es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (10/31/90)
There is an advertisment in the October AmigaWorld for Sega Technical Insitute, a game-making division of Sega, programming for the Sega Genesis, a 68000 based game-machine. Apparently, they are looking for Amiga programmers to develop games on their network of 68030 Amigas for the Genesis. The Amiga is the development system on the Genesis. -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu GorbachevAwards++; free (SovietUnion); IndependentRepublics += 15;
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) (11/01/90)
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > > There is an advertisment in the October AmigaWorld for > Sega Technical Insitute, a game-making division of Sega, > programming for the Sega Genesis, a 68000 based game-machine. > Apparently, they are looking for Amiga programmers to develop > games on their network of 68030 Amigas for the Genesis. The Amiga > is the development system on the Genesis. > -- Ethan It's also the development system for the SNK Neo*Geo entertainment system. It's real new, and not on the market yet, but used a 68000. Amigas are also used for the Atari Lynx. Since Jay Miner has something to do with the Amiga, and he knew a lot about the Amiga, he decided tp use some of the Amiga's technology, thus making it hard to use an ST for the dev system. Reportedly Atari didn't like it much knowing that they had to use Amigas for the Lynx. Maybe Jay was doing us a favor! :) > > Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu > > GorbachevAwards++; > free (SovietUnion); > IndependentRepublics += 15; -Joseph Hillenburg UUCP: ...iuvax!valnet!joseph ARPA: valnet!joseph@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu INET: joseph@valnet.UUCP
peter@cbmvax.commodore.com (Peter Cherna) (11/02/90)
In article <77BXR3w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >It's also the development system for the SNK Neo*Geo entertainment >system. It's real new, and not on the market yet, but used a 68000. >Amigas are also used for the Atari Lynx. Since Jay Miner has something to >do with the Amiga, and he knew a lot about the Amiga, he decided tp use >some of the Amiga's technology, thus making it hard to use an ST for the >dev system. Reportedly Atari didn't like it much knowing that they had to >use Amigas for the Lynx. Maybe Jay was doing us a favor! :) The Amigans that worked on the Lynx included RJ Mical and Dave Needle. Jay Miner did not work on the Lynx. But yes, he did have "something to do with the Amiga"! >-Joseph Hillenburg Peter -- Peter Cherna, Software Engineer, Commodore-Amiga, Inc. {uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!peter peter@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com My opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions of my employer. "She read him like a book: she liked to peek at his end."
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) (11/02/90)
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >The Amiga is the development system on the [Sega] Genesis. Funny - the development system SSI has for the Genesis runs on a Mac. I think you've got a real FACTOID there, Ethan (or, at least, a partial factoid). -- Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.us
jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) (11/04/90)
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) writes: >es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >>The Amiga is the development system on the [Sega] Genesis. >Funny - the development system SSI has for the Genesis runs on a Mac. >I think you've got a real FACTOID there, Ethan (or, at least, a partial >factoid). The Lynx development system is in fact on the Amiga, as is the Genesis development system. Both facts are true facts. It is possible that development systems for the Genesis are also available for the Mac (68000 as well). John
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) (11/07/90)
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >Amigas are also used for the Atari Lynx. Since Jay Miner has something to >do with the Amiga, and he knew a lot about the Amiga, he decided tp use >some of the Amiga's technology, thus making it hard to use an ST for the >dev system. Reportedly Atari didn't like it much knowing that they had to >use Amigas for the Lynx. Maybe Jay was doing us a favor! :) Well, a couple of notes to clear things up a bit (I hope!). First - the Lynx was designed by Dave Needle and RJ Mical. I don't believe that Jay Miner had anything to do with it (although I might be wrong). Second - they designed it for Epyx, the game company. Atari bought the finished product when Epyx couldn't market it under their own name. Since the original design had no connection whatsoever with Atari, naturally they didn't use Atari machines for the development system! -- Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.us
ifarqhar@sunc.mqcc.mq.oz.au (Ian Farquhar) (11/08/90)
