urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (04/01/87)
O.K. folks. This thursday IBM is going to announce its new PCs. According to all the rumours they will use a new proprietary buss, and none of the existing expansion boards will work in this new machine. Also at the same time or shortly later, IBM will be announcing a new operating system to go with these new machines. Of course the BIOS of the new machines will also be different. So where does this leave the AMIGA 2000, (and the new MAC ?) which have been making so much of their their IBM PC capabilities? I realize that there is still the world of several million existing (old style) IBM PCs, their clones, the clone makers, and the add on manufacturers. But the fact remains that as far as capturing a piece of the IBM market, COMMODORE and all the rest are about to be finessed. The AMIGA 2000 was/is supposed to feed of the availability of cheap IBM PC expansion hardware. But with the new standards being set by the new machines, how much longer will the old expansion addons continue to be available? Going of on a tangent from the previous paragraphs, I do not really understand what if any are the constraints on what kind of IBM PC expansion boards will work with the AMIGA 2000. Can anybody from Commodore please post such a list or description. Does an IBM PC or AT type cpu card have to be installed, in order for other IBM PC or AT expansion cards to be useable? Which of the following IBM PC expansion cards and card types will/will not work on the AMIGA 2000: 1) Multifunction cards e.g. AST Six Pack 2) 327x emulation cards e.g. DCA Irma 3) IBM EGA graphics card 4) IBM PGA graphics card 5) IBM PCnetwork adapter 6) IBM Token ring adapter 7) 3M Ethernet card 8) Above board or other memory expansions 9) 3086 accelerator cards 10) scsi cards By work, I mean that their facilities will be available to the AMIGADOS user in some reasonable fashion. That is if PCDOS is running is an (intuition?) window, it will be able to use say the IRma card and the E78 program to emulate a 3278 terminal. Or use the PCnetwork to access files from a network server. Notice that I am not asking for these services to be available to an AMIGA program, although of course if thats possible, I'd like to know about it. P.S. I have an Amiga, but I am not a true believer, ready to defend it, "because it's my computer right or wrong". However I am not an Ed Chaban, out to villify the AMIGA, or to insult you (or myself) by criticising it. I only want to evaluate the situation accurately without bias.
dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU.UUCP (04/01/87)
>O.K. folks. This thursday IBM is going to announce its new PCs. >According to all the rumours they will use a new proprietary >buss, and none of the existing expansion boards will work in >this new machine. Also at the same time or shortly later, IBM >will be announcing a new operating system to go with these new >machines. Of course the BIOS of the new machines will also >be different. >So where does this leave the AMIGA 2000, (and the new MAC ?) >which have been making so much of their their IBM PC capabilities? It leaves the Amiga 2000 and the Mac II in the same place they were before. One might ask, "will IBM continue to support its PC line?". This is probable, but if IBM were to make the mistake of introducing something completely incompatible, then *abandoning* its PC line, I think that everybody would abandon IBM. That is, the clone makers will continue to sell and enhance the original design. So, working on the assumption that the original PC line, which has a huge software and hardware base, will continue on, the Amiga 2000 has nothing to worry about. -Matt
daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (04/02/87)
in article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP>, urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) says: > O.K. folks. This thursday IBM is going to announce its new PCs. All too true. > According to all the rumours they will use a new proprietary > buss, and none of the existing expansion boards will work in > this new machine. Also at the same time or shortly later, IBM > will be announcing a new operating system to go with these new > machines. Of course the BIOS of the new machines will also > be different. Also true. Best guess is that they'll use a new, Microsoft supplied OS that may depend on proprietary op-codes in special IBM versions of the <ugh>86, <ugh>286, and <ugh>386. Old Messy-DOS or PeePee-DOS will run, but the hardware is supposed to be something completely new. > So where does this leave the AMIGA 2000, (and the new MAC ?) > which have been making so much of their their IBM PC capabilities? > I realize that there is still the world of several million > existing (old style) IBM PCs, their clones, the clone makers, > and the add on manufacturers. But the fact remains that as > far as capturing a piece of the IBM market, COMMODORE and > all the rest are about to be finessed. Horse-puckey! You're obviously confused on several points. POINT 1: Pretend for a minute you're a hardware vendor. You're making a new add-on thingy, for the market as it exists today. You could make it for the Amiga Zorro bus (potential market 150K+ users), the Mac II (potential market 0 users), the new IBMs (potential market 0 users), the Commodore 64/128 (potential market 7M+ users), or the PC[lone] market (potential market 10M+ users). Now, personally, I'd like to sell my new hardware thingy. And the best way to sell it is to sell it to the largest available market. That's what PC compatibility on the A2000 gets you, hardware-wise (don't know if the stuff for the Mac is hardware or just software compatible, but the same principals apply). When the new IBM comes out, it'll have the same lack of add-ons that the Amiga, Mac II, etc. all have. Its a new architecture, and no one's going to build for it until there's an installed base. POINT 2: CLONES! IBM's getting killed in the PC market. No surprise. Prior to the IBM PC, IBM had it good in the business world. Business zoids bought their typewriters, terminals, and mainframes (they even put up with EPSIDIC characters). Then IBM introduced the PC, a barely-better-than plain-8-bit box they whipped