Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com (07/08/89)
Does Commodore have any plans for a 2000 or, better yet a 2500
relieved of alllll its IBM compatibility??? I need bridgecards and
IBM slots about as much as I need a hole in the head. I DO, however,
have great need of room for Amiga slots and a faster processor and
would greatly appreciate the availability of a 1500 (2000 without IBM stuff)
or 2200 (2500 with IBM ditto)--better still. I'm SURE I'm not the only one.
LadyHawkelimonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (07/09/89)
This was discussed earlier. The designer (Dave Haynie) posted an
interesting message where he costed the whole thing out and the
difference in price was about $50-$100. That's the difference that
the customer would see.
The reason for this is that the IBM slots use the Amiga's power supply
(P/Ss are very expensive when compared to other parts of the computer)
and has no intelligence (no costly chips, etc; the connectors are
basically "there" and all the pin-1's are connected, all the pin-2's
are connected, etc). All the logic and expensive parts are on the
bridgeboard. So, the cost is really in the connectors and the extra
time it takes the machine to place them and connect them.
It is a good idea, but when you cost it out it isn't at practical as
we'd all hope for. Sorry that the news wasn't better!
-Tom
--
Tom Limoncelli -- tlimonce@drunivac.Bitnet -- limonce@pilot.njin.net
Drew University -- Box 1060, Madison, NJ -- 201-408-5389
Standard Disclaimer: I am not the mouth-piece of Drew University
"DEC's All-In-1 isn't completely useless, but it's a nice attempt."jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) (07/09/89)
In article <20219@cup.portal.com> Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com writes: > Does Commodore have any plans for a 2000 or, better yet a 2500 >relieved of alllll its IBM compatibility??? I need bridgecards and >IBM slots about as much as I need a hole in the head. I DO, however, >have great need of room for Amiga slots and a faster processor and >would greatly appreciate the availability of a 1500 (2000 without IBM stuff) >or 2200 (2500 with IBM ditto)--better still. I'm SURE I'm not the only one. > LadyHawke Silly question: Are you aware that the bridgecard is optional? You don't HAVE to purchase it when you buy an Amiga 2000 or 2500. More important question: Have you ever looked at a 2000 with its cover off? The IBM compatibility consists of four 64-pin sockets, two 36-pin sockets, a set of termination resistors/capacitors, and traces on the printed circuit board connecting all this together. That's all there is! Redesigning the motherboard without those IBM slots won't bring down the price much. The expensive stuff is on the Bridgeboard; if you don't buy that, you pay pretty much nothing for potential IBM compatibility. -- Joe Smith (408)922-6220 | SMTP: JMS@F74.TYMNET.COM or jms@tymix.tymnet.com McDonnell Douglas FSCO | UUCP: ...!{ames,pyramid}!oliveb!tymix!tardis!jms PO Box 49019, MS-D21 | PDP-10 support: My car's license plate is "POPJ P," San Jose, CA 95161-9019 | narrator.device: "I didn't say that, my Amiga did!"
perley@vdsvax.crd.ge.com (Perley Donald P) (07/09/89)
In article <314@tardis.Tymnet.COM> jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) writes: >In article <20219@cup.portal.com> Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com writes: >> Does Commodore have any plans for a 2000 or, better yet a 2500 >>relieved of alllll its IBM compatibility??? I need bridgecards and >>IBM slots about as much as I need a hole in the head. I DO, however, >>have great need of room for Amiga slots and a faster processor and >The IBM compatibility consists of four 64-pin sockets, two 36-pin sockets, a >set of termination resistors/capacitors, and traces on the printed circuit >board connecting all this together. That's all there is! Redesigning the >motherboard without those IBM slots won't bring down the price much. The point isn't just the cost. As it is now there are less amiga slots than there could be. The way the busses are set up, you get a choice of 2 positions for mounting the bridgecard, depending on whether you want to maximize the number of amiga or pc slots. I can't look now (since I am using the computer to write this :-), but is there any reason not to extend this theme so the bridge could go in the last slot if desired? Then if you skip the bridge altogether, all the slots could be used for amiga cards. -don perley -- Reply-to: chinet!steinmetz!vdsvax!perley
erk@americ.UUCP (Erick Parsons) (07/10/89)
>easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) Message-ID: <446@aucis.UUCP> writes: >>In article <Jul.8.13.02.59.1989.7841@pilot.njin.net>, limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: >> This was discussed earlier. The designer (Dave Haynie) posted an >> interesting message where he costed the whole thing out and the >> difference in price was about $50-$100. That's the difference that >> the customer would see. > Ah, but Commodore's marketing group sell a lot of them if they >presented it right. Try this scenario: > > CBM introduces a Amiga 1500. System is a 15" x 15" x 4" system box >with three horizontal Zorro II expansion slots. All the ususal components >found in the B2000 are included on the motherboard. ( A nice option at Right on !! I and probably thousands of others have this same exact system piece mealed together w / subsytems (myself) and too numerous to list other expansion chassis's. IMHO 60% of all Amiga owners would be happily pleased to have 2-3 expansion slots on a STOCK Amiga. The I*M stuff is irrelevant (irreverant) to most Amiga owners and could be done away with completely as far as I'm concerned. I would just as soon buy an I*M compatible (yuch :-( box for the same price as a bridgeboard than spend the x-tra bucks to des- icrate my beautiful Amiga. As it stands right now w/ two expansion slots my box is (again IMHO) purrfect. All that the average user really wants, needs or can somehow afford is: Ram Expansion, Hard Drive.... Baby Boomer talking here Commodore: Instead of reaching for the stars w/ 030 boxes why not fill the niche that is STRONGLY in between the 500 and 2000. I've a feeling that you could easily upgrade A-500 users and attract a large audiance of sens- ible buyers at the same time. But then again what do I know, I am just a stupid customer :-) PS. I would REALLY like to have three slots -- ------------------ // -----------Cut-Here---------------------------------- Erick Parsons // Words for the wise: *If it works don't fix it.* Sacramento Ca // mail to: ...pacbell!sactoh0!americ!erk ------------- \\// --------------------------------------------------------
easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) (07/10/89)
In article <Jul.8.13.02.59.1989.7841@pilot.njin.net>, limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: > This was discussed earlier. The designer (Dave Haynie) posted an > interesting message where he costed the whole thing out and the > difference in price was about $50-$100. That's the difference that > the customer would see. > > The reason for this is that the IBM slots use the Amiga's power supply > (P/Ss are very expensive when compared to other parts of the computer) [...] > bridgeboard. So, the cost is really in the connectors and the extra > time it takes the machine to place them and connect them. > > It is a good idea, but when you cost it out it isn't at practical as > we'd all hope for. Sorry that the news wasn't better! > > -Tom Ah, but Commodore's marketing group sell a lot of them if they presented it right. Try this scenario: CBM introduces a Amiga 1500. System is a 15" x 15" x 4" system box with three horizontal Zorro II expansion slots. All the ususal components found in the B2000 are included on the motherboard. ( A nice option at this point would be to include 4 SIMM sockets on the motherboard for FAST memory to 4 Mbytes .) Auto config circuitry could be on the 3 slot expansion daughter board. Power supply is rated at around 80 watts. This is sufficent to power three expansion boards and two drive units. Mass storage options are two 3.5" drive bays. Any combination of floppys or hard disks. i.e. 1 FD, 2 FD, 1 FD & 1 HD. Ships with 1 floppy as standard. No IBM PCAT slots, no coprocessor slot. Sells for about $500.00 less than B2000. Cost reduction comes from smaller power supply (200 W -> 80 W), reduced number of connectors (4 AT, 2 zorro, 1 video), smaller PC board, less metal, additional glue logic put into a gate array. Does this sound familiar? Can you say, Mac IICX? How is fast is Apple selling those? (hint, they cant make enough of 'em). They could sell a lot of these machines in the European market. The European market has practically dictated this form factor for a system box. They want something about the size of the monitor. Big boxes dont sell well in Europe like they do here. Take a look at a PS2 model 30 or Z286LP to see what I'm talking about. What would you do only three slots? Well, a A2090A/B/C... HD controller is a must, and then maybe a 8MB RAM card for slot #2 (especially if the motherboard dosent have the 4 SIMM sockets). That leaves 1 slot for a super video card or modem card or, or... A nice touch would be a motherboard swap/upgrade to a 68030 system around a year after intro. That may cause problems with marketing the B2000 unless a simalar option was available for it. I for one would have bought the above machine instead of my B2000. PC compatibility? I dont need it, I'm drowning in PC's around here :>. Accelerator boards? A '030 mother board would fix that. There, thats my $0.02 worth. Jeff Easton UUCP: !mailrus!sharkey!aucis!easton Zenith Data Systems OEM Engineering
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (07/10/89)
In <727@bnr-fos.UUCP>, protcoop@bnr-public.uucp (Co-op Student) writes: >Yes, but is that "save $200 and get extra Amiga slots where the IBM ones >used to be"? If so, I'll take it. What the heck good do IBM slots do >someone who only wants an Amiga? All they do is make him wish they were >REAL slots and curse C= . Well, I think they are rather useless too, but I don't go flaming CBM for having them there. This could be because I have looked inside the beast. You should too. The 'PC' slots do not take up Amiga slot space. -larry -- Real Amiga hackers write printer drivers using Metascope. +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca or uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
bob@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (robert s. richardson) (07/10/89)
Don't remove the video slot! I can see the point in the smaller footprint and the lact of IBM slots, but you also kill any advantage in the video market if you lose the video slot, and you can't use flicker-fixer without that as well. In fact, I would LOVE to have an extra video slot in the 2000! We are purchasing a SuperGen 2000S for KBVR-TV as soon as it becomes available (FCC delays) and it occupies the video slot. We would also like to use FlickerFixer at the same time for the workstation when we design 3-d animations. Having that sharp a screen would make development go a lot faster with a lot less eyestrain, and the SG2000S would then encode to NTSC for videotaping. THe FlikerFixer does not modify the video signals to the bus, so it is conceivable that they could co-exist. Also, the ability to use a frame buffer that occupies a video slot with somebody else's genlock and a flicker fixer would be great. You could de-interlace incoming television signals. This is called IDTV! Also, for all of you wanting to lose the IBM slots, I know of a few products that already use that bus without needing a bridgecard such as the Magni Genlock encoder board, and somebody makes an audio amp that lives on the IBM side and draws power from there. And hey out there in developer land: How about a MULTI-PORT MIDI card like those on the Mac and add-ons for the ST. You know, two or more INDEPENDANT midi OUT's so you can have 32 channels or more simultaneously. This is VERY VERY useful in larger MIDI setups especially those with lots of multi-timbral synths and those that use a lot of aftertouch and other controllers and don't want to clog the bandwidth of one cable. Or how about some software that will talk accross the bridgecard to the IBM MIDI cards and feed that into that MIDI library everyone has been talking about? Can the ASDG dual serial board be taught to do MIDI baud rate on a current-loop? How about an Amiga 500-II, say an A-500 motherboard in a 19" wide by 3" tall box with two drives built in and the 1-meg expansion on the main board, and a detatched keyboard. I say 19" so that it can be rack- mounted. Good for musicians. It could make a killing in the MIDI market with a good interface and rack-mountability. Anyone out there interested in taking A500 motherboards and repackaging them in such a cabinet? Can the A2000 keyboard be hooked up to an A500 motherboard with little difficulty? Thanks for any answers or comments, | Bob Richardson (or, for you UNIX buffs: bob@jacobs.cs.orst.edu) | | 218 NW 21st #2 Corvallis, OR 97330 503-758-5018 | | "They have taken my Jesus and locked him up in a church!" - Unknown |
