POLL: What is the most viable Amiga platform for *you*?

[smerf]

Hi,

@ Franko,

How do I know they never came back?

Because all 7 million and one of them are at my place still drinking, thats how. Forgot about the Amiga they sure did!

smerf

[stefcep2]

It's perfectly true what dammy said... In 1992 and after there was no way in hell Commodore could have kept up with the PC world, mainly because of the entire board being a custom chipset. it was, sadly, even in 1992, a doomed concept(for a PC, gaming consoles to this day remain an entirely custom chipsets all along).
If they went the way of a 68000 based mobo + PC expansion cards, things would have probably turned out pretty differently(strictly performance-wise).

Games is what drove PC hardware upgrades.  Its what really made graphics chips updates necessary in the PC world.  Was a plug-in 3rd party graphics card architecture vital for amiga to continue as a viable paltform?

 Well its interestingly, custom chips for consoles did not hold games back games development on them, with about a 5-6 year cycle.  IMO Commodore could have released AGA 12-18 months earlier, which would have competed with SNES and Megadrive well enough, especially if they pushed the A1200CD and a 28 Mhz '020 with even just 2 MB  FAst  RAM and would have held onto its user base.  Had they survived beyond 1994,  custom chips with high res chunky graphics and built in 3D functions could have been implemented well enough to compete with a PS1 and N64 at least, so that would have retained many users.  That custom chip system could have had a life of 5 years just like the consoles, as CPU and ram upgrades and mature programming could have more or less been good enough to produce quality games.

BTW: most viable? Sounds like AROS.  What do i use and probably will continue to? Classic hardware.

[takemehomegrandma]

First off, this poll is not meant to ruffle any feathers. I am simply curious the consensus in 2011 of Amiga.org users. The aim is for users to pick ONE option as if you forced to pick only one. Sadly, there is no pancakes option.

MorphOS, since it represents the peak of Amiga evolution. MorphOS is Amiga done right!

[Buzzfuzz]

If the games had pushed the Amiga harder and Commodore itself, than Amiga would be a lot further by now.
If you bought an Amiga 1200 in 1992/1993 and asked Commodore or it's reseller for a turbo upgrade, they would have said look around, but don't look for it at our shop!
And that attitude is what killed Commodore.
 

Games is what drove PC hardware upgrades. Its what really made graphics chips updates necessary in the PC world. Was a plug-in 3rd party graphics card architecture vital for amiga to continue as a viable paltform?
 
Well its interestingly, custom chips for consoles did not hold games back games development on them, with about a 5-6 year cycle. IMO Commodore could have released AGA 12-18 months earlier, which would have competed with SNES and Megadrive well enough, especially if they pushed the A1200CD and a 28 Mhz '020 with even just 2 MB FAst RAM and would have held onto its user base. Had they survived beyond 1994, custom chips with high res chunky graphics and built in 3D functions could have been implemented well enough to compete with a PS1 and N64 at least, so that would have retained many users. That custom chip system could have had a life of 5 years just like the consoles, as CPU and ram upgrades and mature programming could have more or less been good enough to produce quality games.
 
BTW: most viable? Sounds like AROS. What do i use and probably will continue to? Classic hardware.

[Dandy]

Hi,

@Dandy,

Sorry do not pass go, do not collect $200, go to jail, go directly to jail, you gave wrong information on the Commodore PC's.

The Commodore PC's where called PC-10 and PC-20.

Thank You,

smerf

Maybe you should follow the link I gave in my posting #148 regarding old Commodores PC line - there are the types listed you missed in my posting #121:

"Commodore PC compatible systems - Commodore Colt, PC1, PC10, PC20, PC30, PC40, ..., 486SX-LTC"

Obviously Commodore International marketet their PCs differently in different countries.
I only remembered the Commodore PCs 386 and 486, which obcviously were marketet as PC-50 and PC-60 elswhere.

Back in summer 1986 I wanted to buy a computer to study CAD. At that time I had heard of the overwhelming graphical capabilities of the Amiga and so went to a Commodore dealer to get more information about those systems.

When I told the dealer that I wanted to do CAD on it, he laughed at me and told me that the Amigas just were "better gaming boxes" - but far from being useful for CAD.

He said for that I would need an Commodore 386 PC, that just had been released and would cost 6.000 DM (roughly equals to 3.000 €), plus a good graphics card for 1.500+, plus  the CAD software for well over 10.000 DM, plus a plotter for annother absurd amount of money.

Note that he said "Commodore 386 PC" - and not "Commodore PC-50".

Unnecessary to mention that I ended up with an Amiga two and a half years later and that I bought my first x86PC as late as 2004...

[Franko]

I believe in Nessie  

Are you suggesting the Loch Ness Monster isn't real? Jeez, man, have some national pride! I'm not even from the UK and I show that poor beast more respect!

@ commodorejohn & save2600

I shouldn't really be telling you this (keep it to yourselves) but, Nessie is just a tourist scam that we use to overcharge (mainly yanks & Japs) during the summer so we can make an extra few quid to keep the nation supplied with buckfast...