up in 6 months. Who cares, they were IBM, and business zoids always buy IBM, right? Well, at first they did, and IBM made an impact on the business PC world. Then, along came startups like Compaq who built a better PC for less than IBM. And eventually, the business zoids found out that a Compaq, Tandy, Commodore, or maybe even a Huyndai Clone would do the same job, for much less. So IBM started getting killed as far as sales went, in the very market that they created. Every year Clone makers were getting a bigger piece of the IBM market. So now IBM is going to a new architecture, something that "can't be cloned". Big deal. Its Compaq clones from now on, baby! > The AMIGA 2000 was/is supposed to feed of the availability of > cheap IBM PC expansion hardware. But with the new standards > being set by the new machines, how much longer will the old > expansion addons continue to be available? The hardware's cheap because there are millions of machines that use it. And folks buy those machines 'cause they use the cheap hardware. Its the story whenever you introduce a new machine. The Clones, now and in the future, all work with the currently available hardware. So does my A2000. But the new IBM beasts don't. So what am I gonna buy next time I need a new PC? If IBM delivers something that much better than my A2000, a Mac SE or Mac II, or a power Compaq or Tandy, maybe some will buy it, and pay major $$$ for the add-ons. And there may be a few holdouts that still want IBM only. But in any case, its IBM that's non-standard now, and everyone knows it. > Going of on a tangent from the previous paragraphs, I do not > really understand what if any are the constraints on what > kind of IBM PC expansion boards will work with the AMIGA 2000. > Can anybody from Commodore please post such a list or description. I think they've found one '286 add-on board that doesn't work with the XT Bridge Card. No biggie, a '286 Bridge Card is on the way. The only other problem would be adding a second COM port in the normal manner, as the Bridge Card uses the interrupt Messy-DOS dedicates to the second COM port for its Amiga interfacing. > Does an IBM PC or AT type cpu card have to be installed, in > order for other IBM PC or AT expansion cards to be useable? Some kind of Bridge Card is required to access any IBM bus peripherals. Instead of using an XT or AT Bridge Card, you could conceivable develop a dumb bridge card that essentially maps in the PC bus as an Amiga bus device. I do wonder, however, if there's much desire to do this, 'cause then you'd need all kinds of Amiga side software to drive this GREAT STUFF, instead of relying on already existing PC based software. > Which of the following IBM PC expansion cards and card types > will/will not work on the AMIGA 2000: > Multifunction cards e.g. AST Six Pack, 327x emulation cards e.g. DCA Irma, > IBM EGA graphics card, IBM PGA graphics card, IBM PCnetwork adapter, > IBM Token ring adapter, 3M Ethernet card, Above board or other memory > expansions, 3086 accelerator cards, scsi cards. Most of this stuff should run without trouble on the PC side of things. I know an extensive pile of things has been tested, though I haven't been personally involved in this testing yet. Video cards of any kind will definately work, replacing the Amiga Monochrome/CGA emulation (its a jumper option on the Bridge Card). You could probably even run an Ethernet card if you wanted to, though Amiga bus Ethernet card work so much better. > By work, I mean that their facilities will be available to the AMIGADOS > user in some reasonable fashion. That is if PCDOS is running is an > (intuition?) window, it will be able to use say the IRma card and the E78 > program to emulate a 3278 terminal. Or use the PCnetwork to access files > from a network server. Notice that I am not asking for these services to > be available to an AMIGA program, although of course if thats possible, > I'd like to know about it. You're only going to be running the PC in an Amiga window if you are using the Bridge Card in its normal mode. Adding a graphics card would certainly remove the need to run in an Amiga window, and in most cases limitations on the IBM side prevent the machine from running with multiple graphics cards (they all vie for the same absolute memory locations in the PC's 1 meg address space, or something like that. I'm not all that attune to such primitive behavior (-: ). The Amiga gets access to the PC side though 128K of shared RAM (64K of which is normally video card RAM). When the PC side is coming up, it stops prior to reading PC configuration ROM memory space and notifys the Amiga side that its ready to read said ROM. This gives the Amiga the opportunity to download driver code to the PC side to do virtually anything. The Amiga can even take complete control of the PC side, to use it as an I/O processor or whatever, independent of MS-DOS. The only limitation would be the shared RAM bottleneck, but of course in such a case the PC processor could pre-process stuff to be sent over to the Amiga side. There's a standard Amiga run-time library that manages the Amiga to PC interface. > P.S. I have an Amiga, but I am not a true believer, ready to > defend it, "because it's my computer right or wrong". I can hardly claim to be non-biased, but I do know just about everything there is to know about the A2000 proper, and I have a reasonable working knowledge of the Bridge Cards. > However I am not an Ed Chaban, out to villify the AMIGA, > or to insult you (or myself) by criticising it. > I only want to evaluate the situation accurately without bias. That's obvious, I haven't seen any Amiga bashing, half truths, or praises for non-existant hardware from THE OTHER GUYS in this message at all. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Haynie Commodore Technology // /| ___ __ __ __ {ihnp4|caip|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh |\ // /_| | / \ / \ / \ Commodore rarely admits to knowing me, \\// / | +--+ | | | | | | much less sharing my personal opinions. \/ / | |___ \__/ \__/ \__/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (04/02/87)
In article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes:
$O.K. folks. This thursday IBM is going to announce its new PCs.
