My evening with Commodore USA, LLC

[EDanaII]

Will you two kindly take this elsewhere?

[EDanaII]

@ Redrumloa

Problem is, Red, I can see them selling thousands of the C64x, maybe 10s of thousands, but not much more than that. All they are selling is an alternate (retro) form factor. This doesn't represent much of a value-add for a whole lot of people.

Two cents.

[EDanaII]

That is yet to be seen. The C64x is one product. Don't get me wrong, I am not declaring Commodore USA will be a major player in the near future as being a slam dunk. I do see potential based on what I was shown, but it comes down to final product, execution, co-branding success and maybe a little luck.

Granted, but my main issue with them is their over-optimism based on what appears to be a very tenuous market to me. Declaring that they're gonna create a Linux-based Workbench 5 using a market-model that depends on nostalgia seems a little beyond wisdom.

Of course, I'm also in the if-it-ain't-gonna-be-an-Amiga-like-OS-then-don't-call-it-Amiga camp.

But, yes, we shall see...

[EDanaII]

They have a legal right to use it as they see fit. They hold a license and despite threats, there has been no legal action by Hyperion.

Coke had the legal right to make New Coke too, but that didn't stop them from getting into trouble for it.

Just saying...

[EDanaII]

The other part is management capabilities.  Barry has never had a business failure, he has the basic instinct of what will work and what will fail.  Unlike a lot of business owners who trying to make it, Barry has already made it and could be retired for the rest of his life.  This is his passion, this has capture his interest and he can throw himself into it with out the worry of losing everything.  His pockets run that deep as his connections run extremely deep world wide.   Barry is a different animal then what we have seen since the days of Jack Tramiel.

There's always a first time.

[EDanaII]

Seriously, those of you with moral, ethical, whatever obejections to this need to get over it. It doesn't appeal to you fine, don't buy it. It is legal, it is going forward, and there are people interest in it. We don't care if it is a real resurrection of the "amiga" whatever you consider that to be.

Continuing to harp on this stupid "it's not an amiga" crap is ringing so hollow lately.

Someone seems to have forgotten the Lessons of New Coke:

When you take your products or your services and make them more like your competition, what does that accomplish? If it is a long-standing brand, it leads to trouble with your market. However, it leads to more than that. It removes any real difference between you and your competitors. In the days of New Coke, I switched between New Coke and Pepsi without a thought since to me there was no discernible difference between them. I no longer cared, the only question I had was, “which one is on sale?”

Not all of us are "objecting" on moral/ethical grounds. Some of us are suggesting they make more _strategic_ choices.

[EDanaII]

Nothing CUSA could possibly do would appeal to everyone. They are making stratigic choices, except possibly forgetting or not knowing how much of a cult we really are in.

Did you read the article I linked? Coke did all the right things, made all the correct choices, except for one thing: they ignored the "cult" that supported them.

When entering a new market, or in this case, being a new entry into the market, don't ignore your early adopters. It could make all the difference. And who are the early adopters in an Amiga branded market? Ummm... all you have to do is read here and get the majority of opinions. At least, you can get a good idea of who they aren't.

If it won't have an Amiga-like OS, then C=USA is making a fatal mistake. Better to call it the Commodore Colt or the Commodore PC10 than the Amiga.

If they don't, those prodigal Amigans they do bring back will end up wondering why their "Coke tastes funny."

[EDanaII]

Why don't ya'll just cool it for a minute? You're all arguing so hot and heavy that nobody is listening to anyone.

This is an emotional subject, yes. But nobody's going to get anywhere given the direction the argument keeps spinning into.

Two cents.

[EDanaII]

Trying to offer a differentiated product line is also a great way to ensure you never get off the ground. It takes a lot of money to do this stuff. He should focus on what has the best chances right now.

Unfortunately that's NOT true. Where all things are equal, as it is in the PC market, product differentiation is critical to success. Once again, I urge people to read the link on New Coke I provided.

