paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (03/18/89)
I have two questions regarding the Amiga 2500UX: 1) When AMIX will be available, would an ethernet card be included or available from Commodore at possibly additional cost, or is the Amiga supposed to operate only as an island? 2) If such a board will be available, will it be possible to boot the Amiga via the network and use it as a diskless node (of course making use of NFS)? -- -+= SAM =+- "the best things in life are free" ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov
ditto@cbmvax.UUCP (Michael "Ford" Ditto) (03/19/89)
In article <72@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: >1) When AMIX will be available, would an ethernet card be included or > available from Commodore at possibly additional cost, or is the Amiga > supposed to operate only as an island? The machine won't come with an Ethernet card, although the OS has support for various forms of networking, including AT&T TLI & RFS. There are third-party networking cards that will work when drivers are written for them, and there will be support for those third parties to write drivers if we haven't already done it. We are investigating various TCP/IP software packages, and hope to have full TCP/IP support in the first Amix release. >2) If such a board will be available, will it be possible to boot the > Amiga via the network and use it as a diskless node (of course making use > of NFS)? Not in the first release, but probably someday. Actually that's three separate questions, (boot-via-ethernet, diskless node, and NFS support), each of which is being investigated, and any of which might appear at first without the others. For example, running without disks we theoretically already have with RFS, it's just that you have to be running Unix before you can mount any remote file systems. -- -=] Ford [=- "The number of Unix installations (In Real Life: Mike Ditto) has grown to 10, with more expected." ford@kenobi.commodore.com - The Unix Programmer's Manual, ...!sdcsvax!crash!kenobi!ford 2nd Edition, June, 1972. ditto@cbmvax.commodore.com
paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (03/19/89)
In article <6330@cbmvax.UUCP> ditto@cbmvax.UUCP (Michael "Ford" Ditto) writes: ->In article <72@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: ->>1) When AMIX will be available, would an ethernet card be included or ->> available from Commodore at possibly additional cost, or is the Amiga ->> supposed to operate only as an island? -> ->The machine won't come with an Ethernet card, although the OS has support for ->various forms of networking, including AT&T TLI & RFS. There are third-party ->networking cards that will work when drivers are written for them, and there ->will be support for those third parties to write drivers if we haven't ->already done it. We are investigating various TCP/IP software packages, and ->hope to have full TCP/IP support in the first Amix release. I have some difficulty with the Ethernet card response. First, let me give you my opinion, and then I'll justify it. I believe that if Commodore is going to be committed to the Amiga 2500UX and AMIX, then it will have to fully support networking. Given the above, then Commodore should market an ethernet card. What would happen, god forbid, if a third party company which produces such cards goes belly up? I know and appreciate the fact that Commodore does not want to undercut third party developer efforts, but when it comes to a specific piece of hardware or software which is essential to the overall usefulness of the product it is essential that Commodore has some control over. This was recognized by Apple in coming out with their Ethernet card even at the expense of potentially undercutting their third party developers. If I may make an analogy, fully relying on third party developers to provide an Ethernet card on a Unix machine is like relying on third party developers for floppy drives, and selling an Amiga 2000 without any. ->>2) If such a board will be available, will it be possible to boot the ->> Amiga via the network and use it as a diskless node (of course making use ->> of NFS)? -> ->Not in the first release, but probably someday. Actually that's three ->separate questions, (boot-via-ethernet, diskless node, and NFS support), each ->of which is being investigated, and any of which might appear at first ->without the others. For example, running without disks we theoretically ->already have with RFS, it's just that you have to be running Unix before you ->can mount any remote file systems. I hope that some priority is being put in being abe to use the Amiga as a diskless node. I think that it would be a very competitive Unix machine. I also hope that NFS would become available as quickly as possible. -> -=] Ford [=- -- -+= SAM =+- "the best things in life are free" ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov
root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) (03/21/89)
