I think.........

[psxphill]

The strange story of the Amiga-clone PS3 began right after Gateway went bankrupt. At the time Intel realized Amiga's designs were still significant so they went on an IP shopping trip to buy up what was left of Gateway's Amiga IPs. They used this knowledge, and with HP went onto create what was the IA-64 and Itanium chipsets from those designs. Sony, knowing Intel had the rights to the Amiga design, approached Intel for permission to use it in a console. The rest as they say is history...

I don't know if you're joking or not.
 
No design from the Amiga ended up in the PS3. Although the CPU that Sony/Toshiba/IBM developed ended up in the xbox 360.
 
The Itanium design wasn't based on the Amiga and wasn't used in the PS3.
 
Zorro and PCI have simularities as does WAV and IFF. That is about it in terms of technology that escaped.
 
All of this generations consoles (PS3/XBOX360/WII) have more in common with the gamecube than the amiga.
 
ICP-Vortex made high performance RAID controllers when Intel bought them. Adaptec seem to own them now.
 
http://www.treadlayers.com/PC_Hardware/Storage/SATA_RAID/RAID_4.shtml

[psxphill]

It does not matter how advanced the Amiga was when it came out.
The price was/is insignificant.
It does not matter what chip set it had.

I think those points were significant. If it had the same performance as a sinclair spectrum but a higher price then it would not have sold at all.
 
The only viable competition was the ST, the Acorn Archimedes was too expensive and didn't have enough games. However the ST wasn't cheap enough to make up for the lack of power, so it only appealed to those who wanted built in MIDI or couldn't (or wouldn't) pay for an Amiga.
 
There was a time when Amiga could have competed against PC's, but that time is long gone.
 
You're right that blind loyalty to a brand shouldn't be enough to encourage you to part with money. Although I'm sure there are some people that will feel good about buying an X1000, retail therapy isn't particularly healthy in the long term (unless you never run out of money).

[psxphill]

Ask yourself the question.....why would Intel (big company as they are) have any interest in the Amiga?

Intel had no interest in the Amiga. You are pre-supposing that they did.
 
There is nothing in the Amiga that could help anybody make modern hardware.
 

All I can say is CELL and Xenon (the Xbox 360 CPU) are all PPC based processors, which in turn are improvements on the 680x0 line of processors.

The PPC doesn't have much in common with the 680x0, the first chips were IBM POWER chips that were shrunk, modified to use the 88000 bus and then manufactured under license by Motorola (Motorola's own RISC processor the 88000 didn't do very well so it made sense to go into business with IBM). PPC didn't come into the Amiga's history until after Commodore were dead & it only happened because Apple had made a similar transition (not because of simularities between the processors but because there was nothing else apart from Intel).
 
Windows 95 was Windows 3.1 with some tweaks, that was why OS/2 was arguably better (although it wasn't until OS/2 3.0 that you could say it was better with a straight face as the earlier versions were horrible). Windows NT was better than OS/2 & that was based on VMS, which predated the Amiga by a very long shot.
 
The only reason that Windows 95 existed at all is because Microsoft needed a new product and Windows NT was going to need more RAM than consumers were prepared to buy.

[psxphill]

Ask yourself the question.....why would Intel (big company as they are) have any interest in the Amiga?

Intel had no interest in the Amiga. You are pre-supposing that they did.
 
It's a conspiracy theory with no logical basis.

[psxphill]

And actually OS/2 is the best OS for playing DOS games....the only way you can assign 640kb to the DOS game easily without messing about with config.sys etc of DOS :roflmao:

I went from DOS -> Windows 3.1 -> OS/2 -> Windows 95 -> Windows NT4. I didn't stay on OS/2 for very long. I also ran the latest Amiga OS versions at the same time. Both had features I wish the other had (I still miss ASSIGN's).

[psxphill]

This is why in the first generation of PS3s were able to run Linux and other OSes on the PS3 - because it was essentially a (Amiga) computer. In the case of PS3, it can be used with Linux, or Yellow Dog Linux. Because IBM (being part of the Cell group) also has Cell bridge boards you could buy which used to be supplied by Fixstars > www.fixstars.com.
 
 
Just to show you the 'proof' of what I'm talking about, here is a Yellow Dog Linux setup running Amiga games really smooth on UAE > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEklKwJoyjI

LOL, I hope for your sake you are joking but this stuff is priceless.

[psxphill]

I still think many peoples stances these days are based on "hindsight"
 
I for one did not buy the Amiga because it was the best thing on the market at the time... it was just a coincidence
 
I've brought into the NG line of Amigas because I never stopped being an Amiga User and I want to continue using an evolving AmigaOS

I think there are relatively few people that somehow randomly bought an Amiga back in the 80's and still want to use AmigaOS now. I'd love to know why you bought one if it wasn't because it was the best?