was a 28mhz 020 (same speed) with 2+2 memory in an Amiga 1000/3000 style slim case (for use of cheap 3.5 IDE drives) which Commodore could have produced for half the cost of A4000/030. Commodore gave us a 486 priced Amiga with 286 performance....nice!
A4000/040 was at least justifiable in 1991 on spec/price. Not in 92-94 though.
-
What Amigas do you have now?
I have a small collection, mostly 500's and 1200's, a few 600's, 2000's, 3000's, and a 4000D. Also a fair number of Zorro cards and accelerators. One of the 1200's sees the most use these days for the odd game or demo. The others haven't been turned on in quite a while, mainly for lack of time. I wouldn't mind a 4000T someday, but probably won't seek one out unless I suddenly find myself with an abundance of time and money. :-)
-
Amiga 1000, the only Amiga that was the best desktop computer, AND best looking, in the world on the day it was launched. Downhill all the way from A500 really.
A1200 once reduced to £299 was a good machine too, not at £399 without SIMM slots for fast ram though. 2.5" IDE was a classic cockup.
Rest were either ugly, overpriced, cheaply made or had zero improvements over A1000 OCS worth nothing.
The A4000/030 was a special dead turkey, all people wanted was a 28mhz 020 (same speed) with 2+2 memory in an Amiga 1000/3000 style slim case (for use of cheap 3.5 IDE drives) which Commodore could have produced for half the cost of A4000/030. Commodore gave us a 486 priced Amiga with 286 performance....nice!
A4000/040 was at least justifiable in 1991 on spec/price. Not in 92-94 though.
I have a Commodore 128D, i think it looks a lot like the Amiga 1000 in style
-
I have a small collection, mostly 500's and 1200's, a few 600's, 2000's, 3000's, and a 4000D. Also a fair number of Zorro cards and accelerators. One of the 1200's sees the most use these days for the odd game or demo. The others haven't been turned on in quite a while, mainly for lack of time. I wouldn't mind a 4000T someday, but probably won't seek one out unless I suddenly find myself with an abundance of time and money. :-)
I also have an Amiga 600, it is quite a cute little Amiga i think :)
-
Amiga 1000, the only Amiga that was the best desktop computer, AND best looking, in the world on the day it was launched. Downhill all the way from A500 really.
A1200 once reduced to £299 was a good machine too, not at £399 without SIMM slots for fast ram though. 2.5" IDE was a classic cockup.
Rest were either ugly, overpriced, cheaply made or had zero improvements over A1000 OCS worth nothing.
The A4000/030 was a special dead turkey, all people wanted was a 28mhz 020 (same speed) with 2+2 memory in an Amiga 1000/3000 style slim case (for use of cheap 3.5 IDE drives) which Commodore could have produced for half the cost of A4000/030. Commodore gave us a 486 priced Amiga with 286 performance....nice!
A4000/040 was at least justifiable in 1991 on spec/price. Not in 92-94 though.
Yes it sure went fast in the beginning of the 90`s PC were getting bigger and faster very fast, just think of Wolfenstein in 1992 and Doom in 1993, it easy to see why Amiga could not compete with other machines. my Amiga 4000/030 with 18 mb ram can not run Doom very well.
-
"The Amiga" will always have a special place in my heart. Yes, its not the fastest, yes its not the most expandable, but, damn is it ever pretty to look at and use! (For those that don't know, the Amiga 1000 was "The Amiga"). :)
The closest analogy I can come up with is:
It was the first release of a multi-sequel movie where each sequel was either pretty good, or an outright fail, but, it left you always going back to watch the original.
I think the A1200 is the "best bang for the buck" in terms of power and expandability.
I think the A3000 is the best looking of all the powerful Amigas.
I think the A4000 is the top dog if you just want to build the most expandable, most powerful Amiga.
So, what do you do in this situation; pick the one that suits you best, or, get 1 of each and enjoy!
-
For style of the case, I like the A500 best.
But overall, the A1200. Nice desktop all-in-one with impressive expandability, and AGA chipset.
Got a sweet spot for the A600 too.
I've not seen any big box Amigas in real life, so can't compare those,
-
I guess my favourite Amiga model was the one I bought long ago: the A1200, which replaced the A500 I bought 8 months before just to continue writing for the italian Zzap! magazine (they didn't accept anymore documents written with C64 word processors - they were too much a trouble to transfer to the Macintosh and be converted in a compatible ASCII table in the meanwhile). It had everything I needed, since I added in no time 4 MB of Fast RAM and a whopping 40 MB (!!!) IDE hard drive. It's been a little, amazing and fun computer.