denbeste@bbn.com (Steven Den Beste) (07/10/89)
In article <446@aucis.UUCP>, easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: > (A lengthy redesign of the 2000 - cut down the supply and get rid of some > edge connectors, and somehow cut $500 off the list price. Somehow.) > > I for one would have bought the above machine instead of my B2000. > PC compatibility? I dont need it, I'm drowning in PC's around here :>. > Accelerator boards? A '030 mother board would fix that. > > There, thats my $0.02 worth. > > Jeff Easton UUCP: !mailrus!sharkey!aucis!easton > Zenith Data Systems OEM Engineering And there we have the key: Why the hell should Commodore make a machine which undercuts the 2000 and has a lower profit margin than the 2000 without raising total sales. That doesn't sound very wise to me. Please, PLEASE remember that Commodore's best interests intersect with, but do not precisely equal, your own. If you can cite object lessons from other companies, then I'll cite one. Remember the PCjr? The idea was cockeyed from the beginning. IBM wanted to try to break into the home market, but they didn't want to design a machine which was cheaper than the PC but had all the same features. So they crippled the PCjr and it died on the market. They were on the horns of a dilemma: They could either: 1. Give it enough features to be reasonable and watch the sales of their $2700 PC drop by as much as the PCjr rose, or 2. Cripple the PCjr and risk market rejection. They chose the latter route. Commodore has ridden a different path. You can choose "cheap" (the 500) or "expandable" (the 2000). I don't see any room in there for a third path. There is NO BENEFIT FOR COMMODORE in selling your "1500", even if they COULD match the price you quote. [And I don't think that "it'll have a nice small footprint which is more in favor in Europe" is a sufficient benefit.] Steven C. Den Beste, BBN Communications Corp., Cambridge MA denbeste@bbn.com(ARPA/CSNET/UUCP) harvard!bbn.com!denbeste(UUCP)
protcoop@bnr-public.uucp (Co-op Student) (07/10/89)
Yeah! If I wanted a bloody IBM pee cee I would have bought one! Get off your butt C= and give us a computer that doesn't smell of IBM. There was a nice letter to the editor in a recent (the last?) issue of Amazing Computing that gives one person's opinion on why they do this. I thought it was pretty good. -------------------------------------- Alan W. McKay | My opinions are mine, yours are yours. | Eat Food | NEPEAN, Ont. | I in no way pretend to represent the | and | 613-763-8980 | the options of my employer. So there. | LIVE !! |
protcoop@bnr-public.uucp (Co-op Student) (07/10/89)
Yes, but is that "save $200 and get extra Amiga slots where the IBM ones used to be"? If so, I'll take it. What the heck good do IBM slots do someone who only wants an Amiga? All they do is make him wish they were REAL slots and curse C= . ------------------------ Alan W. McKay | My opinions are mine, yours are yours. | Eat Food | NEPEAN, Ont. | I in no way pretend to represent the | and | 613-763-8980 | the options of my employer. So there. | LIVE !! |
daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (07/10/89)
in article <8823@vdsvax.crd.ge.com>, perley@vdsvax.crd.ge.com (Perley Donald P) says: >>The IBM compatibility consists of four 64-pin sockets, two 36-pin sockets, a >>set of termination resistors/capacitors, and traces on the printed circuit >>board connecting all this together. That's all there is! Redesigning the >>motherboard without those IBM slots won't bring down the price much. > The point isn't just the cost. As it is now there are less amiga > slots than there could be. Nope. Even without the PC slots, you'd still have the same number of Amiga slots; there's no wasted Amiga space due to the PC bus. Unless you attach a bridge card, but if you're of the mind that a bridge card is wasted space instead of a utility, you won't add one. > .. but is there any reason not to extend this theme so the bridge could go > in the last slot if desired? Then if you skip the bridge altogether, all > the slots could be used for amiga cards. The bridge card can go in the last Amiga slot. Obviously it needs an Amiga slot and a PC slot, or it wouldn't be "bridging". The space to the left of the last Amiga slot is used by bus termination logic, and that has to be there, so even with a 6 slot Buster chip (the current 8721 only supports 5 slots) you couldn't run a slot all the way to the end of the board. You can do that with the PC bus, since there's nothing actually going from the motherboard to the PC bus, so it doesn't matter all that much which side of the PC bus gets the termination logic. > -don perley -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: D-DAVE H BIX: hazy Be careful what you wish for -- you just might get it
langz@asylum.SF.CA.US (Lang Zerner) (07/11/89)
>In article <20219@cup.portal.com> Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com writes: >> Does Commodore have any plans for a 2000 or, better yet a 2500 >>relieved of alllll its IBM compatibility??? I need bridgecards and >>IBM slots about as much as I need a hole in the head. I DO, however, >>have great need of room for Amiga slots and a faster processor and >>would greatly appreciate the availability of a 1500 (2000 without IBM stuff) >>or 2200 (2500 with IBM ditto)--better still. I'm SURE I'm not the only one. >> LadyHawke > In article <314@tardis.Tymnet.COM> jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) replies: >Silly question: Are you aware that the bridgecard is optional? You don't >HAVE to purchase it when you buy an Amiga 2000 or 2500. > >More important question: Have you ever looked at a 2000 with its cover off? >... Redesigning the motherboard without those IBM slots won't bring down the >price much. > >The expensive stuff is on the Bridgeboard; if you don't buy that, you >pay pretty much nothing for potential IBM compatibility. This response suggests that the Joe feels Julie's aim is to eliminate IBM compatibilty. If you reread Julie's posting, you'll see that she does not wish simply to remove the IBM slots, but to replace them with Amiga slots. Now, I don't have a 2000-series machine, but as I understand it, the slots after the two bridge slots are IBM-only slots, yes? Though I personally intend to use an AT Bridgeboard (when they become available) with my soon-to-be purchased 2000, I can certainly see the value to an Amiga user of having more slots available for Amiga boards. -- Be seeing you... --Lang Zerner ARPA:langz@athena.mit.edu MX:langz@asylum.sf.ca.us UUCP:bionet!asylum!langz "...and every morning we had to go and LICK the road clean with our TONGUES!"
