rooijen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (A.J. van Rooijen) (10/22/90)
>|#1 - Seperate the product line a500 and a2xxx. >| Simple to do: Don't allow the 1 meg agnus and don't upgrade >| A500s to 2.0. >| >|Doing this will make the seperation more than obvious. People who >|want to buy 500s for the kids can be quite happy with 512k of chip >|and Workbench 1.3. They people who want this machine will not care >|(need?) dealer support. >| >|The customer who does not want a machine that looks like a c128. >|(Sorry) and wants a machine that can do "professional" type >|applications (whether it can be done on the consumer 500 is not >|a issue since we are talking marketing not techie) on a tight >|bugdet will go the computer dealer and purchase a A2000 (A1500?). I think that you have forgotten one thing: a computer is professional by the software it is using. Look at the IBM computer, although there are certain hardware limitations you can run Ventura, Pagemaker, DBaseIV, WordPerfect 5.1. All these programs make the IBM a professional. So I think it is not wise to suppose that a few slots more (for $700 more) makes the A2000 suddenly a professional computer. I am a happy user of an A500 with 2MB memory and a SCSI-harddisk. It is the A500 which has made the success of the Amiga possible. Most people don't have large amounts of money to buy an A2000/A3000. This is also the reason why there are no really professional programs (except for graphics and AmigaTeX). I am getting tired of people stating their A2000 is so professional. If I want to do calculations or do graphics I use a DEC workstation( 40 MIPS, 1024*1024 pixels 16 million colors). If I want to play, write music or make a drawing I use my A500. I just use the right computer for the right job. I hope I have not offended anybody greetings Erwin van Breemen The Orega Programming Group Holland
manes@vger.nsu.edu (10/23/90)
In article <1990Oct22.020502.7545@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu>, vidynath@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) writes: > [Strange that there has no response to this. > Note that followup has been directed to comp.sys.amiga] I was very surprised. In fact, I expected my mailbox to get flooded with either 'you should not have posted that here ...' to 'your out of your tree, you must be competing for the MB Award. (Just kidding Marc!)' > > In article <62.2719a8e6@vger.nsu.edu> manes@vger.nsu.edu writes: > [followingup article <90286.132554DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu> by > DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu, who was complaining about 1meg chip ram not being > supported on the 500] > > I tried raising the 1500 idea way back in early 1988. There was a big > seperation in proce between 500 and 2000. Even then I was told that the cost > of development was not worth it. Today C-A is better equipped to price of the > 2000 agressively. Looking at the techie side of this, I would agree that there is no real need for a Amiga 1500, unless you consider the market. Right now, I think we all agree, Commodore needs a strong answer to the Macintosh Classic. The Amiga 1500 fits perfectly. > it was], it was better than the norm. I am sorry if C-A is indeed going to > leave the 500 owners in the lurch. Not sure it is fair to say leave in a lurch. Commodore is under no obligation to *improve* a given product. They are under obligation to *support* a product. The Amiga 500 has a long future and bright future in my opinion. > > There is only one good reason for not allowing the 1meg chip ram upgrade for > the 500: design limitations in the motherboard. [It is possible that too many I disagree. I think that the A500 must be technically different than a 2000 machine, not just looks. > > There was one commercial that made a deep impression on me when I first came > to the US: It was a car rental company that said "When you are number two, > you try harder." At that time I thought that Indian exporters shold live by > that credo. Now I wish that C-A would think that way too. I wish Commodore was number 2, but since they are not I suspect they are scrambling to keep their dealers and to enhance the product line without a lot of Research and Development. The A1500 and the A3500 is probably the result of this effort. Not to mention filling a void in the Amiga market. Sometimes you have to make hard decisions with limited dollars. > > -- > Vidhyanth Rao It is the man, not the method, that solves > function.mps.ohio-state.edu the problem. - Henri Poincare > (614)-366-9341 [as paraphrased by E. T. Bell] -mark= +--------+ ================================================== | \/ | Mark D. Manes "Mr. AmigaVision" | /\ \/ | manes@vger.nsu.edu | / | (804) 683-2532 "Make up your own mind! - AMIGA" +--------+ ==================================================