Now the place that once was for my A1200 has been taken by my Icaros powered AspireOne A150: quite a nice little platform which gives me back the same emotions. I turn it on and aftware few seconds I am on the Internet. And I can use it for practically everything I did with my A1200, leaving all the boring stuff for more powerful and mainstream platforms.
-
I kinda like the A600 even though it's crap. Dunno why. :D
-
I kinda like the A600 even though it's crap. Dunno why. :D
mayby it is because it is so small its kinda a cool Amiga :)
-
A4000T, hands down. It has all the expandability of an A2000, the options of SCSI and IDE and the latest chipsets.
Plus it is awesome to behold. ;)
-
I have owned at least one of every Amiga model ever produced, and my favorite is the Amiga 2000. I also like the Amiga 500. I have owned several Amiga 1200 computers in like new condition, with their original boxes. They were very low quality, poorly made crap, so I sold them. I owned several Amiga 4000 computers, also in like new condition. Again, very low quality and poorly designed crap. Sold them too, before I started having problems with them. Do not even get me started on the Amiga 600 junk. The only zorro 3 Amiga I like is the Amiga 3000, but, it has major design flaws too, and the quality is not as high as the Amiga 2000 or the 500. Remember, the most popular and number one selling Amiga model is the Amiga 500.
PERSONAL EXPERIANCE: I always have problems with "surface mount" Amiga models. I almost never have problems with the "thru-hole" Amiga models. I never have any problems with Workbench 1.3 to 3.1. I always have problems with Workbench 3.5 and 3.9. I think it is because these particular Workbenches were NOT done by Commodore, but by greedy jerks that just wanted to continue making money by bringing out "newer versions" of the old Amiga OS.
SUMMERY: Amiga 2000 or 500 with KS / WB 1.3 to 3.1 equals almost no problems, works great. Anything newer, nothing but problems. So, you decide which is the best Amiga models, and BE HONEST (do not let personal ego interfer with your judgement).
Damned straight.
I just upgraded my A2000 with an '060 and Picasso II. Loving it. It is my favorite Amiga. Number two is the Amiga 1000. I bought the first one sold in the state of Virginia, USA in October 1985. Still have one. Love it.
My tower A1200 '060 has given me trouble after trouble...
bp
-
Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why
i like my amiga 4000 and amiga 600 the best, i find that almost all games run good on them. but i also like my old amiga 2000 that old girl still keeps going :-)
Hi,
My favorite was the Amiga 1000, I had 4 meg of ram, 6 scsi drives with a supra scsi card, and had 4 floppy drives. It was hard to expand but well worth it when done. Oh yeah, I also upgraded to a 68010 processor.
My next favorite is the CD 32, have the SX-1 expansion, so this thing rocks. Just like a 4000 but it has a built in cd, so I don't have to jump through loops loading it up. I have 2 megs of ram, and a 250 meg hd.
My A4000 is my work computer. Hardly use it anymore since I have Linux on my Intel machine and also have Cloanto's Amiga Forever, which believe it or not is the most useable Amiga of all. It just works. Don't worry about PAL, NTSC, memory, downgrading, floppy or HD game. I click on the ADF and it runs.
Don't need no MAC, or special built PC to run AROS. AF just works.
Don't have to wait 10 years for some programmer to figure out how to make it look and feel like an Amiga because AF just works.
AF is fast, efficient, user friendly, works with most modern day equipment, and it just works.
Did I mention that Amiga Forever (AF) just works
smerf
-
My tower A1200 '060 has given me trouble after trouble...
bp
Same! My first major upgraded Amiga was a towered A1200 with Winner and Mediator board and it. Sucker had all kinds of issues no matter WHAT I did...
I must have sold it in a fit of blind rage because I know I had it one day and it was gone another. That was years and years and years ago. LOVE my A4000T as it is SO much more stable...
-
Amiga 1000, the only Amiga that was the best desktop computer, AND best looking, in the world on the day it was launched. Downhill all the way from A500 really.
I could not disagree more. The Amiga 1000 looked very nice but was limited compared to the Amiga 3000 and 4000.