Providing a retro-case does provided such differentiation, but has limited appeal. Providing a name-brand, OTOH, that isn't what people expect provides disappointment.



@ Those arguing it's not an Amiga

Two cavemen sitting in a cave, one next to a fire, keeping warm, while the other sits in the distance complaining that THIS fire didn't come from the lightning bolt that created the First Fire.

Does it really matter where it came from as long as it keeps you warm?


@ Those arguing C=USA's ethics:

Like or not, they were granted the legal right. What's more important? That they have the right to wield the flame? Or whether or not they use thier flame to build or destroy?


@ Those arguing "sock puppets."

Knock it off, please?

[EDanaII]

@ CommodoreJohn:

Two cavemen sitting in a cave, one next to a fire, keeping warm, while the other scrapes gunk off an animal hide, wraps it around himself, and calls it "fire." "This is a fire, rock-for-brain!" the first caveman proclaims. "That's a blanket."

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was referring to those who were arguing Aros/MorphOS/OS 4.0 weren't "Amiga." In this instance, they are all "fire."


@ Darrin:

Two cavemen sitting in a cave, one next to a fire, eating beef, while the other sits in the distance eating cow shit complaining that THIS cow shit isn't the same as his mate's t-bone steak.

Does it really matter where it came from as long as it keeps you fed?

So, changing the analogy to something completely different proves the original analogy wrong?

Yes, when they seem hell bent on destroying Amiga NG.

The operative word here being "seem." "You're honor, the accused 'seems' to have killed the victim" just won't hold up in a court of law.

Now, before you tear into me as you have Dammy and others, please reread the thread and note that I'm in the Don't-Call-It-Amiga camp.

Sooty is not amused.

Does this mean that I too am a sock puppet?

[EDanaII]

@ Darrin:

Your original anaology was critically flawed. It needed "fixing".

As I pointed out to CommodoreJohn, my original analogy was refering to those arguing that AROS/MorphOS/OS4 wasn't Amiga.

Regardless, yours was a strawman and this from a person who is effectively on the same side as you.

Ah, I see you have called the police out to your house because your neighbour has threatened to kill you? This is a serious waste of police time, please call us back AFTER he has killed you!

You're switching your analogies again. I think "You're honor, the accuse 'seems' to have killed me!" has even less a chance in court. (I can play this game too. )

This is why some people have argued with you to give them a chance. (This, once again, coming from someone who is effectively on the same side as you. I don't like what they're doing either, but as this is early on plans may change. Only time will tell.)


@ Digiman:

Excuse me but a Windows compatible stock x86 motherboard running x86 PC Linux and an Amiga emulator that can only emulate AGA and 680x0 at best is NOT a new Amiga. It is a virtual recreation of a 1992 released model of a real Amiga.

Looks like this mistake is gonna keep coming back to haunt me. Once again: I was referring to those arguing about AROS vs. MorphOS vs. OS4.0. I genuinely DON'T care who is the keeper of the flame, only whether or not we too can have access to it.

Other than that, I only disagree with this point:

That is why there is so much flack for C= USA. And there is no positive argument for them in this area. Unless they start marketing their creations they intend to produce as nothing more than novelty Amiga lookalike PCs to run WinUAE/UAE on they deserve all the flack they get.

There is a positive argument for them here: if it doesn't carry the Amiga legacy, then don't call it "Amiga." Hence my continued points about "New Coke."

I wouldn't have a problem with AROS or Anubis, or even MorphOS or OS4 on these machines. Otherwise, don't call it "Amiga."

[EDanaII]

Since I've been pointing to New Coke as part of my arguments towards the mistakes C=USA is making, I'll just say this: that's kinda like saying, "sure, just buy new Coke and then pour Classic Coke into it."

Sorry, Wolf, that just doesn't work for me. You're so-called "dead OS" is the only thing left of the Commodore name that is of any interest to me. So, without it, I, as an early adopter, am out. I could care less.