manes@vger.nsu.edu (10/23/90)
I redirected this to comp.sys.amiga, where I should have posted in the beginning! In article <1004@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl>, rooijen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (A.J. van Rooijen) writes: >>|#1 - Seperate the product line a500 and a2xxx. >>| Simple to do: Don't allow the 1 meg agnus and don't upgrade >>| A500s to 2.0. >>| [Lots of Brilliant Statements made by ME, deleted! :-)] > > I think that you have forgotten one thing: a computer is professional > by the software it is using. Look at the IBM computer, although there > are certain hardware limitations you can run Ventura, Pagemaker, DBaseIV, > WordPerfect 5.1. All these programs make the IBM a professional. So I Err, are you sure you want to say that? I do not consider the PS/2 Model 30 nor the PS/1 as a "professional" machine no matter what software runs on the beast! > think it is not wise to suppose that a few slots more (for $700 more) makes > the A2000 suddenly a professional computer. I am a happy user of an You are making my point! It is the slots and the box that makes the difference to the "buying" market, and most certainly the "business man". Most people think if it looks like a toy it is a toy. Whether you appreicate the fact that the 2000 has slots or comes in a traditional PC case is irrelevant. You made the pruchasing decision to buy a 500 becasue you were technically minded enough to KNOW the difference. There needs to be a REAL difference, and one of them is the amount of chip memory, availability of the bridgeboard / AT slots and Amiga slots. > A500 with 2MB memory and a SCSI-harddisk. It is the A500 which has made > the success of the Amiga possible. Most people don't have large amounts I agree that the 500 has helped the Amiga market greatly. However it has hurt the image of Commodore. The *reason* that (in my opinion) the high end folks are not porting software is that 70% of the Amigas in the world are 500s! If the 500 was a clear consumer machine and the 2xxx machine was a clear professional machine (and Commodore pushed advertising for the 2000) the software situation might be much different. Right now most people think of the Amiga has a hi-end C64. Not because of specs, but because of 'looks'. > of money to buy an A2000/A3000. This is also the reason why there are > no really professional programs (except for graphics and AmigaTeX). As far as most people go, them there 386 boxes are sure selling well. I dispute the "are no really professional programs". I consider AmigaVision, CEDPro, Imagine, 3d Professional, Word Perfect and Superbase to be equal or greater than the equivalents on the other platforms. However that is another subject. > I am getting tired of people stating their A2000 is so professional. Perhaps you need to define your idea of Professional. > If I want to do calculations or do graphics I use a DEC workstation( > 40 MIPS, 1024*1024 pixels 16 million colors). If I want to play, > write music or make a drawing I use my A500. I just use the right > computer for the right job. Now you see why there needs to be a seperate machine for the seperate individual who thinks this way. Perhaps you need to get know your Amiga 500 a bit more. Then look at a 3000, then come back and talk to me about a professional. BTW: Why is it that people like to compare the Amiga to the Workstations, and yet they never compare the PC to them? > > I hope I have not offended anybody > You did not offend me! > greetings > Erwin van Breemen > The Orega Programming Group Holland -mark= +--------+ ================================================== | \/ | Mark D. Manes "Mr. AmigaVision" | /\ \/ | manes@vger.nsu.edu | / | (804) 683-2532 "Make up your own mind! - AMIGA" +--------+ ==================================================
hill@evax.arl.utexas.edu (Col. Ames and Pixel) (10/23/90)
Ok CBM (or other knowledgable people) riddle me this:
If one can run 2.0 in a non-MMU setup with the penalty of loosing 512K of
RAM. Why not put out a version like that instead of a ROM version for 500's?
The ROM sockets for a 2000 and a 500 are not that much different, and there
are ALOT of 2000's out there that do not have a Fat Agnus in them.