In article <74@snll-arpagw.UUCP>, paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: > In article <6330@cbmvax.UUCP> ditto@cbmvax.UUCP (Michael "Ford" Ditto) writes: > ->In article <72@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: > I have some difficulty with the Ethernet card response. First, let me > give you my opinion, and then I'll justify it. I believe that if > Commodore is going to be committed to the Amiga 2500UX and AMIX, then > it will have to fully support networking. Given the above, then > Commodore should market an ethernet card. What would happen, god > forbid, if a third party company which produces such cards goes belly Sam, the other side to your argument is this: what if, god forbid, Commodore continues to undercut and screw their developers by bringing any profitable product in house because it is "strategic"? This happened to all the third party disk people, memory people, soon the genlock people, etc. If this trend continues you will have ZERO hardware developers in the Amiga marketplace and then what? When the next "gotta have" hardware widget comes down the pike, you will be left to wait for Commodore to provide it. Do you like to wait for two years for such things? > up? I know and appreciate the fact that Commodore does not want to > undercut third party developer efforts, but when it comes to a > specific piece of hardware or software which is essential to the > overall usefulness of the product it is essential that Commodore has > some control over. This was recognized by Apple in coming out with > their Ethernet card even at the expense of potentially undercutting > their third party developers. If I may make an analogy, fully relying I would like to see some justification of your statement. Are you actually suggesting that Ethernet cards would enjoy as wide of an installed base as a floppy drive? Come on. Practically speaking I would doubt that Commodore will ever ship more than 30-40K Amiga 2500UX given the nature of the workstation market and the fact that they are up against incredibly strong competition. Of those 30-40K, how many will be Ethernetted? Maybe 20%? Perhaps the answer is to have Commodore produce "strategic products", but to price them such as to give third parties some room to stay in business. > on third party developers to provide an Ethernet card on a Unix > machine is like relying on third party developers for floppy drives, > and selling an Amiga 2000 without any. > > I hope that some priority is being put in being abe to use the Amiga as a > diskless node. I think that it would be a very competitive Unix machine. > I also hope that NFS would become available as quickly as possible. We have had an A500 booting up over NFS, and BOOTPARAMS. > -+= SAM =+- > "the best things in life are free" It really befuddles me why Ethernet, 2500UX, etc are an issue for future growth at all. Commodore really needs to spend all of its available cycles AND THEN SOME on getting device independent graphics, new graphics chips, the Hedley, 68030 based machines, etc to market. These are all hard things that no third party developer can tackle. Expending all the resources it will take to field/support Unix, networking, etc will only damage efforts to make the fundamental changes to the Amiga architecture that are necessary to remain competitive with Apple, korean 386 boxes, etc. IMHO. Rick Spanbauer Ameristar Technology
hbo@nobbs.ucsb.edu (03/21/89)
In article <2421@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes... > > Sam, the other side to your argument is this: what if, god forbid, > Commodore continues to undercut and screw their developers by > bringing any profitable product in house because it is > "strategic"? This happened to all the third party disk people, > memory people, soon the genlock people, etc. If this trend > continues you will have ZERO hardware developers in the Amiga > marketplace and then what? When the next "gotta have" hardware > widget comes down the pike, you will be left to wait for Commodore > to provide it. Do you like to wait for two years for such things? > (Stuff deleted) > Rick Spanbauer > Ameristar Technology ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ While I recognize that Ameristar has made significant contributions to what success the Amiga 2000 enjoys in the low end workstation market, and while I think they are producing a reasonably priced and functional product, it always bothers me to hear a hardware vendor complain about how competition is going to screw up their business. There are quite a few third party disk and memory vendors still in the Amiga market, at least judging by the ads in Amazing Computing and elsewhere. Their margins might have been cut by competition from CBM, but apparently they are still finding it profitable to do business. The consumer (that's most of us here) ends up with a wider choice of RAM and disk products as a result. I grant that the market for Amiga ethernet hardware and software may be thinner than for disks and RAM, but if it really won't support two vendors, one assumes Commodore won't jump in. If the A2500 does take off as a low end workstation on the other hand, I think the market for networking products may fatten up. (Can you say "Appletalk?") In that case, I'd be glad to see more than one source for the hardware. I kind of doubt Ameristar would pick up its marbles and go home in that event. -- Howard Owen, Computer Systems Manager internet: hbo@nobbs.ucsb.edu Physics Computer Services BITNET: HBO@SBITP.BITNET University of California, Santa Barbara HEPNET/SPAN: SBPHY::HBO "I am not a pay TV service!" 805-961-8366 (work)
paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (03/21/89)
In article <2421@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes:
Sam, the other side to your argument is this: what if, god forbid,
Commodore continues to undercut and screw their developers by
bringing any profitable product in house because it is
"strategic"? This happened to all the third party disk people,
memory people, soon the genlock people, etc. If this trend
continues you will have ZERO hardware developers in the Amiga
marketplace and then what? When the next "gotta have" hardware
widget comes down the pike, you will be left to wait for Commodore
to provide it. Do you like to wait for two years for such things?