$According to all the rumours they will use a new proprietary
$buss, and none of the existing expansion boards will work in
$this new machine. Also at the same time or shortly later, IBM
$will be announcing a new operating system to go with these new
$machines. Of course the BIOS of the new machines will also
$be different.
$So where does this leave the AMIGA 2000, (and the new MAC ?)
$which have been making so much of their their IBM PC capabilities?
$I realize that there is still the world of several million
$existing (old style) IBM PCs, their clones, the clone makers,
$and the add on manufacturers. But the fact remains that as
$far as capturing a piece of the IBM market, COMMODORE and
$all the rest are about to be finessed.
The "IBM" market is NOT IBM's market anymore. There's at least 100
manufacturers of computers which will continue to be successful LONG after
IBM introduces their new machines, simply because of the availability of
cards, software, etc for the IBM standard "PC". In 2 years or so, there
will be some software and hardware for Big Blue's new machines, and PC's
as we know them will wane (the sales of, that is, not the users of).
$The AMIGA 2000 was/is supposed to feed of the availability of
$cheap IBM PC expansion hardware. But with the new standards
$being set by the new machines, how much longer will the old
$expansion addons continue to be available?
My guess is at least 2-3 years.
$Going of on a tangent from the previous paragraphs, I do not
$really understand what if any are the constraints on what
$kind of IBM PC expansion boards will work with the AMIGA 2000.
$Can anybody from Commodore please post such a list or description.
$Does an IBM PC or AT type cpu card have to be installed, in
$order for other IBM PC or AT expansion cards to be useable?
The "Bridgeboard" option for the A2000 is basically a whole PC on a card
minus video circuitry which is emulated by the Amiga through shared ram (shared
by 8088 and 68000 busses). That is, it has an 8088 (+ slot for coprocessor),
512K of its own RAM, compatible BIOS, etc. It IS a PC - not an emulator.
This card goes into ONE of the four slots (actually only two of those four)
can accept the Bridgeboard) leaving three (or two depending on which of the
two you put the Bridgeboard into) slots for PC cards.
One of the three slots has the two connectors required for AT style cards,
however, the other two have holes drilled and connections on the board for
the second connector to be added to make those AT style slots instead of XT
style slots. I think (not sure) that AT cards can only be used on an AT, so
that's moot until we bring out our AT-Bridgeboard (with 80286) in the future.
Anyway, simply put, you can put up to 3 normal PC cards in the A2000 once you
have added the Bridgeboard.
$Which of the following IBM PC expansion cards and card types
$will/will not work on the AMIGA 2000:
[lists a whole bunch of cards]
They should all work, but remember some may need other cards to work also.
What I mean is, Amiga emulates PC Mono and CGA adaptors, so you may need
to add Hercules or EGA or whatever, in order to make cards that require
those features to work.
$Notice that I am not asking for these services to be
$available to an AMIGA program, although of course if thats
$possible, I'd like to know about it.
Crossover capabilities are available for some things. For example, drivers
exist to allow Amiga to use PC hard disks, and vice versa. Since the filing
systems are different though, you'd keep each in its own partition.