I know we are not privy to CBM interals but I have a feeling that the
decision to release 2.0 for the 500 might be a MARKETING one rather than a
TECHNICAL one. I REALLLY hope this is not the case.
The 500 is not UNEXPANDABLE.. You could hook up a SCSI controller to the side
with RAM expansion. I could hook up the same 1.2Gig 3.5" HD and put the same
SIMMS that a 2000 would. Accelerators are nice but would be "hacks". They might
work but they still require HW modification.
If you want to flame take it to EMAIL and if anyone wants to assure me that
2.0 will be out for the 500 I would appreciate it as well.
--
adam hill Everybody lies about sex.
hill@evax.arl.utexas.edu BOING!4Ever Rub HER feet!
It's better to copulate than never
AmigaDos2.0 - A VW with $10,000 in options. --Robert A. Heinleinrooijen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (A.J. van Rooijen) (10/23/90)
In article <83.2722f559@vger.nsu.edu> manes@vger.nsu.edu writes: > >Err, are you sure you want to say that? I do not consider the PS/2 Model >30 nor the PS/1 as a "professional" machine no matter what software runs >on the beast! I have worked at one of the largest computer company in Holland. They sell for 90% IBM. The PS/2 Model 30 is part of their program. All these computers are used in the office. So I think it is a professional computer. They don't sell Amiga because of the lack of good 'office' software. >I dispute the "are no really professional programs". I consider AmigaVision, >CEDPro, Imagine, 3d Professional, Word Perfect and Superbase to be >equal or greater than the equivalents on the other platforms. However that >is another subject. The quality is just the point I am trying to make. Potentially is the Amiga a great computer for business. But the software is staying behind. Take Word Perfect for example. The Amiga version does not live up to the standard of the one running on a (beast of a) IBM model 30. Some features are just not implemented! This is often the result of making a quick conversion, leaving the difficult things out. This makes the Amiga looking bad. (Many games are also quick and bad conversions from the Atari St). SuperBase is indeed a great program. Only it is using a stupid dongle. I don't know any large company who will be prepared to use dongles to run a datebase. I already have said that the graphic programs of the Amiga are professional but that is not enough to ensure a place in the business market. Another important business area is DeskTop Publishing. I have read an article of a man who is making a living with designing graphics. (This was is one of the last dutch amiga magazines) He confirmed in the story that the current DeskTop Publishing programs are not good enough to be compared with the ones running on IBM and MAC. I hope therefore that the rumour about the release of PageMaker in may 1991 is true. >Perhaps you need to define your idea of Professional. > >Now you see why there needs to be a seperate machine for the seperate >individual who thinks this way. Perhaps you need to get know your >Amiga 500 a bit more. Then look at a 3000, then come back and talk >to me about a professional. I think I know a lot about the A500. I have build accelerator boards for my A500 and written many programs in assembly and C. My personal opinion about the A3000 is that the difference is not very much with the A500/A2000 range. OK, it is running a M68030 and Workbench 2.0. The graphics are basicly the same. The resolution of the A3000 has been increased but the number of colors not. For professional use are the number of colors very important, much more important than the number of pixels. I am studying astronomy and I need colors, at least 256 greyscales, which the A3000 does not provide. For calculations is the A3000 still slow even with a M68030 running on 25 Mhz. Sound has not been improved. I am afraid that the graphics and sound, once the reason I bought the A500, is now becoming the bottle neck of the A3000. The software situation for the A3000 is the same as for the A500/A3000. The main advantage of an A3000 over an A500/A2000 is speed. With PageMaker, a full conversion of WordPerfect and DBaseIV the A3000 can be a good alternative for the IBM and MAC range. But Commodore has got to make his moves right now because the competition is catching up in prices and multitasking abilities. This is the last thing I am saying about this subject. Greetings, Erwin van Breemen The Orega Programming Group Holland
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/23/90)
