jxc@rayssd.UUCP (02/13/87)
Here's some early observations, speculations, thoughts and issues
about the Amiga 2000 pre-announcement in COMPUTE!. Just my $0.02...
(And that may be what it's worth!)
Let me first say that it's nice to see the Amiga done the way it should
have been done in the first place: expansion slots (out the wazoo!),
IBM compatibility paths (8088 and 80286), 68020 upgrade capability, keyboard
functionality, long persistence monitor, good pricing. I think everyone
can take a pat on the back - the initial buyers for making suggestions for
improvements, and CBM for having the good sense to listen and learn. I
think CBM deserves extra kudos for conversing on this net with their
customers and developers! Sure, it's in their interest, but how many
companies do it?
Some of the positives:
The Amiga 2000 will increase the total market potential for Amiga
software development. That's good for us, we'll see even more commercial
and public domain software; and it's good for CBM, they will see increased
sales resulting from the increased software base. The important point here
is that since the 2000 is software compatible (not DOWNWARD/UPWARD
compatible), we will continue to see software development for the 1000/2000
configurations. The 1000 is STILL a standard hardware configuration.
As someone who bought an Apple ][ (eight years ago?) and watched the ][+,
//e, //c and IIGS software base evolve to take advantage of hardware
features I didn't have, this is A BIG RELIEF! This means that you will
continue to see PD software on the Net and BBS's and not have to worry
about things like - Gee, it uses the new graphics mode! Gosh, I wish I had
the extra memory that's now standard! Why don't people write software for
the MINIMUM configurations? Sorry, the current configuration is the NEW
minimum configuration, not some architecture from the past, however recent!
A BIG negative:
Hope you like the hardware that's out there for the 1000 now, 'cause you
won't see many new developments. (I welcome your comments on this one,
Perry.) Face it, what incentives exist to develop expansion hardware
for a static architecture? The developments will be primarily for the
expandable 2000; the 500 will be aimed at the 520ST market, the 1000 at the
1040ST market and the 2000 for the open-end market. The unfortunate fact
is that CBM missed the boat by not producing a STANDARD EXPANSION CHASSIS
at the onset. A standard chassis would have opened up the competition and
initial sales for boards by providing a well-defined domain within which
the manufacturers could design their capabilities. Compare the original
open-architecture of the Apple with that of the Amiga. The Apple was well
documented: the memory map, protocols and address decoding were well
defined. Interface boards for the Apple ][ spread like wildfire. By
contrast, Amiga expansion was not well documented initially, and there is
reason to believe that it went through several about-faces. Hardware
developers each produced their own chassis (what would you expect them to
do?), and the users all sat and said: I wonder what the best manufacturer
is, who's going to make the best boards; should I buy an expander with a
pass-thru, a 2 board-chassis, a 4-board chassis, a closed-end memory
board, do I need a power supply, will the sidecar make my hardware useless,
etc, etc, etc. When the best customer decision is to wait and see, the
resulting sales are not good.
Do I expect CBM to offer me an upgrade path? Get real!!! Think about
it. This so-called upgrade looks amazingly like a trade-in. Let's see, new
motherboard with slots, new deeper cabinet, new keyboard layout, new
half-height drives... well, I could keep the monitor, BUT I WANT
HIGH-PERSISTENT PHOSPHORS (whine, whine, whine...)! A trade-in to CBM at a
break-even price won't resemble a reasonable cost to any micro owner I know.
They want to upgrade their 1MHz/16K machines to 16MHz/32Mb for $100, and that
includes shipping!! Hell, the world owes it to them, they spent $395 for it,
new!
Well, haven't I said enough? As for me, I suspect I will buy a couple
of additional Meg, a hard disk (for $850+, ouch!) and continue to relish
the commercial and public domain software. I will watch future Amigans
enjoy the results of my pioneering and watch them take the machine beyond
my expectations. But I know, I was there first! Thanks, Commodore. At
least my software base lives on!
Let's hear some other thoughts out there! Certainly any heated
discussions on these topics are better than the current CPU-wars...