Hi Rick. First let me say that my response to Michael Ditto was not meant in
any way to slight the Ameristar product. I think you guys have been
doing a great job considering the number of people involved. With
that out of the way, it is inconceivable for me to see how ANYBODY can
put out a UNIX box in this day and age without an Ethernet card. The
only reason I would like to see Commodore have their own card is to
show that they are committed to a real UNIX machine, like the 2500UX,
and to protect the 2500UX customers. I did not say that Commodore
should price their card below that of third party, and thus undercut
them. But think about it for a moment. If you guys in a year or two
from now, for the sake of argument, decide that the Mac II market is
much more lucrative and abandon the Amiga market, where are all the
2500UX owners going to be regarding networking. They are going to be
screwed, unless Commodore has enough foresight.
I would like to see some justification of your statement. Are
you actually suggesting that Ethernet cards would enjoy as wide
of an installed base as a floppy drive? Come on. Practically
speaking I would doubt that Commodore will ever ship more than
30-40K Amiga 2500UX given the nature of the workstation market
and the fact that they are up against incredibly strong competition.
Of those 30-40K, how many will be Ethernetted? Maybe 20%?
^^^^^^^^^^
I would say that nearly every 2500UX will have an Ethernet card (that should
make you happy). I repeat, a UNIX box without Ethernet is like a PC
without a Disk drive. Even Sun's slogan says something to the effect
"The network is the computer". An Ethernet card is a "strategic product"
for the 2500UX.
Perhaps the answer is to have Commodore produce "strategic products",
but to price them such as to give third parties some room to stay
in business.
That is exactly what I would like to see. I know that third party
developers are the lifeblood of the Amiga. Indeed third party
developers have so far supported the Amiga better than Commodore (with
the exception of the wonderful people at CATS, of course). But I
believe that customers should be protected when it comes to strategic
products.
We have had an A500 booting up over NFS, and BOOTPARAMS.
About one for the 2000?
-> Rick Spanbauer
-> Ameristar Technology
--
-+= SAM =+-
"the best things in life are free"
ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.govmp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Portuesi) (03/22/89)
root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes: > Sam, the other side to your argument is this: what if, god forbid, > Commodore continues to undercut and screw their developers by > bringing any profitable product in house because it is > "strategic"? This happened to all the third party disk people, > memory people, soon the genlock people, etc. If this trend > continues you will have ZERO hardware developers in the Amiga > marketplace and then what? When the next "gotta have" hardware > widget comes down the pike, you will be left to wait for Commodore > to provide it. Do you like to wait for two years for such things? Perhaps you should have began by saying that you have a vested interest in an Ethernet offering from Commodore, since you offer such a board yourself. Third-party vendors will be inspired to make their money by creating products that offer features and performance that the Commodore products don't, or do the same things at a lower price. For example, there are a variety of broadcast-quality genlocks available, all of which offer their own special features. The GVP disk controller offers features that the 2090A doesn't (mainly a different design). Various third parties offer alternatives to the A501 RAM expander for a lower price. By your argument, nobody who bought a Macintosh would have bothered buying a word processor or paint program because those programs came bundled with the machine. If that really was case, programs such as Microsoft Word, SuperPaint, FullPaint, and Fullwrite Professional wouldn't have a reason to exist. Those packages succeeded because they offered value that the bundled packages didn't. > I would like to see some justification of your statement. Are > you actually suggesting that Ethernet cards would enjoy as wide > of an installed base as a floppy drive? Come on. Practically > speaking I would doubt that Commodore will ever ship more than > 30-40K Amiga 2500UX given the nature of the workstation market > and the fact that they are up against incredibly strong competition. > Of those 30-40K, how many will be Ethernetted? Maybe 20%? I think more than 20% of the Amigas sold for workstation applications would have a network interface. The only major workstation feature that my Amiga doesn't have is a network connection. The network connection provides a networking file system, mail services, and connectivity to other machines, all of which are necessary to be considered a "workstation" these days. > Perhaps the answer is to have Commodore produce "strategic products", > but to price them such as to give third parties some room to stay > in business. I think that to date, Commodore has done a really good job at providing capable peripherals at reasonable prices, but still leaving the market open for third parties who want to build high-performance or enhanced products. > It really befuddles me why Ethernet, 2500UX, etc are an issue > for future growth at all. Commodore really needs to spend all > of its available cycles AND THEN SOME on getting device > independent graphics, new graphics chips, the Hedley, 68030 based > machines, etc to market. These are all hard things that no third > party developer can tackle. Expending all the resources it will > take to field/support Unix, networking, etc will only damage > efforts to make the fundamental changes to the Amiga architecture > that are necessary to remain competitive with Apple, korean 