I'm sorry, but anyone saying the A500 should be restricted because of *marketing* reasons had better get ready for serious flames. It was bad enough abandoning the A1000 and it's only got 100,000 or so in circulation. With most Amiga users being A500 owners Commodore would pretty much kill what remains of their credibility with a move like that. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
manes@vger.nsu.edu (10/24/90)
In article <1007@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl>, rooijen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (A.J. van Rooijen) writes: > In article <83.2722f559@vger.nsu.edu> manes@vger.nsu.edu writes: >> > >>I dispute the "are no really professional programs". I consider AmigaVision, >>CEDPro, Imagine, 3d Professional, Word Perfect and Superbase to be >>equal or greater than the equivalents on the other platforms. However that >>is another subject. > > The quality is just the point I am trying to make. Potentially is the > Amiga a great computer for business. But the software is staying > behind. Take Word Perfect for example. The Amiga version does not > live up to the standard of the one running on a (beast of a) IBM > model 30. Some features are just not implemented! This is often the Tis true, some features of Word Perfect are not available for the Amiga. Perhaps that will change, certainly this is no reason to 'pan' the Amiga. > result of making a quick conversion, leaving the difficult things > out. This makes the Amiga looking bad. (Many games are also quick and Is Word Perfect your only example? Does this mean that >if< Word Perfect releases a 5.1 version for the Amiga, Commodores troubles are solved? Wiping brow... the solution is at hand. ProWrite, Excellence are quickly catching up to what Word Perfect has on the PC. > bad conversions from the Atari St). SuperBase is indeed a great General Statement. I have not games ported from the ST in a long long time. Perhaps an example. > program. Only it is using a stupid dongle. I don't know any large Err, I remember that for the longest time (and perhaps it is still true) that AutoCAD required a dongle like device. > >>Perhaps you need to define your idea of Professional. >> >>Now you see why there needs to be a seperate machine for the seperate >>individual who thinks this way. Perhaps you need to get know your >>Amiga 500 a bit more. Then look at a 3000, then come back and talk >>to me about a professional. > > I think I know a lot about the A500. I have build accelerator boards for > my A500 and written many programs in assembly and C. My personal That is indeed impressive. > opinion about the A3000 is that the difference is not very much with > the A500/A2000 range. OK, it is running a M68030 and Workbench 2.0. > The graphics are basicly the same. The resolution of the A3000 has been > increased but the number of colors not. For professional use are the Hold. Stop, that is enough! Neither the PC nor the Mac offers 24 bit color in a standard configuration. You may purchase these items from third parties, as you can NOW TODAY for the Amiga. I am so sick of hearing the 24 bit whine. For your reference, consider HAM-E, Firecracker-24, DCTV and Mimetics Framebuffer. Sure you want a new custom chip set, so do I, but blast it, be FAIR. > the A3000 still slow even with a M68030 running on 25 Mhz. Sound > has not been improved. I am afraid that the graphics and sound, Sound? Sound? You bring up sound? There is currently no computer (besides the GS) that comes with better sound chips than the current Amiga. This has been true for 5 years! > once the reason I bought the A500, is now becoming the bottle > neck of the A3000. The software situation for the A3000 is the > same as for the A500/A3000. The main advantage of an A3000 over > an A500/A2000 is speed. With PageMaker, a full conversion of Err, you left out a full 32bit bus, AMBER, etc. > WordPerfect and DBaseIV the A3000 can be a good alternative for > the IBM and MAC range. But Commodore has got to make his moves > right now because the competition is catching up in prices and > multitasking abilities. Perhaps you can 'expand' on what should be done. > This is the last thing I am saying about this subject. Do you promise? > > Greetings, > > Erwin van Breemen > The Orega Programming Group Holland -mark= +--------+ ================================================== | \/ | Mark D. Manes "Mr. AmigaVision" | /\ \/ | manes@vger.nsu.edu | / | (804) 683-2532 "Make up your own mind! - AMIGA" +--------+ ==================================================
manes@vger.nsu.edu (10/24/90)
