Regarding the naming of new A-eon systems

[Hans_]

I'm not saying that using "A" is right, just that "A" often has been used by a lot of companies, without anyone taking much notice.

I don't like any of the suggested AmigaOne names - they're too long

Yes. I just tried typing all of the various Amiga models in to google, using the "A" prefix instead of "Amiga," and only A600 and A1200 brought up any mention of the Amiga. All of the searches returned plenty of computers, phones, tablets, cameras, etc. The first page of A500 not only didn't mention Amiga, but did list the A500 road in Staffordshire and Cheshire, England.

Honestly, this is way too much fuss over one letter. This thread has been going on for three weeks now which far exceeds the impact that any naming scheme will have.

I personally couldn't care less if Apple sold a Mac A4000, unless they called it an "Amiga 4000" or "Amiga A4000." It wouldn't be unethical, amoral, or "parasitic" in the slightest. Likewise, an "AmigaOne A3000" will never be an "Amiga 3000." Having said that, I'd suggest using a different number like "AmigaOne A3041" just to avoid confusion when people inevitably shorten the name in discussions (personally, I'd shorten it to A1-A3041 for clarity, but I'm not everyone).

Hans

[Hans_]

The plan:

• P!ss off/confuse "hardcore Amiga guys" inside this "microcosm" by deliberately infringing on the general de-facto naming convention for real/classic Amiga computers ("it doesn't matter since they won't be buying it anyway").
• Aim for world domination outside this microcosm instead by using the "A + number" naming convention that doesn't mean jack sh!t to anyone outside (only inside), hence it will be kind of meaningless on google.

:rolleyes:

Come now, true "hardcore Amiga guys" would never get confused by this; they know what the difference is between an Amiga 3000 and an AmigaOne-<>. Incidentally, referring to an Amiga 3000 as an A3000 is a simple matter of convenience/laziness; nobody is "infringing" on anything. Tone the rhetoric down a notch, please.

BTW, the name isn't ssolie's decision, and his thoughts on the matter aren't the same as those who are actually making the decisions. So, don't get too carried away and treat his comments like the motivation for all this.

It's encouraging though to see that *practically everyone* (on every forum where this is being discussed) comes with truckloads of suggestions using *anything else* than "A" (you and ssolie are among the few going against the stream). I'd say that most people feel a bit like I do, that it's simply wrong to infringe on the real/classic Amiga de-facto naming convention. It's less encouraging however to see that the polling is not taking place in the open, but behind closed doors. Then it's easy to claim that whatever decision you make, "there was a clear majority behind it".

Actually, aside from suggesting not using A1-A3000, I haven't made any naming suggestions at all. I simply don't think that it's worth all this fuss. As far as I'm concerned, they can call it whatever they like (obscenities excluded, of course ;-) ). They could even call it an AmigaOne-Eketahuna or AmigaOne-Timbuktu for all I care. Maybe I should suggest those names .

It seems to me that this boils down to this: you don't accept AmigaOS 4.x (+hardware) as the next version of AmigaOS after 3.x and, therefore, you can't stand anything that even hints at AmigaOS 4.x and the hardware it runs on being the successor of what's now (unofficially) being called the classic Amiga.

By contrast, AmigaOS 4.x users/developers don't see it that way. They are just as entitled to see AmigaOS 4.x + hardware as the successors of the Amiga as you are to reject that. Some clearly see the link to the past as strong enough that it should be reflected in the naming. You're welcome to disagree, but the level of indignation and outrage that you're showing is way over the top (IMHO).

Seriously, is this really worth getting so worked up about?

Hans

[Hans_]

Since when has nine days equalled three weeks?  It's not even two.

Argh! Dates on this forum are in US format. The 20 being where the month should be should have been a dead giveaway.

Hans