386 > boxes, etc. IMHO. Your point that only Commodore can enhance the architecture of the Amiga line is well-taken. But Commodore at some point has to decide who they're competing against. If they really do want a piece of the workstation market, they can't do it without offering at least the same features as the competition, especially since they don't have a name for themselves in that market. Perhaps Commodore should work with third parties and offer select third-party products with Amiga systems through a licensing agreement. They might license your Ethernet board and sell it under their name, for example, or offer it as an option to A2500 systems but still under the Ameristar name. -- Michael Portuesi / Information Technology Center / Carnegie Mellon University INET: mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu / BITNET: mp1u+@andrew UUCP: ...harvard!andrew.cmu.edu!mp1u+ "You just don't get off a spaceship and run." --Avon
rick@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Rick Spanbauer) (03/22/89)
In article <1366@hub.ucsb.edu>, hbo@nobbs.ucsb.edu writes: > In article <2421@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes... > While I recognize that Ameristar has made significant contributions to > what success the Amiga 2000 enjoys in the low end workstation market, and > while I think they are producing a reasonably priced and functional product, > it always bothers me to hear a hardware vendor complain about how competition > is going to screw up their business. There are quite a few third party disk > and memory vendors still in the Amiga market, at least judging by the ads Yes, and as I recall one company was set to field a really innovative disk controller that was basically killed by the announcement of the 2090. By cutting the legs out of disk/memory markets Commodore killed quite a few R&D buggets at third party houses. Since at least some development cost is written against sales of bread&butter products like disk/memory you no doubt have a bit less innovation as a direct result of Commodore playing in that market. > won't support two vendors, one assumes Commodore won't jump in. If the A2500 > does take off as a low end workstation on the other hand, I think the market > for networking products may fatten up. (Can you say "Appletalk?") In that I would like to see Commodore provide, as Apple does, basic support for some network media on the next machine. The networking market would then fatten up nicely. But getting back to ethernet, I just do not see how selling an ethernet board along with Unix is going to produce significant volume for Commodore. The rather sad fact of life is that Sun/DEC/HP already are selling cheap Unix iron to schools/labs/research institutions (with "better" Unix ports) than Commodore will be able to field. In Europe the situation *may* be different due to tariffs, less market presence by HP/Sun, etc. The other problem they are going to have with the 2500UX product is their name, with implications of low cost it carries. Software generally is quite expensive in the Unix market owing directly to lack of standards that work to reduce the volume of product you ship. If, because of the name "Commodore", developers cannot charge a reasonable dollar for their software then it simply will not get developed. > case, I'd be glad to see more than one source for the hardware. I kind of > doubt Ameristar would pick up its marbles and go home in that event. Of course, no one picks up their marbles and goes home. What is does mean to the consumer is that LESS new product development does into the Amiga market. You start to see just "mine is a bit cheaper and a bit faster than the 20X0 widget", ie Commodore drives the technology and everyone tries to undercut them. This is where all the disk/memory people are today. > Howard Owen, Computer Systems Manager internet: hbo@nobbs.ucsb.edu Rick Spanbauer Ameristar Standard disclaimer: my opinions are my own, and may not reflect the official policy of Ameristar, SUNY/Stony Brook, etc.
jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) (03/22/89)
In article <2426@sbcs.sunysb.edu> rick@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Rick Spanbauer) writes: > Yes, and as I recall one company was set to field a really > innovative disk controller that was basically killed by the > announcement of the 2090. By cutting the legs out of disk/memory > markets Commodore killed quite a few R&D buggets at third party > houses. Since at least some development cost is written against > sales of bread&butter products like disk/memory you no doubt > have a bit less innovation as a direct result of Commodore playing > in that market. However, if commodore has no product in that market, it isn't taken seriously by a number of potential buyers/markets, in particular the business market/hig-end home market/whatever the 2000 was aimed at. I think you're referring (above) the ASDG's HD controller project. What killed it was not so much the 2090, but FFS. Their incredible speedup over SlowFS HD's of the time (including the 2090) was due to smarts on the controller doing more or less the same things FFS does now (good buffering, large reads, etc). FFS made the speed differential they had (over anyone else) much smaller, and reduced the demand (also the estimated price kept wandering upwards, which doesn't help demand - I think it more than doubled before the project was dropped, and features kept being added, including a 68881). There is no magic answer that makes everyone happy. The 3rd party developers might love to see commodore sell _nothing_ but minimal systems, so they can reap the profits in selling every form of expansion. Commodore stockholders might be annoyed at not selling things that are profitable. Various markets/buyers often will ignore machines for which the expansions they want are only available from 3rd parties, since they see that