Hope this helps,
Paul Higginbottom.keithd@cadovax.UUCP (04/02/87)
In article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes: > >O.K. folks. This thursday IBM is going to announce its new PCs. >According to all the rumours they will use a new proprietary >buss, and none of the existing expansion boards will work in >this new machine. >So where does this leave the AMIGA 2000, (and the new MAC ?) >which have been making so much of their their IBM PC capabilities? Well, I don't know exactly where it will leave the Amiga 2000, but I kinda think it is a good thing. I figure it means the Amiga 3000 will have to concentrate more on better graphics, better software, better you-name-it, rather than wasting time on me-too-ism. Anyone who wants to jump on the IBM bandwagon is not going to buy an Amiga 2000, he's going to buy one of the new IBMs. Anyone who wants the latest glitzy features is going to buy a Mac II or wait for the Amiga 3000. Hackers who want both the Amiga's glitzy features and to run the megapiles of PC compatible software will buy an A2000 I suppose. Either that or they'll get an A500 *and* a budget PC clone. Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa "Standardization is Institutionalized Mediocrity"
rjg@nis.UUCP (04/03/87)
In article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes: > >O.K. folks. This thursday IBM is going to announce its new PCs. >According to all the rumours they will use a new proprietary >buss, and none of the existing expansion boards will work in >this new machine. Also at the same time or shortly later, IBM >will be announcing a new operating system to go with these new >machines. Of course the BIOS of the new machines will also >be different. >So where does this leave the AMIGA 2000, (and the new MAC ?) .... [some more stuff] Well, my personal opinions on new machines are always a wait and see. Because IBM releases a new machine that may be geared to replace it's predecessor machines (PC/XT/AT, et.al.), does not mean that the business community which heavily uses these items will accept the new machine. A machine conversion for a business is costly from every aspect... people, time, money. Businesses may simply not concern themselves with a new computer. Even so, let's assume it's a perfectly good machine. This does not guarantee that the machine will survive, or be at all successful if it does. (many names immediately come to mind). Therefore, I'm not worried about the A2000, or the Mac. I have yet to be convinced that any new machine from IBM will cause any significant stir in the business community. If it does, which wouldn't happen anywhere near immediately, then I'll personally start considering the implications. This new machine has to cause a real incredible groundswell all over the business world before the 'clones' and 'compatibles' run into real problems. (It's still a very valid question, though.... :-) -- Robert J. Granvin UUCP: ihnp4!meccts!nis!rjg Programmer/Analyst - Technical Services ATT: (612) 894-9494 National Information Systems, Inc. "It's all in the reflexes..."
spencer@eris.UUCP (04/03/87)
In article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes: > >O.K. folks. This thursday IBM is going to announce its new PCs. [Asks Commodore what kind of card he can use with the A2000] >1) Multifunction cards e.g. AST Six Pack >2) 327x emulation cards e.g. DCA Irma >3) IBM EGA graphics card >4) IBM PGA graphics card >5) IBM PCnetwork adapter >6) IBM Token ring adapter >7) 3M Ethernet card >8) Above board or other memory expansions >9) 3086 accelerator cards >10) scsi cards >By work, I mean that their facilities will be available >to the AMIGADOS user in some reasonable fashion. That is >if PCDOS is running is an (intuition?) window, it will >be able to use say the IRma card and the E78 program to >emulate a 3278 terminal. Or use the PCnetwork to access >files from a network server. >Notice that I am not asking for these services to be >available to an AMIGA program, although of course if thats >possible, I'd like to know about it. > I don't need to use ANY PC stuff. I want a hard disk, I want memory. Ok, that I can get. Now I want to get files off the hard disk from my other Amiga (what? not everybody has two Amigas?). I look at all the cards for the PC that I could put in a 2000 and realize that I could only put a hard disk in (and that would be moved to connect to Perry's card when it comes out. I can't get a LAN for my Amiga (who's writing the networking software? Let's use AppleTalk on the serial port!) So there are four PC slots in my 2000 (and a $500 bridge board) that I will never use. So instead I will not trade in my 1000. I will save it and get the 2000-n-1 board. Oh, drat there are those stupid IBM slots again! Why can't I get all the slot space devoted to AMIGA slots? Sounds like ASDG will have more than enough cards to fill in the current number. They could just add slots under the IBM slots so that they don't have to make two card cages. But I would rather have a 2000-n-notIBM cage! Isn't there a large collection of people on this net who have been saying how stupid the IBM part of the 2000 is? Seems to me most current Amiga owners I talk to like buying up, but don't really go for the IBM part, they just want the most recent machine (I know I do). "There's room to move as a fry cook! I could be manager in a year! King!...GOD!!" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Randy Spencer P.O. Box 4542 Berkeley CA 94704 (415)284-4740 I N F I N I T Y BBS: (415)283-5469 Now working for |||||||||||::::... . . BUD-LINX But in no way |||||||||||||||::::.. .. . Officially representing ||||||||||||:::::... .. ....ucbvax!mica!spencer s o f t w a r e spencer@mica.berkeley.edu -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
mwm@eris.UUCP (04/03/87)
