What is the best Amiga in your Opinion?

[Damion]

Then i am lucky since i have 3 Amiga 2000 and 1 Amiga 4000

Yes, very lucky. :pint: My first big-box was an A2000 I picked up some years ago, and spent a long while hunting down various expansions making it perfect for me. (The 2000 is definitely one of my favorites!) Up until that point, I had always had 500's and 1200's. I really enjoyed being able to buy cards, then plop them in the huge case without any fuss, or worry about cooling or power. My first RTG card was a CV64/3D, which was simply amazing compared to AGA.

Expanding the 1200 much beyond an accelerator and a few do-dads always felt like a complete hack-fest, not to mention the sheer terror of the clockport, and mounting challenges increasing the risk of frying something. Even the accelerator can be a pain, since most of them have the CPU facing down - I really despised having the 1200 "up on blocks" when I had the Blizz 1260 in there, simply ridiculous when you can't close the trapdoor and call it good.

[lassie]

Yes, very lucky. :pint: My first big-box was an A2000 I picked up some years ago, and spent a long while hunting down various expansions making it perfect for me. (The 2000 is definitely one of my favorites!) Up until that point, I had always had 500's and 1200's. I really enjoyed being able to buy cards, then plop them in the huge case without any fuss, or worry about cooling or power. My first RTG card was a CV64/3D, which was simply amazing compared to AGA.

Expanding the 1200 much beyond an accelerator and a few do-dads always felt like a complete hack-fest, not to mention the sheer terror of the clockport, and mounting challenges increasing the risk of frying something. Even the accelerator can be a pain, since most of them have the CPU facing down - I really despised having the 1200 "up on blocks" when I had the Blizz 1260 in there, simply ridiculous when you can't close the trapdoor and call it good.[/QUOTE

Yes there sure is some space in those Amiga 2000. And they are some heavy machines, they sure did not Compromise when they build them i am glad to have mine, even if they take up a lot of space in my apartment What Amigas do you have now?

[Digiman]

Amiga 1000, the only Amiga that was the best desktop computer, AND best looking, in the world on the day it was launched. Downhill all the way from A500 really.

A1200 once reduced to £299 was a good machine too, not at £399 without SIMM slots for fast ram though. 2.5" IDE was a classic cockup.

Rest were either ugly, overpriced, cheaply made or had zero improvements over A1000 OCS worth nothing.

The A4000/030 was a special dead turkey, all people wanted was a 28mhz 020 (same speed) with 2+2 memory in an Amiga 1000/3000 style slim case (for use of cheap 3.5 IDE drives) which Commodore could have produced for half the cost of A4000/030. Commodore gave us a 486 priced Amiga with 286 performance....nice!

A4000/040 was at least justifiable in 1991 on spec/price. Not in 92-94 though.

[Damion]

What Amigas do you have now?

I have a small collection, mostly 500's and 1200's, a few 600's, 2000's, 3000's, and a 4000D. Also a fair number of Zorro cards and accelerators. One of the 1200's sees the most use these days for the odd game or demo. The others haven't been turned on in quite a while, mainly for lack of time. I wouldn't mind a 4000T someday, but probably won't seek one out unless I suddenly find myself with an abundance of time and money. :-)

[lassie]

Amiga 1000, the only Amiga that was the best desktop computer, AND best looking, in the world on the day it was launched. Downhill all the way from A500 really.

A1200 once reduced to £299 was a good machine too, not at £399 without SIMM slots for fast ram though. 2.5" IDE was a classic cockup.

Rest were either ugly, overpriced, cheaply made or had zero improvements over A1000 OCS worth nothing.

The A4000/030 was a special dead turkey, all people wanted was a 28mhz 020 (same speed) with 2+2 memory in an Amiga 1000/3000 style slim case (for use of cheap 3.5 IDE drives) which Commodore could have produced for half the cost of A4000/030. Commodore gave us a 486 priced Amiga with 286 performance....nice!

A4000/040 was at least justifiable in 1991 on spec/price. Not in 92-94 though.

I have a Commodore 128D, i think it looks a lot like the Amiga 1000 in style

[lassie]

I have a small collection, mostly 500's and 1200's, a few 600's, 2000's, 3000's, and a 4000D. Also a fair number of Zorro cards and accelerators. One of the 1200's sees the most use these days for the odd game or demo. The others haven't been turned on in quite a while, mainly for lack of time. I wouldn't mind a 4000T someday, but probably won't seek one out unless I suddenly find myself with an abundance of time and money. :-)

I also have an Amiga 600, it is quite a cute little Amiga i think

[lassie]

Amiga 1000, the only Amiga that was the best desktop computer, AND best looking, in the world on the day it was launched. Downhill all the way from A500 really.

A1200 once reduced to £299 was a good machine too, not at £399 without SIMM slots for fast ram though. 2.5" IDE was a classic cockup.

Rest were either ugly, overpriced, cheaply made or had zero improvements over A1000 OCS worth nothing.

The A4000/030 was a special dead turkey, all people wanted was a 28mhz 020 (same speed) with 2+2 memory in an Amiga 1000/3000 style slim case (for use of cheap 3.5 IDE drives) which Commodore could have produced for half the cost of A4000/030. Commodore gave us a 486 priced Amiga with 286 performance....nice!

A4000/040 was at least justifiable in 1991 on spec/price. Not in 92-94 though.

Yes it sure went fast in the beginning of the 90`s PC were getting bigger and faster very fast, just think of Wolfenstein in 1992 and Doom in 1993, it easy to see why Amiga could not compete with other machines. my Amiga 4000/030 with 18 mb ram can not run Doom very well.

