What would an Amiga be today?

[DigitalQ]

I am certain that the Amiga would have devolved back into a video game console, as it was originally intended to be.

[DigitalQ]

adz wrote:

What?? Stuck back in the 90's? I doubt it. Wasn't the Amiga supposed to be ahead of the times?

This is a common misconception.

From the time the Amiga was introduced as Lorraine in 1984, up until 1988, it enjoyed the enviable position of being well ahead of everything in its price class, as well as ahead of computers well above its price class.  It truly was ahead of its time.

By the time 1988 rolled around, the PC world had VGA graphics and OS/2 (a multitasking operating system).  I don't even consider the Mac a contender, as it never properly multitasked until well into the late 90's.  However, the Amiga had been around for a few years, so it had a definite price advantage.  It also had the distinct advantage of being able to work directly with standard television signals, which helped Amiga find its niche market.

By the time 1990 rolled around, PC technology was coming down in price.  Amiga was still relatively competitive with the A500, but the gap was closing fast.  Commodore's response was the A3000, which was not at all competitive with VGA.  It was basically the exact same video hardware but with the ability to address more memory.  We did get some improvements with Workbench 2.04, but only to the extent to bring it up to par; there was nothing groundbreaking.  Interestingly, we got CDTV, which showed some innovation still existed at Commodore, at least as far as marketing the Amiga was concerned; it was still, for all intents and purposes, an Amiga 500 with a CD-ROM drive.

We finally saw AGA in 1992, but as you can imagine, it was too little, too late.  By this time, VGA cards came standard even in the cheapest PC's, and were cheap upgrades for existing PC's.  New standards such as SVGA pushed the boundaries even further out of Amiga's reach, even with AGA.  OS/2 2.00 was released.  The Macintosh still couldn't multitask, but it too sported more advanced graphic capabilities.

I'd say the Amiga peaked in the late 80's from its own momentum; after that, Commodore mismanaged it to death.  Honestly, I wish Commodore had come out with a 16 bit variation of the Commodore 64/128 instead (the mythical Commodore 65), and Amiga had stayed with its original designers.

[DigitalQ]

The question is what kind of new value give us new computers? Can we do something better, productive today that 15 years ago, or even 1000?

Value which is improving the life truly and fully, value which make life different than in past.

What development of computers change in human nature, how it helped in personal development?

Simple questions, even my poor English is able to express this issues...

Digital photography and digital video.  The importance of accurately documenting history has proved to be a valuable tool in the advancement of our society.  You know what they say; those who forget history are bound to repeat it.  Modern computers networked together have also provided us with the ability to store vast amounts of data reliably and securely.  We have surpassed the Library of Alexandria, but the information we store is now easily copied and duplicated. Each computer can become a virtual Library of Alexandria, so the information won't be lost to time.

On a personal level, I have learned a lot from web sites I've found on the internet; from how to fix a problem with my car, to how to make my own wine.  There is a modern computer inside my GPS navigator, so now I don't get lost on those family vacations, which takes a lot of stress out of the trip.  I am currently enrolled in a distance learning course, where I will obtain certification as an Electronics Technician.  This type of learning and certification most certainly will enrich my life, and is made possible by modern computers.

I hope I have sufficiently answered your question.

[DigitalQ]

kreciu wrote:
@DigitalQ

Information is not a new value. Did you hear saying: "The history is written by this who won the battles", or that "History is written by historians"?

Ah, but it is the content and accuracy of that information that has improved, making that information that much more valuable.  It is no longer controlled by the "State and Church," or, as you suggested, historians and conquerors.  Modern computers have leveled the playing field.  I have the power of the press at my fingertips, and can publish whatever I want.  

You also need to address the fact that information today is not as volatile as it once was.  Before computers, a fire could wipe out centuries of works.  Indeed, the progress of mankind has probably been set back by such destruction.  Who knows what great secrets were hidden in the Library of Alexandria?  It has already been demonstrated that many of the discoveries made then had to be rediscovered.  

kreciu wrote:
Soon nobody will have to go out of the house, to feed it's own virtual pet, water virtual plant, nutrients will be provided by "pipes" directly to you system... ups. I started describing matrix? What the "brilliant" idea, lets make a movie about that?