In article <3018@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> spencer@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Randy Spencer) writes: >I can't get a LAN for my Amiga (who's writing the networking software? I thought you knew this, randy: Ameristar is selling ethernet boards for the Amiga, both as plug-in-the-side and Zorro cards. They also have TCP/IP with NFS (clients, no servers yet). You can't share files directly, but can copy them around without to much trouble. I don't know Appletalk, so don't know how this compares. With the next version, they've promised TCP/SLIP, so you'll be able to do all this magic over your serial port for cheap - or over longer distance than you want to run an ethernet cable (say, from my house to the UCB campus :-). >Seems to me most current Amiga owners I talk to like buying >up, but don't really go for the IBM part, they just want the most >recent machine (I know I do). Yeah, but the latest hardware is also in the A500, as far as I'm concerned. But it _still_ needs more chip memory (I get tired of not being able to move windows....) <mike -- Here's a song about absolutely nothing. Mike Meyer It's not about me, not about anyone else, ucbvax!mwm Not about love, not about being young. mwm@berkeley.edu Not about anything else, either. mwm@ucbjade.BITNET
byron@gitpyr.UUCP (04/04/87)
In article <1460@cadovax.UUCP> keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes: >I figure it means the Amiga 3000 will have to concentrate more on >better graphics, better software, better you-name-it, rather than >wasting time on me-too-ism. > What Amiga 3000? Most of the Amiga info I have is from reading this newsgroup. I got the impression when the 2000 was introduced sans the 68020/68881, better graphics etc. that the 3000/Ranger/Vastly better technology type machine idea was trashed (in my opinion). The dismantling of the original CA group confirmed this (again in my opinion). So I have no expectation of CA to bring out a new machine. They've put all their eggs into the 2000/IBM compatability basket at least for the time being. Is there any evidence to the contrary? I don't have a machine right now (Poor college student). But I was really impressed with the Amiga line and was anxiously awaiting the introduction of 68020 box with Amiga's awesome arch. But I feel I'll be waiting much longer than I anticipated. -- Byron Jeff E-mail address: ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!byron
miner@ulowell.UUCP (04/04/87)
In article <3018@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> (Randy Spencer) writes: LAN for your Amiga. Ameristar has anouced two products, >>In article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes: > [Asks Commodore what kind of card he can use with the A2000] >>5) IBM PCnetwork adapter >>6) IBM Token ring adapter >>7) 3M Ethernet card Please, this is the same narrow minded suggestion that came from Commodore when someone asked about networking A2000's during the release at the BCS meeting. Try and have both a client and server process running for one of these cards on the PC side of the A2000! > I can't get a LAN for my Amiga (who's writing the networking software? >Let's use AppleTalk on the serial port!) Ameristar Technologies has two Amiga networking products. One is an ethernet board with telnet, ftp, TCP/IP, and best of all NFS (Net Work File System). The board has been shown working as an NFS client and they claim that a first release of the other software will be ready "real soon now". I have ordered two boards for our lab, an A2000 internal card and an A1000 side mount version. The board and software will support multiple login and remote communication shells. Best of all I can make the 500 Meg drive on our Sun look like an Amiga hard disk. The other product Ameristar has is a non-standard, Amiga specific, cheaper, token ring network called ARC-Net. This will allow multiple Amigas to share resources an communicate. We are considering this one for the development systems at home. I have not seen any of this software/hardware, but I have talked to people who have and believe Ameristar is faily committed to networking Amigas. They can be reached at: Ameristar Technologies, INC. \\ P.O. Box 415 Hauppauge, NY 11788. Phone: 516.724.3344 My only connection with Ameristar is that I am a customer. -- Rich Miner ULowell-Cntr for Productivity !ulowell!miner 617-452-5000x2693
dpz@paul.UUCP (04/04/87)
> From: keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) > In article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes: >>So where does this leave the AMIGA 2000, (and the new MAC ?) >>which have been making so much of their their IBM PC capabilities? Huh? I haven't heard exceedingly much about the Mac II having any IBM PC capabilities, except for a 3rd party '286 board. Unix, yes, but very little about PC compatibility. > Well, I don't know exactly where it will leave the Amiga 2000, but I kinda > think it is a good thing. Doesn't bother me. The PC style machine will be around a good long time, and thus so will hardware and software for it. > I figure it means the Amiga 3000 will have to concentrate more on > better graphics, better software, better you-name-it, rather than > wasting time on me-too-ism. At the least, C-A has a little breathing room to do a bit of inventive R&D for future machines now that the line has filled out. > Anyone who wants to jump on the IBM bandwagon is not going to buy > an Amiga 2000, he's going to buy one of the new IBMs. Anyone who Ahhh... I wouldn't count IBM in that fast. Remember the fuss over the PC Jr. It was going to standardize the home market. Righto. > wants the latest glitzy features is going to buy a Mac II or wait > for the Amiga 3000. Hackers who want both the Amiga's glitzy features Hmm. The Mac II's base price is quite high for people who want to get a flashy machine that is just a large Mac at this point. After you add Unix and the necessary hard disk, you are entering Sun territory. I seriously hope that they have plans for a friendly multitasking OS other than Unix that won't require the physical and monetary resources of Unix. -- David P. Zimmerman rutgers!dpz dpz@rutgers.edu