as the machine not being supported. Users are often interested in the lowest price, especially for "jelly-bean" items such as memory - higher prices means less expanded amigas, less sales of high-end software that can use that memory, less buyers of amigas, less users to buy 3rd-party hardware. It's all related, and everyone can't be maximally happy. I'm no marketing person, I don't make these sorts of decisions, I don't know why any particular decision is made (usually), so don't ask me. Apple is well-known for letting 3rd-parties blaze the way, then changing the specs on them to make everyone break and releasing their own version, now the only working version. I seem to remember something about their telling developers "you can't draw power from appletalk signals", then after several 3rd parties built ones with power supplies, Apple introduced their own that drew power from the signals. (note - I'm not tightly connected to the apple developer community, and therefor don't take my comments as gospel truth). Disclaimer: these are just the meanderings of my own mind. These are not the meanderings of any commdore official position. TINAR, IMHO, So There. -- Randell Jesup, Commodore Engineering {uunet|rutgers|allegra}!cbmvax!jesup
andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) (03/22/89)
In article <2426@sbcs.sunysb.edu> rick@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Rick Spanbauer) writes: > cheaper and a bit faster than the 20X0 widget", ie Commodore drives the > technology and everyone tries to undercut them. This is where all the > disk/memory people are today. This is just my opinion...but on the A1000, Commodore spent its time/money on Genlocks, Frame grabbers, etc, leaving the memory cards, hard disks, expansion boxes, etc. to the 3rd parties. The results speak for themselves. (not mentioning quality/reliability .... some of it had quite high, quality while others were awful, or 'producing what the market wanted') but rather, who could take it seriously as a business computer when you couldn't expand the memory or add a hard disk without relying on 3rd party products ? The bread and butter expansion items have to be available from the manufacturer for business to be able to rely on them. A business may turn to a 3rd party controller or ram card, just like it may do so when expanding a Sun...but I, as a Sun user, have a certain confidence knowing that I can get a memory card or hard disk from Sun, though I may turn around and buy a card from Helios anyway :-) andy -- andy finkel {uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy Commodore-Amiga, Inc. "The salesperson said this computer is the next best thing to sliced bread, but didn't say what to do about the crumbs in the disk drive." Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share. I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.
perley@trub.steinmetz (Donald P Perley) (03/22/89)
In article <2421@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes: >In article <74@snll-arpagw.UUCP>, paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: >> In article <6330@cbmvax.UUCP> ditto@cbmvax.UUCP (Michael "Ford" Ditto) writes: >> ->In article <72@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: >> If I may make an analogy, fully relying >> on third party developers to provide an Ethernet card on a Unix >> machine is like relying on third party developers for floppy drives, >> and selling an Amiga 2000 without any. Well, Commodore does rely on other companies for floppy drives. >> I hope that some priority is being put in being abe to use the Amiga as a >> diskless node. I think that it would be a very competitive Unix machine. >> I also hope that NFS would become available as quickly as possible. I am not all that hot on diskless nodes myself. NFS is great, being able to access files all over the place, but remember that you are limited to a total of about 1.2 mbyte/sec. When you start splitting that among a large number of stations, it would be nice to at least have memory paging on a local disk. > for future growth at all. Commodore really needs to spend all > of its available cycles AND THEN SOME on getting device > independent graphics, new graphics chips, the Hedley, 68030 based > machines, etc to market. > Rick Spanbauer Yes. It would be a shame if they missed the boat on, say, HDTV compatability because they were spending their effort duplicating some peripheral that is already available. -don perley
mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Portuesi) (03/22/89)
rick@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Rick Spanbauer) writes: > Yes, and as I recall one company was set to field a really > innovative disk controller that was basically killed by the > announcement of the 2090. and by the announcement of a new file system that supported read/write speeds equal to or greater than that of the innovative disk controller that never made it to market (it was vaporware for *quite* some time before the announcement of the 2090+FFS killed it). > By cutting the legs out of disk/memory > markets Commodore killed quite a few R&D buggets at third party > houses. To expect Commodore to market the Amiga without offering a disk subsystem and memory upgrade is ludicrous. Pure and simple. -- Michael Portuesi / Information Technology Center / Carnegie Mellon University INET: mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu / BITNET: mp1u+@andrew UUCP: ...harvard!andrew.cmu.edu!mp1u+ "You just don't get off a spaceship and run." --Avon
paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (03/22/89)