nsw@cbnewsm.ATT.COM (Neil Weinstock) (07/11/89)
In article <7253@cbmvax.UUCP> daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) .sigs: >Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests" > {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: D-DAVE H BIX: hazy > Be careful what you wish for -- you just might get it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hey, when did this get in there? Pretty loaded coming from "the 32-bit guy". Gotta go find me a wishing well... ;-) /.- -- .. --. .- .-. ..- .-.. . ... .- -- .. --. .- .-. ..- .-.. . ...\ / Neil Weinstock | att!cord!nsw | "One man's garbage is another \ \ AT&T Bell Labs | nsw@cord.att.com | man's prune danish." - Harv Laser / \.- -- .. --. .- .-. ..- .-.. . ... .- -- .. --. .- .-. ..- .-.. . .../
DMasterson@cup.portal.com (David Scott Masterson) (07/11/89)
In message <42427@bbn.com>, denbeste@bbn.com writes: >Commodore has ridden a different path. You can choose "cheap" (the 500) or >"expandable" (the 2000). I don't see any room in there for a third path. There >is NO BENEFIT FOR COMMODORE in selling your "1500", even if they COULD match >the price you quote. [And I don't think that "it'll have a nice small footprint >which is more in favor in Europe" is a sufficient benefit.] > Wrong, banana breath! (forgive me -- I've always wanted to say that :-) No, actually, you don't need a third path to identify the reasons. One is "cheaper" (vis-a-vis the A2000) and the other is "more expandable" (vis-a-vis the A500). I think there is plenty of room in these two reasons to justify more from Commodore where the Amiga is concerned. Already, there is call for a more powerful/expandable Amiga "workstation" (A3000). I could see good reason for an A250 (one zero) for more of the home market (Commodore's more traditional market). So why not something for those who feel they need more than an A500 and less than an A2000 (did someone say A1000?? ;-). There may be a market (although, I think there is more of a market in shooting higher and lower than the current levels). David Masterson DMasterson@cup.portal.com
farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren) (07/11/89)
In article <446@aucis.UUCP> easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: > Cost reduction comes from smaller power supply (200 W -> 80 W), reduced >number of connectors (4 AT, 2 zorro, 1 video), smaller PC board, less >metal, additional glue logic put into a gate array. Cost increases come from overhead costs of redesigining the case, new manufacturing facilities, additional costs of supporting a new model, design and manufacture of "additional glue logic". You don't win. You might not even break even. -- Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.usa
dleigh@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM (Darren Leigh) (07/12/89)
In article <727@bnr-fos.UUCP> protcoop@bnr-public.UUCP (Co-op Student) writes: > >Yes, but is that "save $200 and get extra Amiga slots where the IBM ones >used to be"? If so, I'll take it. What the heck good do IBM slots do >someone who only wants an Amiga? All they do is make him wish they were >REAL slots and curse C= . >------------------------ >Alan W. McKay | My opinions are mine, yours are yours. | Eat Food | >NEPEAN, Ont. | I in no way pretend to represent the | and | >613-763-8980 | the options of my employer. So there. | LIVE !! | What the heck good do IBM slots do for someone who only wants an Amiga?? They sell more Amigas so that more software, hardware and support is available for the Amiga-only user. When large companies or the government buy computers they have a long list of capabilities that the computers must be able to do (either as is or with apropriate options). PeeCee compatibility is a pretty common thing to see for microcomputers. Puting in those PC slots was a very wise decision on C-A's part. The slots are cheap, they don't displace any Amiga slots and they allow the Amiga to break into the corporate and government environments. What's more, someday someone will build a dumb bridgeboard which will allow those of us who hate PC's but love cheap PC hardware to use the cheap stuff on a real microcomputer. ======== Darren Leigh Internet: dleigh@hplabs.hp.com UUCP: hplabs!dleigh
OHA101%URIACC.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu (F. Michael Theilig) (07/12/89)
I feel compelled to give my opinion here. When I was looking at
the Amiga, I was looking twords the A500. Price WAS an object.
I hate the A500's style. It looks like a C128. I immagine that it
was aimed at the home computer/game machine market. I think higher
of the Amiga than to call it a game machine.
The 2000 was expensive and I didn't think I needed all of the extra
stuff. Definately not the PC slots, no 5 1/4 inch drive bay, possibly
not all of the Amiga slots, maybe not the video and co-processor
slots. I wanted a redesigned A1000.
I couldn't understand why Commodore built another machine completely
(the A500) rather than redesign the 1000.
Take a A1000, give it a little more room inside, new chip set, standard
board updates, Kickstart in ROM... basicly bring up the technology to
A500 standards. Or rather, putting the 500 in the 1000 box.
Maybe this would have cut into 2000 sales ( I did buy a A2000).
Apple doesn't seem to have any trouble, though. What do they have,
10 different models?
I am glad I bought my 2000. I ate less for a year, but I feel good
that I have upward mobility. But, if there was a cheaper acceptable
machine, I would have definately gotten it, instead. Maybe I would have
regretted it. I doubt it.