dpz@paul.UUCP (04/04/87)
> From: spencer@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Randy Spencer) > I don't need to use ANY PC stuff. I want a hard disk, I want memory. Same here, presently, until I see some really neat PC expansion board that I want. I really haven't found anything in the run-of-the-mill IBM boards that I don't have in my Amiga. A clock will be in Perry's box, and I already have parallel and serial ports, mouse support, joystick ports, and video built in. But I am not ruling out the future. > will never use. So instead I will not trade in my 1000. I will save > it and get the 2000-n-1 board. Oh, drat there are those stupid IBM > slots again! Why can't I get all the slot space devoted to AMIGA > slots? Sounds like ASDG will have more than enough cards to fill in Whoa. Perry's box has a maximum of 7 Amiga slots, isn't that enough? 2 Zorro-1 slots, 3 Zorro-2 only slots, and 2 Zorro-2/AT slots (plus the 2 PC only slots). If you don't put any AT cards in, you have a total of 7 Zorro-1/2 slots. > slots so that they don't have to make two card cages. But I would > rather have a 2000-n-notIBM cage! Isn't there a large collection of > people on this net who have been saying how stupid the IBM part of the > 2000 is? Seems to me most current Amiga owners I talk to like buying What is stupid about covering your butt? Expandability and flexibility are the main concerns here, and given a choice between keeping the Amiga castrated from the rest of the world, and trying to bridge the gap to provide for more utility, I would choose the latter, both as a company and as a user. dpz -- David P. Zimmerman rutgers!dpz dpz@rutgers.edu
ewhac@well.UUCP (04/04/87)
[ Forget the lawyers, guns, and money: Gimme a Cray! ] In article <3018@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> spencer@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Randy Spencer) writes: >In article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes: >> >>O.K. folks. This thursday IBM is going to announce its new PCs. > [Asks Commodore what kind of card he can use with the A2000] > >I don't need to use ANY PC stuff. I want a hard disk, I want memory. >Ok, that I can get. Now I want to get files off the hard disk from my >other Amiga (what? not everybody has two Amigas?). I look at all the >cards for the PC that I could put in a 2000 and realize that I could >only put a hard disk in (and that would be moved to connect to Perry's >card when it comes out. I can't get a LAN for my Amiga (who's writing >the networking software? Let's use AppleTalk on the serial port!) Um, yes you can. AmeriStar's ethernet board has been out for some time. But I agree; I'd love to have a cheepo network running on the Amiga. If I knew the first thing about creating a quick-and-dirty network, I run right off and create it, and then I'd write MazeWar for it. The odd part is that I probably wouldn't write anything else for the network once I got MazeWar running. >So >there are four PC slots in my 2000 (and a $500 bridge board) that I >will never use. So instead I will not trade in my 1000. I will save >it and get the 2000-n-1 board. Oh, drat there are those stupid IBM >slots again! Why can't I get all the slot space devoted to AMIGA >slots? Sounds like ASDG will have more than enough cards to fill in >the current number. They could just add slots under the IBM >slots so that they don't have to make two card cages. But I would >rather have a 2000-n-notIBM cage! Isn't there a large collection of >people on this net who have been saying how stupid the IBM part of the >2000 is? Seems to me most current Amiga owners I talk to like buying >up, but don't really go for the IBM part, they just want the most >recent machine (I know I do). > Hey! Someone who wants what I want. Someone who doesn't care one whit about Eye Bee Emm {in}compatability. Someone who simply wants the best there is. I mean, come on. Do you really think an IBM memory card can be used by the Amiga? The silly things are designed for a segmented architecture, and the ones that have more than 640K all have to do bank switching (or some version of). Bank switching? On a flat address space? We don't need no steenking bank swtiching! We don't need no steenking 4.75MHz 8088 clogging up one of our valuable slots. What we need is a 25 MHz 68020 with a 25MHz 68881 running out of 25MHz RAM. A 25MHz blitter would be nice, too. BTW, have you considered that it *JUST MIGHT* be possible to remove the existing custom chip set and put the new super-dooper chips on an external card if and when they become available? Excuse me; I'm flaming. I have to go nurse my leg.... >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >Randy Spencer P.O. Box 4542 Berkeley CA 94704 (415)284-4740 > I N F I N I T Y BBS: (415)283-5469 >Now working for |||||||||||::::... . . BUD-LINX >But in no way |||||||||||||||::::.. .. . >Officially representing ||||||||||||:::::... .. ....ucbvax!mica!spencer > s o f t w a r e spencer@mica.berkeley.edu _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ ________ ___ Leo L. Schwab \ /___--__ The Guy in The Cape ___ ___ /\ ---##\ ihnp4!ptsfa!well!ewhac / X \_____ | __ _---)) ..or.. / /_\-- -----+==____\ // \ _ well ---\ ___ ( o---+------------------O/ \/ \ dual ----> !unicom!ewhac \ / ___ \_ (`o ) hplabs -/ ("AE-wack") ____ \___/ \_/ Recumbent Bikes: "Work FOR? I don't work FOR The _O_n_l_y Way To Fly! anybody! I'm just having fun."