[bitcpy]

"The Amiga" will always have a special place in my heart. Yes, its not the fastest, yes its not the most expandable, but, damn is it ever pretty to look at and use! (For those that don't know, the Amiga 1000 was "The Amiga").
 
The closest analogy I can come up with is:
 
It was the first release of a multi-sequel movie where each sequel was either pretty good, or an outright fail, but, it left you always going back to watch the original.
 
I think the A1200 is the "best bang for the buck" in terms of power and expandability.
 
I think the A3000 is the best looking of all the powerful Amigas.
 
I think the A4000 is the top dog if you just want to build the most expandable, most powerful Amiga.
 
So, what do you do in this situation; pick the one that suits you best, or,  get 1 of each and enjoy!

[nomore]

For style of the case, I like the A500 best.

But overall, the A1200. Nice desktop all-in-one with impressive expandability, and AGA chipset.

Got a sweet spot for the A600 too.

I've not seen any big box Amigas in real life, so can't compare those,

[paolone]

I guess my favourite Amiga model was the one I bought long ago: the A1200, which replaced the A500 I bought 8 months before just to continue writing for the italian Zzap! magazine (they didn't accept anymore documents written with C64 word processors - they were too much a trouble to transfer to the Macintosh and be converted in a compatible ASCII table in the meanwhile). It had everything I needed, since I added in no time 4 MB of Fast RAM and a whopping 40 MB (!!!) IDE hard drive. It's been a little, amazing and fun computer.

Now the place that once was for my A1200 has been taken by my Icaros powered AspireOne A150: quite a nice little platform which gives me back the same emotions. I turn it on and aftware few seconds I am on the Internet. And I can use it for practically everything I did with my A1200, leaving all the boring stuff for more powerful and mainstream platforms.

[whabang]

I kinda like the A600 even though it's crap. Dunno why.

[lassie]

I kinda like the A600 even though it's crap. Dunno why.

mayby it is because it is so small its kinda a cool Amiga

[J-Golden]

A4000T, hands down.  It has all the expandability of an A2000, the options of SCSI and IDE and the latest chipsets.

Plus it is awesome to behold.

[blakespot]

I have owned at least one of every Amiga model ever produced, and my favorite is the Amiga 2000.  I also like the Amiga 500.  I have owned several Amiga 1200 computers in like new condition, with their original boxes.  They were very low quality, poorly made crap, so I sold them.  I owned several Amiga 4000 computers, also in like new condition.  Again, very low quality and poorly designed crap.  Sold them too, before I started having problems with them.  Do not even get me started on the Amiga 600 junk.  The only zorro 3 Amiga I like is the Amiga 3000, but, it has major design flaws too, and the quality is not as high as the Amiga 2000 or the 500.  Remember, the most popular and number one selling Amiga model is the Amiga 500.
 
PERSONAL EXPERIANCE:  I always have problems with "surface mount" Amiga models.  I almost never have problems with the "thru-hole" Amiga models.  I never have any problems with Workbench 1.3 to 3.1.  I always have problems with Workbench 3.5 and 3.9.  I think it is because these particular Workbenches were NOT done by Commodore, but by greedy jerks that just wanted to continue making money by bringing out "newer versions" of the old Amiga OS.
 
SUMMERY:  Amiga 2000 or 500 with KS / WB 1.3 to 3.1 equals almost no problems, works great.  Anything newer, nothing but problems.  So, you decide which is the best Amiga models, and BE HONEST (do not let personal ego interfer with your judgement).

Damned straight.

I just upgraded my A2000 with an '060 and Picasso II. Loving it. It is my favorite Amiga. Number two is the Amiga 1000. I bought the first one sold in the state of Virginia, USA in October 1985. Still have one. Love it.

My tower A1200 '060 has given me trouble after trouble...




bp

[smerf]

Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why

i like my amiga 4000 and amiga 600 the best, i find that almost all games run good on them. but i also like my old amiga 2000 that old girl still keeps going :-)

Hi,

My favorite was the Amiga 1000, I had 4 meg of ram, 6 scsi drives with a supra scsi card, and had 4 floppy drives. It was hard to expand but well worth it when done. Oh yeah, I also upgraded to a 68010 processor.

My next favorite is the CD 32, have the SX-1 expansion, so this thing rocks. Just like a 4000 but it has a built in cd, so I don't have to jump through loops loading it up. I have 2 megs of ram, and a 250 meg hd.

My A4000 is my work computer. Hardly use it anymore since I have Linux on my Intel machine and also have Cloanto's Amiga Forever, which believe it or not is the most useable Amiga of all. It just works. Don't worry about PAL, NTSC, memory, downgrading, floppy or HD game. I click on the ADF and it runs.

Don't need no MAC, or special built PC to run AROS. AF just works.

Don't have to wait 10 years for some programmer to figure out how to make it look and feel like an Amiga because AF just works.

AF is fast, efficient, user friendly, works with most modern day equipment, and it just works.

Did I mention that Amiga Forever (AF) just works

smerf

[J-Golden]

My tower A1200 '060 has given me trouble after trouble...

bp

Same!  My first major upgraded Amiga was a towered A1200 with Winner and Mediator board and it.  Sucker had all kinds of issues no matter WHAT I did...

I must have sold it in a fit of blind rage because I know I had it one day and it was gone another.  That was years and years and years ago.  LOVE my A4000T as it is SO much more stable...