In article <6370@cbmvax.UUCP> jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) writes: ->In article <2426@sbcs.sunysb.edu> rick@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Rick Spanbauer) writes: ->> Yes, and as I recall one company was set to field a really ->> innovative disk controller that was basically killed by the ->> announcement of the 2090. By cutting the legs out of disk/memory ->> markets Commodore killed quite a few R&D buggets at third party ->> houses. Since at least some development cost is written against ->> sales of bread&butter products like disk/memory you no doubt ->> have a bit less innovation as a direct result of Commodore playing ->> in that market. -> -> However, if commodore has no product in that market, it isn't taken ->seriously by a number of potential buyers/markets, in particular the business ->market/hig-end home market/whatever the 2000 was aimed at. That was exactly my point. I will venture to say that most 2500UX will be bought by businesses, and not for home use. And the business market is going to think about twice before buying a 2500UX if Commodore does not provide an Ethernet card and networking software with support. Particularly TCP/IP, NFS, and RPC. That is what the Unix competition offers, and that is what the Unix market demands. -- -+= SAM =+- "the best things in life are free" ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov
paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (03/22/89)
In article <13392@steinmetz.ge.com> perley@trub.steinmetz.ge.com (Donald P Perley) writes: ->In article <2421@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes: ->>In article <74@snll-arpagw.UUCP>, paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: ->>> In article <6330@cbmvax.UUCP> ditto@cbmvax.UUCP (Michael "Ford" Ditto) writes: ->>> ->In article <72@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: -> -> ->>> If I may make an analogy, fully relying ->>> on third party developers to provide an Ethernet card on a Unix ->>> machine is like relying on third party developers for floppy drives, ->>> and selling an Amiga 2000 without any. -> ->Well, Commodore does rely on other companies for floppy drives. Not to the point that when you buy an Amiga no drive comes with it and you have to buy it from a third party. ->> for future growth at all. Commodore really needs to spend all ->> of its available cycles AND THEN SOME on getting device ->> independent graphics, new graphics chips, the Hedley, 68030 based ->> machines, etc to market. -> ->> Rick Spanbauer -> ->Yes. It would be a shame if they missed the boat on, say, HDTV compatability ->because they were spending their effort duplicating some peripheral that is ->already available. All of the above is besides the point. If Commodore cannot afford to get into the Unix market and support their product properly without sacrificing the development on the standard Amiga, maybe they shouldn't get in. But this is a marketing decision that they have to make. I appreciate that there may be a lot of Amiga users which couldn't care less about Unix or Commodore's entry into this arena. And for you guys, this may be your attitude. All I'm saying is if Commodore is going to get in the Unix market, they either should do it right, or not do it at all. ->-don perley -- -+= SAM =+- "the best things in life are free" ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov
perry@madnix.UUCP (Perry Kivolowitz) (04/02/89)
In article <6370@cbmvax.UUCP> jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) writes: >In article <2426@sbcs.sunysb.edu> rick@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Rick Spanbauer) writes: >> Yes, and as I recall one company was set to field a really >> innovative disk controller that was basically killed by the >> announcement of the 2090. By cutting the legs out of disk/memory > I think you're referring (above) the ASDG's HD controller project. >What killed it was not so much the 2090, but FFS. Their incredible speedup >over SlowFS HD's of the time (including the 2090) was due to smarts on the >controller doing more or less the same things FFS does now (good buffering, >large reads, etc). FFS made the speed differential they had (over anyone >else) much smaller, and reduced the demand (also the estimated price kept >wandering upwards, which doesn't help demand - I think it more than doubled >before the project was dropped, and features kept being added, including a >68881). Randell's interpretation of history is correct. While Rick is correct that some CBM hardware releases *have* possibly aborted some research projects among the third parties, the SDP was torpedoed by CBM software. In this case, all for the better (since having the FFS for everyone does a lot more good than having a few SDP's for the privelidged few. For sure, I wish the experience had cost of less r&d time and money :-)). So far, I've been upset many times by impending Commodore hardware releases. But, after time passes and the dust settles I've been able to see how and why CBM felt it was appropriate to release their own product and that the net result on the Amiga marketplace was a positive one. Discovering the how's and why's has helped guide us into market areas which have extremely low probabilities of direct CBM competition. (For example, the product areas attainable through Twin-X such as the whole color scanner and related software market). So, having gone into areas where CBM is not likely to follow we've been happy to find that what was more often than not an adversarial relationship is now more and more a finely tuned cooperative relationship where we, CBM, and the Amiga community benefits. ------ So what's the moral of the story? Well, there are some companys that can prosper in the shadow of CBM by offering lower cost/different solutions. There are some companys that seek to exist entirely outside the shadow cast by CBM by exploring new markets and going where no Amiga has gone before. Those that can do neither...well... -- Perry Kivolowitz, ASDG Inc. ARPA: madnix!perry@cs.wisc.edu {uunet|ncoast}!marque! UUCP: {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!perry CIS: 76004,1765 (what was that about ``giggling teenagers''?)