blgardne@esunix.UUCP (04/06/87)
in article <3018@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>, spencer@eris.UUCP says: > So instead I will not trade in my 1000. I will save > it and get the 2000-n-1 board. Oh, drat there are those stupid IBM > slots again! Why can't I get all the slot space devoted to AMIGA > slots? Sounds like ASDG will have more than enough cards to fill in > the current number. They could just add slots under the IBM > slots so that they don't have to make two card cages. But I would > rather have a 2000-n-notIBM cage! Isn't there a large collection of > people on this net who have been saying how stupid the IBM part of the > 2000 is? Seems to me most current Amiga owners I talk to like buying > up, but don't really go for the IBM part, they just want the most > recent machine (I know I do). Perry, why not extend the Amiga side of the bus by two more slots? Simply putting Amiga slots in line with the two PC slots on the far left of the machine would give those of us that don't have much use for the IBM stuff two more slots, without hurting those that need IBM slots. -- Blaine Gardner @ Evans & Sutherland UUCP Address: {ihnp4,decvax}!decwrl!esunix!blgardne Alternate: {ihnp4,seismo}!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!esunix!blgardne
keithd@cadovax.UUCP (04/07/87)
In article <3382@gitpyr.gatech.EDU> byron@gitpyr.UUCP (Byron A Jeff) writes: > >What Amiga 3000? Most of the Amiga info I have is from reading this newsgroup. Well, I assume that SOMEDAY Commodore must come out with a new machine, they could hardly survive FOREVER on the A2000. They may not call it a A3000, but you get the idea. > But I was really >impressed with the Amiga line and was anxiously awaiting the introduction >of 68020 box with Amiga's awesome arch. But I feel I'll be waiting much >longer than I anticipated. Looks like we all are. Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa
spencer@eris.UUCP (04/07/87)
Too many people responded to the wrong part of a recent article of mine. The focus of my article was not: In article <2866@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes: }In article <3018@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> spencer@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Randy Spencer) writes: }}...I can't get a LAN for my Amiga (who's writing }}the networking software? Let's use AppleTalk on the serial port!) } } Um, yes you can. AmeriStar's ethernet board has been out for some }time. But was rather: }}there are four PC slots in my 2000 (and a $500 bridge board) that I }}will never use. So instead I will not trade in my 1000. But I would }}rather have a 2000-n-notIBM cage! Isn't there a large collection of }}people on this net who have been saying how stupid the IBM part of the }}2000 is? } Hey! Someone who wants what I want. Someone who doesn't care one }whit about Eye Bee Emm {in}compatability. Someone who simply wants the best }there is. }}Randy Spencer P.O. Box 4542 Berkeley CA 94704 (415)284-4740 } ________ ___ Leo L. Schwab Sorry to pick on you Leo, you were just the last to post about my message. But while I have your attention, where does one purchase: } ________ ___ } \ /___--__ } ___ ___ /\ ---##\ } / X \_____ | __ _---)) } / /_\-- -----+==____\ // \ _ }___ ( o---+------------------O/ \/ \ } \ / ___ \_ (`o ) } ____ \___/ \_/ } Recumbent Bikes: I see the .signature file all the time, but I never see bike stores that sell them. I don't even see people riding them, but I hear they are: } The _O_n_l_y Way To Fly! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Randy Spencer P.O. Box 4542 Berkeley CA 94704 (415)284-4740 I N F I N I T Y BBS: (415)283-5469 Now working for |||||||||||::::... . . BUD-LINX But in no way |||||||||||||||::::.. .. . Officially representing ||||||||||||:::::... .. ....ucbvax!mica!spencer s o f t w a r e spencer@mica.berkeley.edu -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
grr@cbmvax.UUCP (04/07/87)
In article <1178@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu> miner@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu (Richard Miner) writes: >In article <3018@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> (Randy Spencer) writes: > LAN for your Amiga. Ameristar has anouced two products, >>In article <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes: >> [Asks Commodore what kind of card he can use with the A2000] >>>5) IBM PCnetwork adapter >>>6) IBM Token ring adapter >>>7) 3M Ethernet card >Please, this is the same narrow minded suggestion that came from Commodore >when someone asked about networking A2000's during the release at the BCS >meeting. Try and have both a client and server process running for one of >these cards on the PC side of the A2000! > >Ameristar Technologies has two Amiga networking products. One is an >ethernet board with telnet, ftp, TCP/IP, and best of all NFS (Net Work File >System). The board has been shown working as an NFS client and they claim >that a first release of the other software will be ready "real soon now". >I have ordered two boards for our lab, an A2000 internal card and an A1000 >side mount version. The board and software will support multiple login and >remote communication shells. Best of all I can make the 500 Meg drive on our >Sun look like an Amiga hard