-No expansion slots/Zorro III
-Only 256k for Kickstart
-No CPU slot
-OCS only
-Side expansion was cumbersome
-No RTC
I could go on...
"Best Desktop"?? Not likely...
-P
-
I could not disagree more. The Amiga 1000 looked very nice but was limited compared to the Amiga 3000 and 4000.
I could go on...
"Best Desktop"?? Not likely...
-P
All true, but idea might be it was revolutionary
-
It's almost a tie between my 4000T and 3000T, those don't have whacky problems and are expandable.
+1 I love my 3000T and would like a 4000 someday, doesn't have to be a tower but with LCD monitors available the 4000 is more desirable to me now. You get AGA and CF cards ext.
-
The A1200 gets my vote. I got mine in September of '94 and it gave me good service for many years. It has a 40 MHz Blizzard 1230 II with 4 Meg of Fast RAM, and a 200 Meg HDD.
Mostly it still works, but I'm having trouble with the HDD.
-
The A4000T is the coolest and most expandable Amiga ever. :)
(http://i46.tinypic.com/2zxmrsk.jpg)
-
The A4000T is the coolest and most expandable Amiga ever. :)
(http://i46.tinypic.com/2zxmrsk.jpg)
OHH! That A4000T looks really good! Nice color on it!
-
-No expansion slots/Zorro III
It had an expansion slot. On the side. It wasn't Zorro III, but it was many many years before Zorro III. That's like complaining that it didn't have PCI or AGP. ;-)
-Only 256k for Kickstart
You could softkick higher if you had extra RAM.
-No CPU slot
But there were CPU accelerators that attached to the CPU and/or side expansion.
-OCS only
No ECS is not really a big deal. Not many people actually used those modes.
I do agree that the big drawback was that it was stuck with 512M CHIP, which is a problem.. Only solution I'm aware of to that is a motherboard replacement, and those are hard to come by...
-Side expansion was cumbersome
That's a matter of opinion. I like side expansions myself.. ;-)
-No RTC
That's silly. Adding a RTC is easy. Lots of expansions came with one.
And considering the jump in technology, the 1000 was a HUGE jump. Most of the other Amigas were littler jumps, and it took way to long to get there..
For it's time, I still say the A1000 was the best.
For today, I'd have to say the A1200. Cost, expansion, features...
The 3000 was great looking and had the built in flicker fixer. Nice. But no improved graphics. (ECS doesn't count)
The 4000 had AGA and lots of slots, but lost the Flicker Fixer.
Nice machines, but no Amiga 1000.. ;-)
desiv
-
OHH! That A4000T looks really good! Nice color on it!
Do you know what those blue lights are with numbers?
-
Looks like some sort of fan control.
-
I could not disagree more. The Amiga 1000 looked very nice but was limited compared to the Amiga 3000 and 4000.
-No expansion slots/Zorro III
-Only 256k for Kickstart
-No CPU slot
-OCS only
-Side expansion was cumbersome
-No RTC
I could go on...
"Best Desktop"?? Not likely...
-P
It had an expansion slot. On the side. It wasn't Zorro III, but it was many many years before Zorro III. That's like complaining that it didn't have PCI or AGP. ;-)
You could softkick higher if you had extra RAM.
But there were CPU accelerators that attached to the CPU and/or side expansion.
No ECS is not really a big deal. Not many people actually used those modes.
I do agree that the big drawback was that it was stuck with 512M CHIP, which is a problem.. Only solution I'm aware of to that is a motherboard replacement, and those are hard to come by...
That's a matter of opinion. I like side expansions myself.. ;-)
That's silly. Adding a RTC is easy. Lots of expansions came with one.
And considering the jump in technology, the 1000 was a HUGE jump. Most of the other Amigas were littler jumps, and it took way to long to get there..
For it's time, I still say the A1000 was the best.
For today, I'd have to say the A1200. Cost, expansion, features...
The 3000 was great looking and had the built in flicker fixer. Nice. But no improved graphics. (ECS doesn't count)
The 4000 had AGA and lots of slots, but lost the Flicker Fixer.
Nice machines, but no Amiga 1000.. ;-)
desiv
Desiv you pretty much covered all I would say.
The A1000 doesn't have the ability for 1mb or 2mb chipram no, but you can still put in an ECS Denise if you like. The side slot is called Zorro 1 and a small side expansion for 4/8mb RAM expansions is not exactly going to use up more deskspace than an A500 with 1084 still.