______________________________________________________________
| Jeffrey Jay Clesius, Raytheon Submarine Signal Division |
| 1847 West Main Road, Mail Stop 188 |
| Portsmouth, RI 02871-1087 (401) 847-8000 (X4015) |
| { allegra | gatech | mirror | raybed2 } -----\ |
| { linus | ihnp4 | uiucdcs } --------------->!rayssd!jxc |
-------------------------------------------------------------- perry@well.UUCP (02/13/87)
In article <656@rayssd.RAY.COM>, jxc@rayssd.RAY.COM (Jeffrey J. Clesius) writes: > Let me first say that it's nice to see the Amiga done the way it should > have been done in the first place: expansion slots (out the wazoo!), The 2000 IS a good, stable, competent design worthy of respect. > A BIG negative: > > Hope you like the hardware that's out there for the 1000 now, 'cause you > won't see many new developments. (I welcome your comments on this one, > Perry.) Face it, what incentives exist to develop expansion hardware > for a static architecture? The developments will be primarily for the > expandable 2000; the 500 will be aimed at the 520ST market, the 1000 at the True and Not True. For example, ASDG has a commitment to provide its existing customers with an above-amiga mounting four or more slot rack. We owe them this since we offer a full buy back on their Mini-Rack-C's and D's. We've been giving this a lot of thought. To produce a four slot old Zorro box would be pointless for reasons which are obvious. So...how do we satisfy our commitments while also satisfying the consumer's (and the company's) future needs? We think we have a way. What about an above-amiga (1000) box incorporating two existing Zorro slots (so all ASDG customers and owners of other mfr's Zorro boards can simply insert their old boards into the new box) and a full A2000 bus as well so that all A1000 owners can enjoy the fruits of A2000 development? Plus space and power for drives etc. So far we think that everyone will be satisfied by the above arrangement. It also represents an opportunity for our expertise in building racks to work for us instead of against us (higher quality equaled higher cost in the mini-rack's so people who were unsure of whether they should go Zorro or sots went with sots). Our guess is that buyers of a combination box such as I mentioned have already demonstrated their seriousness for quality expansion by buying full Zorro spec products. Thus, they'd see and appreciate the quality of box we build and might be more apt to look past small differences in cost between ours and whoever else makes a similar product. What do you think? As far as board development itself goes. Our 8M for the A1000 is nearing full production time. Our disk controller will appear in both form factors as well. But it is true that once our A1000-2000 box is out, we'll be more comfortable about doing future designs in the 2000 format first. As it is the 2M and 8M are almost ready to go in the 2000 anyway. > | Jeffrey Jay Clesius, Raytheon Submarine Signal Division | Perry
higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (02/14/87)
In article <656@rayssd.RAY.COM> jxc@rayssd.RAY.COM (Jeffrey J. Clesius) writes:
$ Here's some early observations, speculations, thoughts and issues
$about the Amiga 2000 pre-announcement in COMPUTE!
$[...praise for 2000 deleted...]
$
$A BIG negative:
$ Hope you like the hardware that's out there for the 1000 now, 'cause you
$won't see many new developments.
$Face it, what incentives exist to develop expansion hardware
$for a static architecture? The developments will be primarily for the
$expandable 2000; the 500 will be aimed at the 520ST market, the 1000 at the
$1040ST market and the 2000 for the open-end market. The unfortunate fact
$is that CBM missed the boat by not producing a STANDARD EXPANSION CHASSIS
$at the onset.
What's to prevent someone from providing an expansion chassis for the 1000
and 500 which allow those computers to use cards for the 2000?
It isn't too late at all. And once such a device is available (seems the
Byte-by-Byte box can't be far off), then all can enjoy the same cards.
$ ______________________________________________________________
$ | Jeffrey Jay Clesius, Raytheon Submarine Signal Division |
$ | 1847 West Main Road, Mail Stop 188 |
$ | Portsmouth, RI 02871-1087 (401) 847-8000 (X4015) |
$ | { allegra | gatech | mirror | raybed2 } -----\ |
$ | { linus | ihnp4 | uiucdcs } --------------->!rayssd!jxc |
$ --------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Higginbottom
Amiga Sales Support Mgr.eric@osiris.UUCP (02/15/87)
In article <2579@well.UUCP>, perry@well.UUCP (Perry S. Kivolowitz) writes: > > We think we have a way. What about an above-amiga (1000) box incorporating > two existing Zorro slots (so all ASDG customers and owners of other mfr's > Zorro boards can simply insert their old boards into the new box) and a full > A2000 bus as well so that all A1000 owners can enjoy the fruits of A2000 > development? Plus space and power for drives etc. I can probably safely say that I would definitely be a customer for such a box, assuming that the price is better than the difference between selling by A1000 and buying an A2000. But how are you going to pull out all the special slots, such as the CPU slot, and the video slot? Can you really duplicate the AT and XT slots? Will a Bridge card work? I know nothing of the Zorro slot definition - is everything you need really coming out the side of an A1000? Or will there have to be some kind of internal connections? -- eric ...!seismo!mimsy!aplcen!osiris!eric