/* F. Michael Theilig OHA101 at URIACC.Bitnet
"There is no Dark Side of the Moon...
in fact it is all dark." */staatsvr@asdcds.cds.wpafb.af.mil ( Vern Staats;;) (07/12/89)
Personally, I'd rather see CBM come out with an "A500X", that being a small Amiga system configured as an X-Window terminal. It would have Dale Luck's X Server and Boing mouse, and some form of ethernet connection. Connections for both thick & thin would be ideal. Other nice options would be: 1) choice of color or grayscale monitors 2) additional memory If I'm correct in thinking that the A590 provides memory and harddrive expansion capabilities for the 500, then all that's lacking is ethernet. --------------------------------- - - . - . -- l . signature/disclaimer block under construction..... staatsvr@asdcds.UUCP (Vern Staats)
brianr@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Brian Rhodefer) (07/12/89)
One good argument for having an IBM-type bus is the huge variety of hardware add-ons that are available for this standard. I don't imagine that it's not all that tricky to translate the amiga's 68000 bus signals into those appropriate for IBM peripheral cards, with suitable compromises (such as a wait state or two, and not mapping the entire 68000's address space onto the IBM bus). Even accepting the restriction that IBM peripherals with resident ROMed firmware couldn't be supported, I would imagine that a great many useful pieces of hardware would remain, and would then be supportable via the appropriate Amiga software. If the bus translation electronics aren't too tough, mightn't it be worthwhile to add them to an A1500's motherboard? Kind of a brainless built-in "FootBridgeBoard". Out of ignorance: Postings! (I wish I knew the Latin for this) Brian Rhodefer
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (07/12/89)
The 500 *was* a redesigned 1000. Look at the motherboard. It's a
A1000 re-worked by some people that are cost-reduction experts.
The case can only be defended by pointing out that it's shape reduces
the number of pieces of plastic to ~2 and the number of screws in 1/2.
Those "external" reductions also cut the assembly cost by a huge
factor (I don't remember what I was told at a JAUG meeting, but I
think it cut that cost in 1/2).
(The p/s was the other major cost-reduction factor mentioned)
-Tom
--
Tom Limoncelli -- tlimonce@drunivac.Bitnet -- limonce@pilot.njin.net
Drew University -- Box 1060, Madison, NJ -- 201-408-5389
Standard Disclaimer: I am not the mouth-piece of Drew University
"DEC's All-In-1 isn't completely useless, but it's a nice attempt."denbeste@bbn.com (Steven Den Beste) (07/12/89)
In article <12644@well.UUCP>, farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren) writes: > In article <446@aucis.UUCP> easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: > > Cost reduction comes from smaller power supply (200 W -> 80 W), reduced > >number of connectors (4 AT, 2 zorro, 1 video), smaller PC board, less > >metal, additional glue logic put into a gate array. > > Cost increases come from overhead costs of redesigining the case, new > manufacturing facilities, additional costs of supporting a new model, > design and manufacture of "additional glue logic". You don't win. You > might not even break even. > > -- > Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.usa If GM spends $10,000 redesigning a car to eliminate 3 5-cent screws, GM makes money. Per-unit costs are a straight additive to the cost-of-sales. All the costs Mike Farren cites are one-time costs which are amortized over the total manufacturing life of the product. Since at least 500,000 A500's have been built, the amortized cost of these things (except the support) is almost neglible on a per-unit basis. (Probably less than a dollar.) But the cost savings of the smaller, less expensive supply, the easier, less expensive final assembly process DIRECTLY subtracts at least a hundred dollars, possibly more, from the cost-of-sales. You know, on Howdy-Doody (now I'm dating myself) Cowboy Bob would occasionally say "No comments from the peanut gallery" to the kibitzing little kids on the show. What makes you peanuts think you understand Commodore's business and market better than they do? If you're so smart, why don't you start a competing business? Think of all the money you could make by skimping on the amortized cost and increasing the per-unit costs?
daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (07/12/89)
in article <19492@louie.udel.EDU>, OHA101%URIACC.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu (F. Michael Theilig) says: > I feel compelled to give my opinion here. When I was looking at > the Amiga, I was looking twords the A500. Price WAS an object. > I hate the A500's style. It looks like a C128. The A500 was done physically as a C128 style computer simply because that's the lowest cost way to make a computer. Period. Anything different is going to cost more. The A1000 case was a very expensive sucker to build. Ever count the number of pieces in that case, or the number of screws used once you get the thing apart. The point of the A500 was to make the lowest cost Amiga possible; after all, that's at least the kind of computer Commodore's traditionally been able to sell, and we were at the point where, if the "new thing" didn't sell well, they might as well have "brought in the bombers and leveled this place", to paraphrase the head honcho back then. The A1000 case is _nice_, no question about that. I still have my A1000, even though I use the A2000 most of the time. But even with A500 guts, the A1000 would still be too pricey for the features it provides. Perhaps there's room for something between the 500 and the 2000; that's something only the marketing folks can say for certain. But I'm convinced an A500 in an A1000 case isn't the machine you're looking for there; it would have to have some slots. > /* F. Michael Theilig OHA101 at URIACC.Bitnet > > "There is no Dark Side of the Moon... > in fact it is all dark." */ -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: D-DAVE H BIX: hazy Be careful what you wish for -- you just might get it
mclek@dcatla.UUCP (Larry E. Kollar) (07/13/89)
I'm surprised a third party hasn't jumped in to fill this particular gap. I haven't done any measuring (yet), but I *think* an A500 motherboard would fit in a "tower" box. Add a beefier power supply, a muffin fan, a few cables, and maybe plug in a pair of expansion slots at the bottom. All this is off the shelf, and might cost as little as $500-600 (motherboard & disk drive not included, of course) if you do it yourself and shop smart. A company buying in quantity would pay less, & have some markup. This would give us a little more expansion room on our 500s (a LUCAS would be easier to plug in this setup, for example) and still cost less than a 2000 all told. With the interest shown in an intermediate model, I think it would fly (I'd do it myself, if I could get the startup capital). -- Larry Kollar ...!gatech!dcatla!mclek : life BEGIN funds @ enough_to_retire < WHILE work REPEAT ;