Anyway it is all opinion but for me seeing as even the A500 plus and A600 didn't improve the number of sound channels or the number of colours on screen in lo-res and lo-res lace it makes no difference. Hence I put A1000 first (does everything an A2000/500 does technically including half-brite and you could add hard drives, SCSI CDROM, 32bit fast RAM with upto 030 accelerators. even had it's own XT bridgeboard style expansion) for 1985 it was AWESOME IMO
And then A1200 mentioned as that was a good deal for £299 after initial launch price discounting kicked in by the following spring, to play Super Stardust on PC you needed a Pentium 100/120mhz vs plain vanilla A1200 @ 14mhz :)
edit: there was an internal 24bit video adaptor, from Germany I think, that plugged into Denise for A500 and that also worked in A1000 so you could even have 24bit graphics even if you discount the DCTV (which you shouldn't). Not saying these parts are easy to find today but then nor is an A2000 with massive upgrade spec easy to find for a price sane people are willing to pay so who cares :)
-
Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why
It`s the one you use.
-
Do you know what those blue lights are with numbers?
Fan and temp controller, can't see exactly wich one but could be one of aeroCool's controllers, but hard to tell on the pic.
-
Fan and temp controller, can't see exactly wich one but could be one of aeroCool's controllers, but hard to tell on the pic.
But it sure could be nice to have this Amiga 4000T :)
-
I could not disagree more. The Amiga 1000 looked very nice but was limited compared to the Amiga 3000 and 4000.
-No expansion slots/Zorro III
-Only 256k for Kickstart
-No CPU slot
-OCS only
-Side expansion was cumbersome
-No RTC
I could go on...
"Best Desktop"?? Not likely...
-P
you are missing the point in that Digiman noted it was the best home computer the day it was launched and it was 'THE Amiga" before Commodore tainted it. Of course future Amiga's had more expandability etc. BUT no one can deny the impact the A1000 had on the entire computer industry and not just the Amiga per say.
My vote is for the almighty Amiga 1000 as not only was it the best looking desktop IMHO but it led the way where all other future Amiga models only followed unfortunately.
-
you are missing the point in that Digiman noted it was the best home computer the day it was launched and it was 'THE Amiga" before Commodore tainted it. Of course future Amiga's had more expandability etc. BUT no one can deny the impact the A1000 had on the entire computer industry and not just the Amiga per say.
My vote is for the almighty Amiga 1000 as not only was it the best looking desktop IMHO but it led the way where all other future Amiga models only followed unfortunately.
Hi have any of you noticed that Commodore 128D looks a lot like Amiga 1000. i have a 128D but no Amiga 1000 :-( but from the pictures i have seen they look a lot like each other
-
Hi have any of you noticed that Commodore 128D looks a lot like Amiga 1000. i have a 128D but no Amiga 1000 :-( but from the pictures i have seen they look a lot like each other
The Commodore 128D (not metal cased model of course, just the plastic one) and the Commodore PC-1 look identical except for the keyboard. It's only an 8086 based PC but hell it's a lot more elegant than those IBM breeze blocks :)
The colour is different too I find. I have a brand new (was sealed when purchased) port cover for A1000 side expansion Zorro slot and it's is more white than the 64C or 128/128D plastics to me.
Going back to 1985 A1000 vs 1987 A500/A2000 all are limited to 512kb chipram and 8mb fast ram AFAIK. The main difference with Amiga 500 is you didn't need to use the side expansion for a 512 chip + 512 fast ram using the trapdoor ram adaptors but on the A1000 512kb all chipram is max memory without Zorro 1 side expansion/internal acceleration. That's about it really in general, don't get me wrong I liked my A2000 too but the cool stuff like VLAB Y/C came out over half a decade later. Excellent keyboards on A2000s as well. They are damned noisy and don't fancy getting a hernia every time I need to switch an A500 on and off (even Atari STs had on/off switch on unit not PSU and C64 and Vic 20....)
In fact I am going to be selling two A2000 keyboards on pissbay soon, not like I will stumble on just a working motherboard cheaper than a complete yellowed A2000 anyway :)
The A4000's HD floppy drive did come in really handy in the 90s with cross-dos though, and you only get that on the A4000. The A1200 really could have done with that drive for a few pence more than the 880kb thing. Super SF2 comes on 8 floppies and needs constant swapping, it's a nightmare!!