In article <77BXR3w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >Amigas are also used for the Atari Lynx. Since Jay Miner has something to >do with the Amiga, and he knew a lot about the Amiga, he decided tp use >some of the Amiga's technology, thus making it hard to use an ST for the >dev system. Reportedly Atari didn't like it much knowing that they had to >use Amigas for the Lynx. Maybe Jay was doing us a favor! :) Wrong. R.J. Mical and Dave Needle were involved with the Lynx. Jay Mical, to my knowledge, did not have anything to do with it. As for the old argument "the Amiga is the Lynx development system because no other computer had the power to do it", that is utter garbage. The original Lynx was designed by Epyx, and the designers used the Amiga because they developed that system previously. I can see no reason why the Lynx devsys could not be ported to any other computer, even (gasp!) MS-DOS. The thing that has stopped Atari doing just that is the high cost of redesigning the devsys hardware, and rewriting the development software. Both would be major jobs, and Atari - even if it wanted to spend that soft of money - could not afford the time delay involved. Personally, I am very happy that the Amiga is my devsys for Lynx software. In fact (as was pointed out by the previous poster), the Amiga seems to be becoming the devsys of choice for many consoles. At present, we have the Genesis, the Neo-Geo, the Lynx, the (if they ever get it out) the Konix Multisystem, and (of course) the CDTV. Additionally, a surprising number of coin-ops are just Amigas in boxes, and the Amiga is branching out (at last) into the instrumentation market and is becoming seen in laboratories and other similar areas. I see this as a *very* good thing. -- Ian Farquhar Phone : 61 2 805-9404 Office of Computing Services Fax : 61 2 805-7433 Macquarie University NSW 2109 Also : 61 2 805-7205 Australia EMail : ifarqhar@suna.mqcc.mq.oz.au
jmeissen@oregon.oacis.org ( Staff OACIS) (11/09/90)
In article <736@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> ifarqhar@sunc.mqcc.mq.oz.au (Ian Farquhar) writes: >............................................................ As >for the old argument "the Amiga is the Lynx development system because >no other computer had the power to do it", that is utter garbage. The >original Lynx was designed by Epyx, and the designers used >the Amiga because they developed that system previously. Actually, "no other computer had the power to do it" was our internal justification, too. At least the power to do it the way we thought it should be done. RJ and Dave had no qualms about using other machines. They both used Macs for all their business-related work and documentation. Epyx had a large investment in PC's, and wanted to build on that base, but we wanted something that would allow more flexibility and power. (of course, it didn't hurt that we were all Amiga fanatics :-) >I can see no reason why the Lynx devsys could not be ported to any other >computer, even (gasp!) MS-DOS. The thing that has stopped Atari doing >just that is the high cost of redesigning the devsys hardware, and >rewriting the development software. Both would be major jobs, and Atari >- even if it wanted to spend that soft of money - could not afford the >time delay involved. True, it's money that keeps Atari from redoing the development system. But it could never be ported to a non-multitasking machine. While the debugger and miscellaneous utilities like the assembler could stand alone, many other pieces would take significant rewriting. In order to achieve the development environment we developed, you would need a workstation. The Amiga is much more cost-effective and much nicer to work with. -- John Meissen .............................. Oregon Advanced Computing Institute jmeissen@oacis.org (Internet) | "That's the remarkable thing about life; ..!sequent!oacis!jmeissen (UUCP) | things are never so bad that they can't jmeissen (BIX) | get worse." - Calvin & Hobbes
MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu (11/10/90)
This article mentioned something that caught my interest... that many arcade video games are actually Amigas in a big cabinet. Which games are these? What, if anything, has been done to "upgrade" the Amigas to arcade-quality? (I.E. new chips, et cetera...) /Mark "Remixed for Common Household Appliances" Sachs - MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu\ |DISCLAIMER? You've GOT to be kidding, right? || // AMIGA || | | "Haven't they heard we won the war? || \X/ Power || | \== "What do they keep on fighting for?" -- B. Joel, LENINGRAD =============/
utoddl@uncecs.edu (Todd M. Lewis) (11/16/90)
In article <736@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> ifarqhar@sunc.mqcc.mq.oz.au (Ian Farquhar) writes: >Additionally, a surprising number of coin-ops are just Amigas in boxes, Can anybody give a list of coin-ops which are just Amigas in boxes? Enquiring minds etc... --Todd;