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (07/14/89)
In <222@kesmai.COM>, dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) writes: >As an aside, I do kind of wonder why Commodore didn't at least put PC traces >in on the 2000 motherboard so you could put in connectors ala. the AT slots >and use all of the slots for Amiga cards if you wanted to get crazy with a >soldering iron. Bus loading, bus timing. Wouldn't work reliably. -larry -- Real Amiga hackers write printer drivers using Metascope. +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca or uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer) (07/14/89)
In article <42606@bbn.COM>, denbeste@bbn.com (Steven Den Beste) writes: > What makes you peanuts think you understand Commodore's business and market > better than they do? If you're so smart, why don't you start a competing > business? Think of all the money you could make by skimping on the amortized > cost and increasing the per-unit costs? Well actually, as a stockholder, rather than competing I was thinking about mounting a proxy fight and taking over the company. ;-) BTW, I think the A500 should have been called the A1200 or something else A > 1000, as it is superior to the 1000 in many ways (megabyte chipset capability, turns the audio filter off in software) The main thing it doesn't have is a detachable keyboard. Is that worth cutting the model number in half? ;-) -- -- uunet!sugar!karl "Ooh, I'm having an in-body experience!" -- free Usenet access: (713) 438-5018
dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) (07/14/89)
In article <42606@bbn.COM>, denbeste@bbn.com (Steven Den Beste) writes: > > If GM spends $10,000 redesigning a car to eliminate 3 5-cent screws, GM makes > money. True, but we're talking about redesigning most of the car here, not changing the hub cabs. New circuit board, new cabinet, is a pretty substantial deal not just a few screws. Even GM probably has to sell quite a few cars before they recoup the cost of a substantially remodelled car. > > Per-unit costs are a straight additive to the cost-of-sales. All the costs Mike > Farren cites are one-time costs which are amortized over the total > manufacturing life of the product. Since at least 500,000 A500's have been > built, the amortized cost of these things (except the support) is almost > neglible on a per-unit basis. (Probably less than a dollar.) > > But the cost savings of the smaller, less expensive supply, the easier, less > possibly more, from the cost-of-sales. Perhaps, but so what? For this idea to have any merit it must meet a few basic criteria. a) It must substantially increase the number of Amigas sold and/or increase Commodore's margins by allowing them to make more money per box. We've already lost (how many?) managers because they are unhappy U.S. sales of the Amiga. Spending money on a box that does nothing to increase the market is a pretty poor move. Trading 1500 sales for 2000 sales or 500 sales is not going to cut it. b) It cannot add a trickle of sales to the top end of the market (the 2000s) when the low end of the market is the bulk of sales (500). c) It cannot piss off the dealer network at the plethora of machines they need stock just to carry a line which is only a middling seller. d) The income it brings in must not only offset engineering and tooling for production expenses but, also the cost of a separate production line which is operated to produce the machine in addition to that of the 2000 and 500. Given that discounted there is roughly a $700 price differential between the 500 (with the A501) and the 2000 I can agree that there are probably many people that might have bought a machine that fell between these extremes rather than the 500 or the 2000. The crux, however, is not whether the desire for such a machine exists but if such a machine will bring in new customers. I think not. In my opinion, the Amiga's problems are those of customer awareness, dealer network size, and the upstream fight against the PCs dominance of the marketplace (and the speed at which the PC marketplace moves given the tremendous volume). I suspect that 98% of those who so desperately desire the A1500 will spend the extra bucks for the 2000 or sigh and settle for the 500. Try to realise what you want (because it saves you money) and what makes good business sense aren't necessarily one and the same. As an aside, I do kind of wonder why Commodore didn't at least put PC traces in on the 2000 motherboard so you could put in connectors ala. the AT slots and use all of the slots for Amiga cards if you wanted to get crazy with a soldering iron. David Albrecht
nor1675@dsacg2.UUCP (Michael Figg) (07/14/89)
In article <19492@louie.udel.EDU>, OHA101%URIACC.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu (F. Michael Theilig) writes: > > I feel compelled to give my opinion here. When I was looking at > the Amiga, I was looking twords the A500. Price WAS an object. I also feel compelled to give my opion here. I think that most users can't ask much more in a stock, off the shelf machine than what is available with the A500 and the A2000. The A500 offers low price while keeping most of the standard features of the orginal 1000. The 2000 offers the buyer a much easier path to expansion, without giving him any hardware he doesn't want. Also as someone else mentioned these options give a broader base of users, which helps the Amiga software platform. If you think of the software that was available 2 years ago when the 500 and 2000 came out, compared with what now is available and you can't help but be atleast alittle thankful. If it wasn't for the 500 and 2000 , I wonder fow many of those buyers would have gone with ST's and MACII's? -- "Hot Damn! Groat Cakes Again Michael Figg Heavy on the thirty weight!" DLA Systems Automation Center Columbus, Oh. (614)-238-2446 (Temporarily)
rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu (Rick Francis Golembiewski) (07/17/89)