It's a bit like the wild 3 legged Haggis shoots we take them on up the hillsides...
 


Hi Smerf ...

You know them 7 million ex Commodore users that you party with every weekend, well at your next party could you look for a wee fat baw faced git that goes by the name of Gib and ask him when I'm going to get back the tenner I lent the bugger back in 97...

As for the lavvies getting bunged up, simple solution let them use the back garden instead (just make sure they do their business over the fence into the neighbours garden)...

(PS: how do you manage to fit 7 million ex Commodore users into a guinea pig cage !!!)

Franko

[Digiman]

Great C64 videos you put on the web - didn´t know that there was so great marketing at Commodore - curious why this didn´t happen also for Amiga?
Was this marketing for GB specially or also for the US-market?

Jack left C=, business decisions became ineffective. It's that simple.

Bought in Amiga technology staved off their demise half a decade, but with idiots like Medhi cocking things up what did you expect.

Example: Jack asked for what turned out to be the C16 but it was meant to retail @ $70 to wipe out low end competion ie VIC20 replacement. New management ended up with +4 @ $299 with just extra 48kb RAM and same crippled chipset :roflmao:

[KThunder]

The custom chipset has been mentioned a few times recently on a couple threads and I thought I would comment on it.

The custom chipset wasn't the reason Commodore, or the Amiga had trouble, because it was Commodores chipset, as in not only did they own it they owned Mos tech which produced it all the way up to AGA.

"Vertical Integration" was the reason the Vic and C64 were less expensive than the competition, had generally better chipsets, and the c64 had a custom 6502. It was the reason Commodore could take on the Amiga chipset in the first place and sell for less than most of the competition, whilst having better features etc.

The problem came because Commodore didn't put enough money into Mos tech. By '85 rather than produce a 16bit cpu they went with a 68000 (the 16bit 65816 which is 6502 compatible works pretty dang good in the Apple IIgs and snes) And by the time AGA came around they couldn't fabricate some of the chips so they had to outsource.

So much of the cost savings of having your own chipfab were negated by the early '90s and commodore had to charge more and more while giving less and less in features. The cpu manufacturer of most of the 80s computers didn't plan ahead. The computer company that holds a guiness world record for the most systems sold of any single computer line, died.

As much as I like the 68000 the Amiga should have had a 65816 style 16bit chip. By the 90's they should have transitioned over to a 32bit 6502 compatible risc chip. All the ram and chipset components should have been Mos tech produced. And the Amiga chipset and OS should have been licensed out and chip fab services as well.

[WolfToTheMoon]

As much as I like the 68000 the Amiga should have had a 65816 style 16bit chip. By the 90's they should have transitioned over to a 32bit 6502 compatible risc chip. All the ram and chipset components should have been Mostek produced. And the Amiga chipset and OS should have been licensed out and chip fab services as well.

Whatever happened to Terbium?(WDC's 32 bit 6502 evolution)

But your idea is interesting... 65816 was shown to be roughly comparable to early 68K Motorolas. It's probably much cheaper as well. But since Lorraine was based on 68000 it would mean building a whole new chipset basically. I do not think that's likely to have been approved.
But 65816 maybe should have been used in the 128 or a similar C= branded machine.

[KThunder]

Thats the thing though, the chipset probably wouldn't have had to be changed much at all. And they should have been able to handle it easily. The 68000 has a 16bit interface and kinda funky control bus setup but nothing too weird. I have seen 68020's connected to Apple II's so even if a little glue logic was required for OCS it could be completely fixed by ECS

[commodorejohn]

I've heard that the 65816 is roughly comparable in horsepower to the 68000, but it's not nearly as nice an architecture, and nothing you'd want to build a multitasking OS around. It might have been good for Commodore to go with a MOS CPU for the Amiga, but it should have been a completely new design.

[runequester]

Did the 65816 have a path forward with faster chips like the 68K ?

(Not being snarky here btw, Im not familiar with the chip in question)

[commodorejohn]

Nope. WDC was planning a 32-bit upgrade, but they haven't updated the news on it in years...

[Arkhan]

I've heard that the 65816 is roughly comparable in horsepower to the 68000, but it's not nearly as nice an architecture, and nothing you'd want to build a multitasking OS around. It might have been good for Commodore to go with a MOS CPU for the Amiga, but it should have been a completely new design.

The 65816 is a nightmare.  I think it is the worst CPU to code for, ever.

Thank God they used 68k

[KThunder]

I think you missed what I said, I said a 16bit 6502 compatible cpu and then mentioned the 65816 as an example that it could be done and done well. The apple IIgs is pretty impressive machine, and though it is clocked at 2.whatever mhz the snes does pretty well too. The gs was actually a good bit better than the original mac.


http://oldcomputers.net/appleiigs.html

[Arkhan]

and though it is clocked at 2.whatever mhz the snes does pretty well too.

You do know the SNES is a pain in the ass to develop for because of the 65816 being the CPU inside of it , right?

Among other things.