dale@boing.UUCP (Dale Luck) (04/02/89)
In article <1366@hub.ucsb.edu> hbo@nobbs.ucsb.edu writes: >In article <2421@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes... >> Sam, the other side to your argument is this: what if, god forbid, >> Commodore continues to undercut and screw their developers by >> bringing any profitable product in house because it is > (Stuff deleted) >> Rick Spanbauer >> Ameristar Technology > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > While I recognize that Ameristar has made significant contributions to >what success the Amiga 2000 enjoys in the low end workstation market, and < stuff deleted> >it always bothers me to hear a hardware vendor complain about how competition >is going to screw up their business. There are quite a few third party disk < stuff deleted > This is true in an industry where the main mother company (like cbm) does not consider third party developers as competitors. I have personally seen and heard through second sources though that this is not the case with Commodore. Let me assure you that this is not the attitude of all the people at Commodore, just some that are in the wrong positions, like working there at all. Rick S. spoke right about the products cbm needs to be developing. In my opinion, Commodore should be developing products that no third party developer can develop. Like a 68020 based A500; (Would make a killer X terminal for GfxBase) or a 68030 based a2000 with a real 32 bit highspeed bus; A middle line product with 2 slots, video slot, smallish footprint AND DETACHED KEYBOARD; a real portable/transportable amiga (maybe beat Apple to this market). -- Dale Luck GfxBase/Boing, Inc. {uunet!cbmvax|pyramid}!amiga!boing!dale
dale@boing.UUCP (Dale Luck) (04/02/89)
In article <79@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes: >In article <2421@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes: > Sam, the other side to your argument is this: what if, god forbid, > Commodore continues to undercut and screw their developers by > bringing any profitable product in house because it is > "strategic"? This happened to all the third party disk people, >Hi Rick. First let me say that my response to Michael Ditto was not meant in >any way to slight the Ameristar product. I think you guys have been >doing a great job considering the number of people involved. With >that out of the way, it is inconceivable for me to see how ANYBODY can >put out a UNIX box in this day and age without an Ethernet card. The >only reason I would like to see Commodore have their own card is to >show that they are committed to a real UNIX machine, like the 2500UX, > > Perhaps the answer is to have Commodore produce "strategic products", > but to price them such as to give third parties some room to stay > in business. > >That is exactly what I would like to see. I know that third party >developers are the lifeblood of the Amiga. Indeed third party I agree that cbm should be providing CBM labeled products that they can support and maintain. I believe in the early days of Sun, Sun could not make all the cards they needed as well. The expertise required to develop and maintain complex cards like the ethernet card takes time to create. Commodore could relable Ameristar's ethernet cards and sell them in bundles. This would have to be supported by Commodore's engineering and customer support staff though. This is unlike the bundling options the marketing dingy's do with thrid party software. When customers want to to buy all their pieces from one vendor, the also want all their support from the same vendor. Given the amount of time it takes Commodore to get anything to the market from the time it is announced, I would say Ameristar has a good two years before they have to start worrying about competing with something that is not vaporware. However creating Vaporware is one of Commodore's strengths. The time from announcement to available for nearly all commodore amiga products has been greater than a year. a2620, A3000, WB1.3, A2024, PVA, AMIX, A2084, ATBridge. I think Commodore is getting better recently, I did not see the announcement for the A4000 at the Hannover fair, nor did I see the continued misrepresentation of AMIX running concurrently with AMIGADOS. So I think Commodore is doing better, they just need to catch up and deliver the products they have announced. (Thanks for the now shipping 2620 boards). -- Dale Luck GfxBase/Boing, Inc. {uunet!cbmvax|pyramid}!amiga!boing!dale
paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (04/03/89)
In article <694@boing.UUCP> dale@boing.UUCP (Dale Luck) writes: ->In article <1366@hub.ucsb.edu> hbo@nobbs.ucsb.edu writes: ->>In article <2421@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes... ->>> Sam, the other side to your argument is this: what if, god forbid, ->>> Commodore continues to undercut and screw their developers by ->>> bringing any profitable product in house because it is ->> (Stuff deleted) ->>> Rick Spanbauer ->>> Ameristar Technology ->> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ->> While I recognize that Ameristar has made significant contributions to ->>what success the Amiga 2000 enjoys in the low end workstation market, and -> < stuff deleted> ->>it always bothers me to hear a hardware vendor complain about how competition ->>is going to screw up their business. There are quite a few third party disk -> < stuff deleted > -> ->This is true in an industry