The 500 is a very good machine for it's price and I think that CA will sell a a lot of them, however the 2000 is not such a good deal. Yes it offers the expandability, but the cost is too high for the power it delivers. Right now the 2000 is running at about $1400, for $1000 I can get a 16Mhz 2Mb AT clone, for the $400 I could get a really good graphics card, DOS, and some other softwware. Granted that IBM stuff is not as user friendly, and you don't get multi-tasking, but you get more speed more memory, better graphics resolution, and a stronger base of productivity software, plus a lot more (and cheaper) hardware to expand your expandable machine. If the 2000 was priced at $1000 (after discounts) then the 2000 could compete pretty well, and the 2000HD and 2500 stack up even worse because 386 machines are getting CHEAP, I can get a 25Mhz 386 for $1800, probabily $2000 for a package deal with 40MB HD, that's $1000 less then the 2500, with that $1000 you could get lots of stuff (a pretty nice A500 system in fact). So unless CA shifts down the price on the 2000 models, then they are going to have some problems moving units. // Rick Golembiewski rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu \\ \\ #include stddisclaimer.h // \\ "I never respected a man who could spell" // \\ -M. Twain //
cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (07/18/89)
Rick Francis Golembiewski writes: >The 500 is a very good machine for it's price and I think that CA will sell a >a lot of them, however the 2000 is not such a good deal. Yes it offers the >expandability, but the cost is too high for the power it delivers. Right >now the 2000 is running at about $1400, for $1000 I can get a 16Mhz 2Mb >AT clone, for the $400 I could get a really good graphics card, DOS, and >some other softwware. Rick, try not to compare apples to oranges, or in this case "IBM's to Amigas" they have different markets and different tradeoffs. A comparable IBM PC would also need 4 channel stereo sound and a graphics co-processor to help with the painfully slow access methods of most PC graphics cards. Also don't forget getting a mouse and a copy of Windows since that is capability the Amiga offers. Ever notice that Deluxe Music doesn't run on an AT clone ? Anyway, does Commodore want to compete in the VW of computer markets? I'd rather they didn't. They sell the best approximation of a personal workstation to date, and it is the least expensive as well. To compare it to a Mac or PC you _must_ include a window system and multitasking OS because that is essential to the Amiga system. If you could get a copy of X or something to run on MINIX you might be able to configure a IBM architecture machine to compete with and Amiga but you'd still need 3 times the memory. The competition is 386 clones and Mac II's running Windows/386 and Multifinder (or A/UX). Price the three systems, which one wins? Even with the '020 board you win. > Granted that IBM stuff is not as user friendly, and > you don't get multi-tasking, but you get more speed more memory, better > graphics resolution, and a stronger base of productivity software, plus > a lot more (and cheaper) hardware to expand your expandable machine. This is sort of like saying, "Granted you can't actually use this Pinto as a farm tractor, but gee the gas is cheaper and you don't need a crane to replace a flat tire." If you or a friend of yours is in the market for a cheap, difficult to use, high resoloution/slow rendering, 8088 on steroids with a 640K address space and 1-bit audio sound machine then they *SHOULD* buy a PC. It meets all of their requirements. But if they want to buy an easier to use, high speed color video graphic, stereo sound, multitasking personal workstation that can later be expanded to a 32 bit processor without replacing the motherboard machine then they can't buy one for less than an Amiga 2000. > If the 2000 was priced at $1000 (after discounts) then the 2000 > could compete pretty well, and the 2000HD and 2500 stack up even > worse because 386 machines are getting CHEAP, I can get a 25Mhz > 386 for $1800, probabily $2000 for a package deal with 40MB HD, > that's $1000 less then the 2500, with that $1000 you could get > lots of stuff (a pretty nice A500 system in fact). So unless > CA shifts down the price on the 2000 models, then they are going > to have some problems moving units. I don't know how many times this has been said before, but I'll repeat for the newcomers in the audience. Ever wonder how you design a 386 PC clone ? Do you hire an engineer? A programming staff? No, you look at the schematic for a Compaq, build your own motherboard, and plug some PC ROMS in it to see if it boots or not. Then you start selling them and as complaints about certain products come in you hone in on perfect cloneness. One dweeb in a garage is all it needs. So what is your overhead? Nil. 386 Motherboards were selling for $1200 when Intel's best price on the '386 was $400. That is *ONE THIRD* of the retail price. If there had been any overhead at all you would have seen prices for motherboards in the $2000 - $3000 range. So what does Commodore do? Well I'm sure the materials cost of the 2000 is such that they could sell them and make a profit at $1000. But they would have to lay off Dave Haynie, no extra bux for design sorry guy. And then two years from now, you would still have a cheap 2000 and no 3000. After a while, no Commodore at all. What does that buy you? The Amiga is an independent architecture. All of the innovative OS changes and hardware enhancements have to be built by Commodore. And Commodore has to fund that engineering effort somehow. The problem with the Amiga 2000 is not one of price. In marketing speak it is one of "position." No one in the US has ever had the guts to say "We build the best personal workstation for the money, here is why you want one." Copperman might, we'll have to wait and see. The danger with this position is that it forces one to "name" the enemy and thus give some direction to engineering. When engineering is building a high resolution display with lots of colors and it is getting expensive, it is easier to kill the project and say, "We don't want to compete with systems like that, we're a follow on to the C-64 and look at how much better we are." rather than say, "This is what we build, and we need this to have a better story to tell in the offices of the US." At first we believed the story "The US percieves us as a game machine company." and we went on a crusade as developers to change that image, now I hear that same phrase used as a crutch to justify a lack of attention to the US market. No one that I have spoken to that knows the difference between an Atari ST and an Amiga (eg they have actually looked at these two machines and realize they are built by two different companies) has ever said "The Amiga is just a game machine." Rather they show a healthy respect for the technology and "understand" why "those technical guys" are so crazy about them. Commodore needs to position the Amiga as a Personal Workstation, much like Apple has been trying to position the Mac II (ever see those Desktop Media ads?) In summary, a PC-AT clone is not competition for the Amiga. You can do things on both that you can't do on the other without expanding the system. They are different focuses and different "positions" in the computer marketplace. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "A most excellent barbarian ... Genghis Kahn!"