In article <6876@sugar.hackercorp.com>, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > I'm sorry, but anyone saying the A500 should be restricted because of > *marketing* reasons had better get ready for serious flames. It was bad > enough abandoning the A1000 and it's only got 100,000 or so in circulation. > With most Amiga users being A500 owners Commodore would pretty much kill > what remains of their credibility with a move like that. > -- Perhaps you should open a dealership, and learn about this the hard way. Contrary to popular belief there is not enough profit in the A500 to keep dealers alive. Unless they sold mailorder, but hey, you don't want that do you? You might say sell the peripherals...well most 500 owners don't purchase many upgrades. Most 500 owners we have dealt with simply buy the machine to play with, the rare exception is someone who is doing real work with it. Perhaps this is different from region to region. They have to sell the Amiga 2xxx/3xxx to be viable. How do you propose to improve sales of the A2xxx/A3xxx without spending a great deal of money on R&D, and delivering a solution - NOW, when it is needed most? I do not believe Commodore can afford a big TV ad campaign again, and currently all of the products are in the midst of re-organization (at least from my viewpoint) Sorry, but I see little choice for Commodore. BTW: Improving a product is NOT a requirement of Commodore. Supporting a product is a requirement. Also, interestingly enough, my mail box has yet to have the first flame. Perhaps this has now changed. > Peter da Silva. `-_-' > <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. -mark= +--------+ ================================================== | \/ | Mark D. Manes "Mr. AmigaVision" | /\ \/ | manes@vger.nsu.edu | / | (804) 683-2532 "Make up your own mind! - AMIGA" +--------+ ==================================================
johnhlee@hermod.cs.cornell.edu (John H. Lee) (10/24/90)
In article <1990Oct22.213836.26854@evax.arl.utexas.edu> hill@evax.arl.utexas.edu (Col. Ames and Pixel) writes: > If one can run 2.0 in a non-MMU setup with the penalty of loosing 512K of ^^^^^^^ > RAM. Why not put out a version like that instead of a ROM version for 500's? > The ROM sockets for a 2000 and a 500 are not that much different, and there > are ALOT of 2000's out there that do not have a Fat Agnus in them. As far as I understand it, a RAM-based Kickstart you're thinking of *requires* an MMU to map the 2.0 Kickstart in RAM over the 1.3 Kickstart in ROM. You can't run the non-ROM 2.0 Kickstart in a non-MMU A2000 either. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The crew must save GfxBase! Next time on AmigaDos: The Next Generation. John Lee Internet: johnhlee@cs.cornell.edu The above opinions of those of the user, and not of this machine.
MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu (10/29/90)
In article <6876@sugar.hackercorp.com>, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) says: > >I'm sorry, but anyone saying the A500 should be restricted because of >*marketing* reasons had better get ready for serious flames. It was bad >enough abandoning the A1000 and it's only got 100,000 or so in circulation. >With most Amiga users being A500 owners Commodore would pretty much kill >what remains of their credibility with a move like that. >-- >Peter da Silva. `-_-' ><peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. Just to put in my $0.02, it's my experience that a lot of A500 owners (more than you might think!) bought the 500 because they wanted an Amiga, but could not afford a 2000. The only advantages of the 2000, anyway, are the 1 MB standard, and more slots. Look at it this way: the 500 has all the capabilities of the 2000. It is still expandable, just a bit more clunky to do so. So why shell out the extra $700 (or whatever), especially if you can't easily afford it? We need to get rid of the prejudice that all A500 owners bought their computers just to play games, and therefore can be tossed aside in the junkheap whenever the latest technical innovation comes along... such as 2.0. By the way, HAS C= actually ANNOUNCED they will not be putting the 2.0 ROMs in new 500's? Or is this just an evil rumor? I've read through this entire thread and the answer is never made clear. /Mark "Remixed for Common Household Appliances" Sachs - MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu\ |DISCLAIMER? Thanks to an amazing coincidence, these || // AMIGA || | | ARE PSU's opinions. No, really. || \X/ Power || | \===== "If I were not in the C.I.D., something else I'd like to be..." =====/