When C=USA originally announced their intentions of developing AROS, I was strictly against it. It is a dead platform, as any other AmigaOID around. You'd have to pour dozens of millions of dollars into it to even have a remote chance of being succesful in mainstream. In doing so, you would introduce things that were never present in the original AOS, like memory protection, which means several things... first, it would loose some of it responsiveness because of that and secondly, it would basically become a new OS with very few connections whatsoever to the original. It would loose probably most of it Amiga-like features in the process... It simply doesn't make any sense next to a perfectly working kernel like Linux + GNU tools.

And this is where you keep getting into trouble, Wolf, no disrespect intended. Telling people to accept as dead that which they want to see living again is like rubbing salt in a wound. You're only going to get more flack if you keep suggesting it.

That said, and as I've suggested to Leo on the Commodore-Amiga forum, support AROS, make it ready for prime-time by donating to it would go a long way in terms of community out-reach, but telling it's dead is only gonna make them turn away from you.

[EDanaII]

@ Persia:

I happen to be in the middle-ground, Persia. I don't like what they're doing, but I don't think what they're doing is "evil." I would like them to stay away from the Amiga name, but other than that? I don't care.

New coke doesn't apply, classic coke was a living product, Classic Amiga is not.

I disagree. This isn't about whether or not Amiga is living or dead. It's about what early adopters expect from the product. And since C=USA has a strong need to differentiate their products from the all the other PC providers out there, it could make all the difference in their success or failure.


@ Wolf to the Moon

You've missed the point, Wolf. Regardless of whether or not what you say is true -- I disagree with the proposition -- getting others who don't (won't) agree with you is only gonna get you in more trouble.

To be clear from my PoV: AmigaOS as it stands now is not commercially viable. An up-to-date AmigaOS has a better chance. But telling people it's OK to call it Amiga 'cause AmigaOS is dead is only gonna get people arguing with you. You can't prove that proposition any more than they can.

Regardless, if it doesn't bear the legacy, it shouldn't bare the name. Just ask the creators of New Coke.

[EDanaII]

an up to date Amiga OS would need billions to make commercially successful... It is as viable as is space elevator.

If I've told you once, I've told you a billion times: don't exaggerate! (And you are exaggerating.)

However, the gist of my argument still isn't they should do an AmigaOS. I'd welcome it if they would, however: if it doesn't have AmigaOS, don't call it Amiga. There are expectations that come with that name that the cannot fulfill, whatever the reason.

Leo said something about still wanting to support AROS(and bounties), so you may yet get your wish.

Which is all some of us are asking.


@ Dammy:

It can't by legal agreement between AI and Hyperion.

All the more reason to leave the name alone, then.

[EDanaII]

@ WolfToTheMoon:

I'm not exaggerating... first you'd have to rewrite the entire OS, because the current ones are stuck in the 90s in basic features. Then you'd have to get hardware manufacturers to write drivers for it. Then you'd have to write some apps, pay other companies to port theirs to your platform. Then you'd have to market it, which alone would cost you a very large amount of money(commercials on TV, newspapers, internet). After all that, you're still a long way of being sure you will succeed in attracting a lrge enough user base. So my billions are spot on the money

Really? So, you know for a fact that they'd rewrite the OS from scratch? You know exactly how many man-hours are required and the salaries of all the people that would be needed? You know exactly what *I* meant when I said "an up-to-date AmigaOS?"

Them's some pretty impressive skills you got there...

Workbench X will be a Amiga OS. It will run on Amigas and it will be produced by Commodore. Thus, it becomes an Amiga OS. Your argument that it will not be related to any of the current amiga like OSes is valid.

"My coke tastes funny!"


@ Dammy:

Yup, AmigaOS will not be used in conjunction with C=USA Amigas.

Not what I mean, Randy, not what I meant.

I've been chatting a little on the side with Tim, I know a little bit about what's going on with that so-called "follow on" OS and I ain't got a problem with it. Even offered to help if I can, but until then -- and assuming what form it finally takes -- C=USA would be wise to stay away from the Amiga brand. It's just gonna explode in their faces, just like New Coke did. MHO, of course.