omynous@watcsc.waterloo.edu (Shannon Mann) (07/18/89)
In article <222@kesmai.COM> dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) writes: >In article <42606@bbn.COM>, denbeste@bbn.com (Steven Den Beste) writes: >> >> If GM spends $10,000 redesigning a car to eliminate 3 5-cent screws, GM makes >> money. >True, but we're talking about redesigning most of the car here, not changing >the hub cabs. New circuit board, new cabinet, is a pretty substantial deal >not just a few screws. Even GM probably has to sell quite a few cars before >they recoup the cost of a substantially remodelled car. Redesign sounds really expensive, but, it usually represents a relatively small fraction of the cost of the final product. The real and often forgotten cost is in retooling. Given the fact that most design is now done on cad workstations, even major changes can be incorporated quickly, with minor difficulty. (Of course, I am ignoring testing of prototypes, etc...) Implementing those changes in the manufacturing process isn't simple, nor cheap. Changing from single-sided boards to double (or worse multi-layer) sided boards can mean introducing new equipment into the line, hiring-training/retraining staff to handle the new processes, abandoning a working process for one that may contain flaws, etc. Even small changes (i.e. to fix a design flaw) can cause these problems. Kinda like asking for a headache :-) -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- A500 - redesigned A1000 board to take advantage of better memory chips etc, a minimum of retooling. A2000/2500 - single motherboard capable of after-production enhancement from base machine to UNIX, improvements to video, mpu/fpu, addition of IBM (yech!) compatability, etc. All without changes to the motherboard, nor the need to retool. -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- Redesign existing models??? And Retool??? Hah! Good way to slit your own throat. Personally, I believe the A2000/2500 to be the most versatile machine on the market. I cannot wait 'til I can afford one! :-) Now, if Commodore can maintain excellent after-sales support, they may get somewhere... :-) >David Albrecht -=- -=- Shannon Mann -=- omynous@watcsc.UUCP -=-
daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (07/18/89)
in article <222@kesmai.COM>, dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) says: > As an aside, I do kind of wonder why Commodore didn't at least put PC traces > in on the 2000 motherboard so you could put in connectors ala. the AT slots > and use all of the slots for Amiga cards if you wanted to get crazy with a > soldering iron. Two simple reasons, both of which have been mentioned before: [1] The Buster chip only supports 5 expansion slots. [2] Even if it supported more, there's no room left for a 6th slot -- that room is occupied by bus termination components and a mounting hole. > David Albrecht -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: D-DAVE H BIX: hazy Be careful what you wish for -- you just might get it
daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (07/18/89)
in article <0YkTciy00V4FA0UVUx@andrew.cmu.edu>, rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu (Rick Francis Golembiewski) says: > Right now the 2000 is running at about $1400, for $1000 I can get a 16Mhz 2Mb > AT clone, for the $400 I could get a really good graphics card, DOS, and > some other softwware. You can also get a Ford Mustang that's faster and cheaper than a Porsche 944. But it's not a Porsche... > // Rick Golembiewski rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu \\ -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: D-DAVE H BIX: hazy Be careful what you wish for -- you just might get it
Thyss@cup.portal.com (Brian TT Fudge) (07/19/89)
Why compare an Amiga 2000 to a '386 Clone? Amiga is Commodore. '386 Clone could be any one... How about you give Amiga a chance and compare it to a vanilla IBM *MADE* by IBM? See who wins there. Thyss@cup.portal.com
sjorr@rose.waterloo.edu (Stephen Orr) (07/19/89)
While it is true that some of the new PC's (IBM machines) with 386's on board
are running at 25MHz, did you ever look at the bus sitting down there? It's
probably running at about 12 MHz flat out. IBM busses have a real hard time
pushing bits any faster than that. The Amiga bus runs (even on a 500) at
28 MHz, which is one reason why a 7.14MHz process can still in general
outstip a lot of 10MHz plus AT's. Further if GVP is to be believed, they
have a board that runs 33MHz with 0 wait state capability. I'd be really
suprised if any of those PC lookalikes are pushing bits quite that fast.
{ The opinions expressed herin ARE those of my employer...
I'm self employed ! - Stephen Orr }451061@UOTTAWA.BITNET (Valentin Pepelea) (07/19/89)
Stephen Orr <sjorr@rose.waterloo.edu> writes in <15240@watdragon.waterloo.edu> > While it is true that some of the new PC's (IBM machines) with 386's on board > are running at 25MHz, did you ever look at the bus sitting down there? It's > probably running at about 12 MHz flat out. IBM busses have a real hard time > pushing bits any faster than that. The Amiga bus runs (even on a 500) at > 28 MHz, which is one reason why a 7.14MHz process can still in general > outstip a lot of 10MHz plus AT's. Further if GVP is to be believed, they > have a board that runs 33MHz with 0 wait state capability. I'd be really > suprised if any of those PC lookalikes are pushing bits quite that fast. You are mixing up three concepts here. There is the bus speed (28 MHz), then there is the processor speed (33 MHz) and its memory access speed (0 wait states). The GVP 030 board may indeed run at 33 Mhz and have no wait states when accessing its 32-bit wide memory, but that will in no way increase the Amiga's 28-MHz-you-say bus speed. Valentin _________________________________________________________________________ The godess of democracy? "The Name: Valentin Pepelea tyrants may distroy a statue, Phonet: (613) 231-7476 but they cannot kill a god." Bitnet: 451061@Uottawa.bitnet Usenet: Use cunyvm.cuny.edu gate - Confucius Planet: 451061@acadvm1.UOttawa.CA
douglee@becker.UUCP (Doug Lee) (07/24/89)
In article <15240@watdragon.waterloo.edu> sjorr@rose.waterloo.edu (Stephen Orr) writes: >pushing bits any faster than that. The Amiga bus runs (even on a 500) at >28 MHz, which is one reason why a 7.14MHz process can still in general ^^^^^^^ This is the master clock which is immediately divided down by motherboard/ fat-agnus logic. The bus actually only runs at 7.16 Mhz. <<<Doug>>> douglee@becker
grr@cbmvax.UUCP (George Robbins) (07/26/89)
In article <639@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) writes: > In <222@kesmai.COM>, dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) writes: > >As an aside, I do kind of wonder why Commodore didn't at least put PC traces > >in on the 2000 motherboard so you could put in connectors ala. the AT slots > >and use all of the slots for Amiga cards if you wanted to get crazy with a > >soldering iron. > > Bus loading, bus timing. Wouldn't work reliably. Pin count on the "Buster" chip... -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing arpa: cbmvax!grr@uunet.uu.net Commodore, Engineering Department fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)