You are kidding, right?  Much of the advancements in modern technology are getting people out there to discover their world.  GPS navigators are showing people the way to some great historical sites and destinations they might not otherwise have seen.  Their digital cameras have them out photographing nature in all her beauty.  

The biggest advancements we see are in portable electronics.  MP3 players, cellular telephones, laptop and handheld computers, portable gaming systems...clearly, people want to get out of their homes, which is contrary to your assertions.  

Consider the sample pictures that come with Vista.  Names such as "Forest Flowers," "Autumn Leaves," "Forest"...I have 15 sample pictures, all of which have to do with nature.  

Another benefit is that computers and computer technology has led us to more efficient designs.  We now have automobiles that can travel large distances while sipping a minimal amount of fuel.  We have much more energy efficient appliances, and more efficient and safer ways of cooking our food.

No doubt that modern advancements in computers and technology is a double-edged sword.  However, people will ultimately choose what is best for them.

[DigitalQ]

I think he meant Anti-Amiga like how Bernie Stolar of Sega Of America was Anti-Saturn, saying that the Sega Saturn was not part of Sega's future in the middle of its product life and I wouldn't be surprised if Commodore management said something similar about Amiga.  

Like Berine Stolar sabotaging the Sega Saturn's chance in market, I think Commodore managment was sabotaging the Amiga's chance in the market.  Just look at how little devlopment the Amiga went through under Commodore.

On this, I disagree.  Commodore was never an innovative computer company; rather, they were in it for the money.  Prior to computers, they made office furniture; and before that, they made typewriters; which was after they were simply a typewriter repair shop in Toronto.  They simply delivered whatever was in demand at the time.  The PET was essentially a product of a company called MOS technologies.  The wildly successful Commodore 64 was derived from that, and we can thank MOS engineers that sneaked things in like a synthesizer chip; because if Commodore had its way, that would never have happened.  The logic behind Commodore's decisions was to deliver a product for the cheapest price.  At that, they succeeded...the PET, Vic 20, and Commodore 64 were machines that undercut everything else on the market.  Because of this, they were falling behind technologically.  MOS was an 8 bit company; they needed a 16 bit company which turned out to be Amiga.  They basically did with the Amiga what they did with the 8 bit Commodores.  The A1000 was basically the PET, and the A500 was their C64.  These strategies worked for about the same period of time they worked for their 8 bit years.

MOS were innovators.  Amiga were innovators.  The engineers from these companies that Commodore retained were innovators.  By their very nature, Commodore was not an innovative company.  What appeared to be sabotage was simply the only way they knew how to do business, which is, essentially, hack-and-slash the essentials while those at the top bled the company dry.  Those in control did not know nor care for computers; they lacked vision beyond their bottom line.  At one point, they actually relied on misinformation given to them by their competition (anyone remember the laptop Commodore?)  

So, no genuine sabotage, except for the apparent sabotage which is natural with this way of doing business.  

[DigitalQ]

AeroMan wrote:

persia wrote:
A more interesting question is would any of us actually be interested in a modern Amiga?  

I do! As long as it is still an Amiga at it´s heart and not just another PC clone.

Elvis still rules! :-D

By the way... Back in 92 SVGA boards were quite slow... AGA was not that bad compared to them, but was showing (fast) it´s age. Commodore was aiming at RTG also at some point in future.
And Windows multitasking was crappy until Win98, many years ahead.

Back in '92, I never considered Windows/DOS a worthy competitor to the AmigaOS; it was OS/2 which had the best multitasking capabilities.  Also, faster high performance SVGA cards did exist for the PC in '92, but the introduction of clock doubled processors (ie; the '486 DX2-66) more than made up for the relative slowness of the low-end SVGA cards.

EDIT: PC's got something else in '92; cheap and good 16 bit sound.  Frustrating that Amigas still were stuck with 8 bit sound.

It was a sad time to be an Amiga loyalist (which I was), all thanks to the mismanagement of Commodore.  For the record, my first new PC was a '486 DX2-66 with 8MB of RAM running OS/2 Warp 3.  I always considered OS/2 Warp to be a natural progression for Amiga owners.