What was the Best and "not so good" Amiga Models?

[xeron]

Best is a toss up between the 3000 and 4000T. The 3000 had scandoubling, SCSI, and was very well made.

The 4000T had SCSI *and* IDE, a nice big roomy case, AGA, and a certain amount of prestige that it commands.

Worst? They all have their faults. The A4000 has battery leakage problems, trouble with early buster models, and Paula-audio death seems fairly common, but otherwise they're really nice machines.

The 500+ was alright, it wasn't Commodores fault that game programmers relied upon certain undocumented features of the Kickstart 1.x ROMs (or worst of all expecting routines to be at fixed addresses).

At the end of the day, all Amigas are bloody great, imho :-)

[xeron]

Well, AFAIK the A600 was released after the A1200, but it had much less features.

Nope. I personally know of two people who bought an A600 as it was the latest model, only to be really annoyed that the 1200 was announced shortly afterwards.

It had a lower price, but that didn't seem to help much. A 020 and some fastmem would have made it faster, but it still lacked the AGA which everyone wanted at that time.

There were no AGA machines when it was released. Not for a few months, anyway.

[xeron]

The A500 is not a 'low quality' computer. It is very well manufactured, and likely to last you a long time.

[xeron]

Considering the extremely high price of the A2000 at the time, if Commodore hadn't released the A500 line the Amiga wouldn't have made it any further, period.

Considering the market the A500 was designed for, the fact that very few of them are going to be regularily stood on by elephants, the A500 does what it was designed for, and it does it very well.