disk. Please forgive the Sales & Marketing types. We are quite familiar with the Ameristar boards. The came down to demonstrate the side-mount and zorro card versions several months ago. We said "please make cards to fit the A2000". The latest word is we'll have them in a week or two. We also asked them to think more about peer networking, since not every Amiga cluster owner is going to have a sun or other NFS host lying about. After all, you can hang a pretty big disk off a SCSI controller if you really want to... >The other product Ameristar has is a non-standard, Amiga specific, cheaper, >token ring network called ARC-Net. This will allow multiple Amigas to share >resources an communicate. We are considering this one for the development >systems at home. Arc-Net is actually a well establised standard used by a number of hardware vendors, including some of the PC products. I'm not sure if it really has any advantage over the "cheaper-net" implementations, but I do agree that real ethernet could be too expensive for many applications. -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing arpa: cbmvax!grr@seismo.css.GOV Commodore, Engineering Department fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)
spencer@eris.UUCP (04/11/87)
In article <1303@sfsup.UUCP> perry@sfsup.UUCP writes: >In article <44@esunix.UUCP>, blgardne@esunix.UUCP writes: >> Perry, why not extend the Amiga side of the bus by two more slots? >> Simply putting Amiga slots in line with the two PC slots on the far left >> of the machine would give those of us that don't have much use for the >> IBM stuff two more slots, without hurting those that need IBM slots. > >That's a good idea, except that several VERY popular IBM PC board makers >assume that there is room beneath the ``normal'' bottom of a PC board. They >use this room to fit more logic than they otherwise would have been able >to fit. > >Perry Ok, but the slots are not put right up against each other, there is space between the slots for all the componants that are sitting on them (like speakers on some modems). So take advantage of that. Place the slots as follows: /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\/\/\/\ [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] <-- Amiga Slots [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] <-- PC Slots [] [] [] [] \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/\/\/\/ <-- Card Holder Thingies By "thingies" I mean those metal cutouts that you slide the card down through and they hold the card up when they are plugged into the slots. I also like the idea of a Dumb Bridge Board. Then people could VAR all these PC products just by writting a driver for the product that would talk through some Standard Dumb Bridge Board (SDBB). Now, how are we going to settle on a stardard for the SDBB. Lets get somebody really prominant in the making of the Amiga to design it. I've got it ------->>> COMMODORE. If they can't figure it out no one can. Then everyone can be compatible. Or we could have different manufacturers make their own version (like the 68020 boards, do we access the CSA 68020 and the :vapor: CBM board the same way? or was that a bad example?) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Randy Spencer P.O. Box 4542 Berkeley CA 94704 (415)284-4740 I N F I N I T Y BBS: (415)283-5469 Now working for |||||||||||::::... . . BUD-LINX But in no way |||||||||||||||::::.. .. . Officially representing ||||||||||||:::::... .. ....ucbvax!mica!spencer s o f t w a r e spencer@mica.berkeley.edu -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
blgardne@esunix.UUCP (04/14/87)
In article <1303@sfsup.UUCP> perry@sfsup.UUCP writes: >In article <44@esunix.UUCP>, blgardne@esunix.UUCP writes: >> Perry, why not extend the Amiga side of the bus by two more slots? >> Simply putting Amiga slots in line with the two PC slots on the far left >> of the machine would give those of us that don't have much use for the >> IBM stuff two more slots, without hurting those that need IBM slots. > >That's a good idea, except that several VERY popular IBM PC board makers >assume that there is room beneath the ``normal'' bottom of a PC board. They >use this room to fit more logic than they otherwise would have been able >to fit. > >Perry Ok, good point. I'm willing to compromise. Could you be convinced to do everything execpt solder in the sockets? If the holes were drilled, and the traces were there on the board, it would be trivial for hardcore Amiga types to solder in the edge card connectors. This would allow more Amiga expansion, but cause no problems at all for those that are more inclined towards IBM expansion. You could even go so far as to extend the IBM side of the bus (without installing connectors) to give equal expansion opportunity. This extend-the-bus-without-installing-the-connectors method is used by IBM in the AT, and by Commodore in the A2000 (on two of the IBM bus connectors). It seems to be the ideal way to provide more Amiga slots. It would also give the A1000 + 2000-and-1 an expansion edge over the A2000. Well, have I made a sale? Do I get any royalties? :-) :-) :-) -- Blaine Gardner @ Evans & Sutherland UUCP Address: {ihnp4,decvax}!decwrl!esunix!blgardne Alternate: {ihnp4,seismo}!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!esunix!blgardne