Top 3 worst ideas in Amiga history?

[save2600]

Good stuff here, but I'd add the fact they didn't do anything to upgrade Paula. Clearly by the A3000's time, that should have morphed into a 16-bit or higher Hi-Fi chip that was backwards compatible.

And the fact that since the A3000, they were still confused about how to market AND didn't really have a pulse on who wanted to purchase what Amiga model. Too many Amiga's competing with each other and all were severely crippled hardware wise by the lack of Fast Ram, better processors, 15khz video, etc.

No affordable AGA upgrade path for old Amiga's too, "forced" us to re-purchase inferior products in order to 'keep up'.

Zip chip implementation in A3000.

Constantly rushed products which always forced us to purchase more and more accessories, peripherals, Kickstarts, Busters, Agnus's, RAM, etc. The Amiga really has always been somewhat of a money pit/experimental hobbyists type of computer - hasn't it? lol

[save2600]

Weren't there workarounds in the form of slot adapters w/ necessary video lines to address the multiple video card issue?

[save2600]

1.) Putting effort into PC products (both with complete computers and Amiga addons / bridge boards) instead of focusing on the Amiga
2.) A600 expansion port with no CPU traces
3.) Putting Kickstart into ROM

...OMG! All excellent points and I totally agree. Especially the IBM clone business, which I always forget about. It would be interesting to hear from Amiga users from back in the day that actually had and used said Amiga/PC setups. I picked up a large haul of Amiga gear in the early 2000's and the guy did have a Mac emulation program with System, 6.02 in there. I think it also had the external Mac ROMS and drive dongle too if I am not mistaken. I have all the software bits, but not the hardware... I should give it a try some day. Looks like he used Quark with it. Never knew anyone that cared to run IBM stuff though.

And it will forever remain my opinion that Kickstart in ROM was a terrible idea. Sure, the machine boots a little faster with it in, but big deal. It's still pretty fast. Being able to truly change an OS without opening your computer is common sense 101 and true user friendliness IMO.

[save2600]

I agree that games like Doom changed the face of computer gaming for a lot of people.

But I just thought of another thing that continually frosts my balls about Amiga gaming: the fact MOST games did not take advantage of a controller that has more than 1 friggin' button! Think about this... the Amiga was designed to be a game machine first and foremost, yet we've been stuck with one button gaming ala the Atari 2600 for decades?!? I'm getting pissed just thinking about pushing 'UP' to jump...  lol

[save2600]

No, PC's have had multi-button games for a looooong time, but maybe not as far back as I am thinking. But wait... yeah, pretty much Gravis and Logitech, I remember having 2 buttons and that scenario was even standard on systems as far back as the Apple ]['s.

In any event, by the time the A500, CDTV, A1200 & CD32 came out, 2+ buttons for gaming should have been the standard. I'm just surprised that it wasn't the standard starting with the A1000.

[save2600]

Thought of another one: the rollout price of a 256kb A1000. IMO, was too expensive and cost prohibitive for many of its prospective users - which were primarily loyal Commodore users of course. This is a tough thing to decide though - price it too low and people and professionals might not have given it a second look. Price it too high and people might rather go for an old standby such as Apple or IBM. Guess in all fairness, it was priced pretty well - but compared to the ST, no so much. I believe a 512kb system should have rolled out at around $1k, maybe $1.3k tops with some more software and a monitor. Better or more RAM solutions that were cheaper should have been made more available too, instead of rare or years later that were STILL too expensive for what they were.

[save2600]

Not the same. I'd like to see 3.9 run on a 1.3 kickstart rom.

Me too!! Or 3.1 at least  :lol:

[save2600]

I agree that the A2000 was priced too high for too long. I love the A2000, but it *is* essentially just an A500 with slots, a big box and a beefier power supply. Image and perception are everything though - the A2000 was a BEAST! In America, BIGGER is BETTER don'tcha know? lol

I remember shaking my head at the price of a barebones A2000 system in the late 80's and up until the early 90's when some retailers still had them for sale and outfitting them with 2091's, OS2.1, etc. They were never really deeply discounted, at least - to my knowledge - for a particular computer such as the A2000 to last 'that' long and continue to be a viable machine years later, amidst all the changes in computing, is nothing short of astounding. The damn thing literally grew with the computer user and the upgrade options were nearly endless. The A2000 was obviously a hugely successful concept for C=, especially from a gross margin point of view and around the time one would have thought they were starting to discontinue the model, you know they weren't going to be unloading 'em cheap for the Video Toaster and other speciality users at the time. From a business standpoint, I guess I would have done the same thing. At the end of the day, you can't really fault Commodore too badly here. IF you subscribe to the doctrine of not fixing that which is not broken that is. lol

[save2600]

Does anybody else wonder if Atari would have done better with the Amiga technology?

Nope. They would have done exactly the same thing ultimately - just as they did with their ST line. I'd go so far as saying that Atari's brand name was already tainted to the point that hardly anybody at the time would have taken them seriously. Atari is Atari and that means console gaming and maybe their A8 line - but soon after the 2nd and 3rd generation 8-bit computer line (which were really all the same machines basically), they had already burned so many bridges with retailers that yes - they would have not stood a chance marketing anything as innovative as the Amiga. And when you look back at the ST days, C= did a much better job with the scant advertising and marketing than Atari ever did with any of their products at the time.

IMO - As only Nixon could have gone to China, only Commodore could have handled the Amiga.

[save2600]

You know, that got me to thinking about how "silly" hardware Kickstart switchers really were. I mean, why Commodore couldn't have included the option to boot from whatever Kickstart you wanted with each new revision. "Cost" aside (which many of us paid for anyway in the form of a switcher and extra ROM), why couldn't they had combined 2+ Kickstarts in the latest revisions along with some code that would allow a user to choose his or her flavor right from startup? An Amiga user with a battery backed clock and NVRAM (like the A3000) could retain your preference so as not to "inconvenience" the user. I know the argument is moot in the grand scheme of things and would involve a complete turn-a-round in C='s philosophy and design, but... lol

And what AmigaNG was probably referring to were the incompatibility issues 2.x+ had with 1.3. I had an A1200 right as soon as they were released and I gotta tell you, the Boot Menu didn't fully help get some of my old programs to run. It wasn't until later that we had Kickstart disks and other Degraders for our 3.x machines. I remember feeling really disappointed back then because obviously, I had amassed quite the collection of stuff, like most all of us.

[save2600]

@AmigaDave: Yeah, the Kickstart switcher was a necessary evil for a while there. Not arguing that fact, just wondering had C= implemented true backwards compatibility, how that would have affected their perception with other users, Amiga or otherwise.

And yes, totally agree about the VT keeping C= alive for a little while longer. I eluded to that with the expandability capability of the big box Amiga's, especially the 16-bit centered A2000 (until you added a processor card that is) and how long it kept the system viable for all those years. Really is a wonderful system that way - the A2000. Any of the big boys really, when you think about it. I just give the A2000 slightly more props because of its age, its seemingly open architecture and PC capabilities if anyone thinks that played a significant role (I'm not sure it did, but I'm not saying that it didn't either). And when I say the A2000 is little more than an A500, I meant in its core design. Both were capable of the same things: 1mb Agnus, 9MB Ram, FF/SD optional, Zorro expanders optional off the bus, including accelerators, etc. And I do believe you can towerize or at least slap a Bodega Bay on an A500 to have Zorro slots and even a video card if I am not mistaken. Might not be 100% Toaster compatible though IIRC.