where the main mother company (like cbm) does ->not consider third party developers as competitors. I have personally ->seen and heard through second sources though that this is not the case ->with Commodore. Let me assure you that this is not the attitude of all the ->people at Commodore, just some that are in the wrong positions, like ->working there at all. -> Rick S. spoke right about the products cbm needs to be developing. In my ->opinion, Commodore should be developing products that no third party ->developer can develop. Like a 68020 based A500; (Would make a killer ->X terminal for GfxBase) or a 68030 based a2000 with a real 32 bit highspeed ->bus; A middle line product with 2 slots, video slot, smallish footprint ->AND DETACHED KEYBOARD; a real portable/transportable amiga (maybe beat ->Apple to this market). Dale, I'm all for the above suggestions. My original comment was simply that if Commodore cannot afford to support a Unix workstation properly, then they have no business in entering in this competitive market, since businesses are not going to buy a Unix workstation with very little networking support (both hardware and software). ->Dale Luck GfxBase/Boing, Inc. ->{uunet!cbmvax|pyramid}!amiga!boing!dale -- -+= SAM =+- "the best things in life are free" ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov
elg@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Eric Green) (04/08/89)
in article <588@madnix.UUCP>, perry@madnix.UUCP (Perry Kivolowitz) says: >>In article <2426@sbcs.sunysb.edu> rick@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Rick Spanbauer) writes: Re: "Commodore is undercutting their independent developers by releasing hardware!": >>> Yes, and as I recall one company was set to field a really >>> innovative disk controller that was basically killed by the >>> announcement of the 2090. By cutting the legs out of When the Amiga 1000 was released, I roundly flamed Commodore for not putting a built-in hard disk controller. Said I: "You're intending to market this as a business computer. No self-respecting business computer is floppy-based. Somebody's collective business sense is stuck up their a$$." Events proved me right. The few hard drive controllers eventually released for the 1000 were, by and large, kludges (e.g. the C Ltd. and Supra "slap-on-the-side"), and were twice the price of equivalent solutions for IBM compatible computers. And the first of the ones that really worked appeared almost a year after the Amiga was introduced -- is it any wonder that people had trouble seeing the Amiga as a "serious" computer? So you can call the 2090 more a case of "too little, too late". Its cost effectiveness is very suspect when Microbotics Hardframes give better performance for the same price, and down at the bottom end other controllers flourish by giving inferior but acceptable performance at half the price (e.g. a $150 C Ltd. controller does 300K/sec with a 40ms RLL drive & Adaptec 4070 -- not bad at all, eh?). Now someone says, "Unix without an Ethernet card is like a business computer without a hard drive", and what happens? A maker of Ethernet cards jumps their case! (although I can't blame him, if some of the rumors of past CBM dealings are correct). The problem is that Unix on the A2500 cannot be taken seriously as a viable Unix solution if it cannot be hooked up onto the existing network of Unix machines. AT&T and others are heavily pushing Unix as "the network operating system" (similar to DEC's "the network is the machine" or some such bull). A Unix that doesn't network? Average DP manager is likely to say, "Hell, might as well stay with DOS!" > So what's the moral of the story? Well, there are some companys that can > prosper in the shadow of CBM by offering lower cost/different solutions. > There are some companys that seek to exist entirely outside the shadow > cast by CBM by exploring new markets and going where no Amiga has gone > before. Those that can do neither...well... Looking at other Commodore products that compete with third party products, e.g. their Genlocks etc., again the 3rd-party solutions are better supported, better quality, and suitably priced (TV studios aren't as price-sensitive as ordinary consumers -- they'll gladly pay $500 for a quality genlock, and count it cheap). Commodore, by its very nature, is inept at producing small quantities of a specialty product. Let's face it, Commodore's forte' is mass-production and mass-marketing. Manufacturing and selling 800,000 Amiga 500s is something they can do without blinking, but making and selling 8,000 genlocks... well, they can't do that any better than the 3rd party can, and because of the usual bureaucratic hassles of a large company, by the time it's produced, it's likely to be obsolete. On the other hand, corporate customers want complete systems. They don't want to have to deal with 90 different manufacturers. And of course there's a sort-of-solution for that problem: cross-licensing of existing technology. But that doesn't always bear fruit. E.g. a random rumor I heard somewhere says that CBM bought some of Ameristar's networking technology for cheap Amiga-to-Amiga communications a couple of years back -- and that it immediately disappeared into a black hole, never to be seen again. -- | // Eric Lee Green P.O. Box 92191, Lafayette, LA 70509 | | // ..!{ames,decwrl,mit-eddie,osu-cis}!killer!elg (318)989-9849 | | \X/ Amiga. The homestation for the blessed of us. |