roger_earl@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Roger Earl) (04/11/91)
Well, I had the opprotunity of seeing the CDTV demonstrated first hand today. First of all, let me say that I was impressed. The CDTV was very real and tangible. It was NOT like a computer system at all, you cannot 'hack' with it. This may seem obvious, but people's comments on the Net lately have always been on expandibility and graphics capabilities and such. An A3000 with 16 megs running Amigavison and a laserdisk player was also demoed. The A3000 was demonstrated to show how you can 'create' Multi-media, generally for business (mostly advertising) purposes. The CDTV was demonstrated as Multi-media for the masses. CDTV cannot be compared to a computer, even though it is an A500 underneath. It cannot be compared to a Nintendo, even though you can throw a Disc in it and play a game. CDTV has its own category (CD-I being its only competitor, although CD-I is being marketed badly as a computer device). People are in the market for CD players, and in the market to upgrade their Nintendo (sorry, most parents play Nintendo more than thier kids do, and they want more). When someone walks into an electronics store and sees a whole Atlas or a whole Encyclopedia (that would cost over $1000 by itself in traditional format anyway) in Muli-media style, they'll dig into their pockets and go home with a CDTV. If you want a CD player to run within a computer environment, wait for the A690. **************************************************************************** * "The personal computer market is about the same size as the total potato * * chip market. Next year it will be about half the size of the pet food * * market and is fast approaching the total worldwide sales of pantyhose" * * -James Finke, Pres., Commodore Int'l Ltd.(1982)- * **************************************************************************** Roger Earl = Usenet: roger_earl@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca = GEnie: R.Earl4
kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) (04/12/91)
In <roger_earl.4223@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca> roger_earl@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Roger Earl) writes: > CDTV cannot be compared to a computer, even though it is an A500 underneath. > It cannot be compared to a Nintendo, even though you can throw a Disc in it > and play a game. CDTV has its own category (CD-I being its only competitor, > although CD-I is being marketed badly as a computer device). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You are probably thinking of Intel's DVI as the "computer device", Roger. CD-I is from Sony and Philips, who also gave us CDROMs and CD audio discs. From the start (first public announcement in Feb, 1986), CD-I was intended for home consumer use as an interactive TV player, with little or no emphasis on the computer inside. CDTV copied ALL of CD-I's concepts, from the idea of being an A/V component, right down to the IR controller, personal RAM card, and expandability. Unfortunately it didn't also copy the video technology or disc standard. The remainder of your message is bang on! kev <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/15/91)
In article <1991Apr12.065004.19162@ncsu.edu> kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes: > CDTV copied ALL of CD-I's concepts, from the idea of being an A/V component, > right down to the IR controller, personal RAM card, and expandability. Well, except for the compatibility with existing consumer computer technology. > Unfortunately it didn't also copy the video technology or disc standard. If it had, it wouldn't be an Amiga. It might or might not be a better product for all of that, but Commodore is (rightly) sticking to the knitting here. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) (04/15/91)
>> CDTV copied ALL of CD-I's concepts, from the idea of being an A/V component, >> right down to the IR controller, personal RAM card, and expandability. > >Well, except for the compatibility with existing consumer computer technology. > >> Unfortunately it didn't also copy the video technology or disc standard. > >If it had, it wouldn't be an Amiga. It might or might not be a better product >for all of that, but Commodore is (rightly) sticking to the knitting here. Ah, but it _isn't_ an Amiga. Let me explain that: CDTV will not be sold as a computer, nor does anyone expect that most owners will do any expansion. This is an _appliance_ which just happens to use an A500 as the controller. The only reasons in this case to stick with existing technology were to greatly lessen R&D costs, and so that current authoring tools could be used. Sure, some Amigas will be sold to new authors, but the number will be very tiny. Put it another way: if the player had a _Mac_ core, what real benefits would Mac owners gain? Can you think of any? What if it had an Atari core? Any? Okay, some say: well, it'll make CBM some money they can use for the Amiga. Hey, that could be said even if CBM had used their PC clones as the core. And anything developed as an application or addon for the amiga core, could've and/or should've been developed _anyway_. OTOH, it's diverting personnel and advertising funds from the Amiga itself, which is what most of us care about. Aren't there 2.5 million Amigans which need attention, more so than A/V nuts? sincerely - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (04/15/91)
In article <1991Apr15.131009.14068@ncsu.edu> kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes: >>> CDTV copied ALL of CD-I's concepts, from the idea of being an A/V component, >>> right down to the IR controller, personal RAM card, and expandability. >> >>Well, except for the compatibility with existing consumer computer technology. >> >>> Unfortunately it didn't also copy the video technology or disc standard. >> >>If it had, it wouldn't be an Amiga. It might or might not be a better product >>for all of that, but Commodore is (rightly) sticking to the knitting here. > >Ah, but it _isn't_ an Amiga. Let me explain that: CDTV will not be sold >as a computer, nor does anyone expect that most owners will do any expansion. >This is an _appliance_ which just happens to use an A500 as the controller. > Kevin, you may have some very valid points about CD-I, but that statement is totally untrue. CDTV IS an Amiga, and here is why. At the show, Xetec, who makes a CD-ROM drive for 2000/3000 owners, was running EVERY SINGLE CDTV CD PROGRAM, with only one exception, Barney Had A Bun, and after having to demo that about 10 times I would have no problem snapping the CD in half. The dictionary, encyclopedia, world atlas, etc., will all run TODAY on higher Amigas. Get a Xetec drive. I don't know whether Xetec also make an A500 model, but Commodore IS developing an A500 version. What you are missing is that CD-I, as well as CDTV, will probably take a while before they have a large base of support. This will hurt software development initially. BUT, CDTV will also be an add-on to the 3 million Amigas around the world. Now, if only 1/2% buy it that is 15,000 owners to start with. Considering that there aren't too many titles to buy, those that are out now will get a real boost. And Kevin, about your being so upset that CDTV will hurt the superior CD-I market, look at it this way. Isn't it a shame that the PC took sales away from other machines which were more capable? But the technology still developed. People will choose what they want, what is best for them. If that is CD-I, and CD-I becomes the standard, well God Bless Philips! >Aren't there 2.5 million Amigans which need attention, more so than A/V nuts? > Actually it is now 3 million. The number is now officially 3 million Amigas SHIPPED, though not sold. The 2 million number announced last September was units sold. So it hasn't been 1 million units sold in the past 7 months, but most likely the Amiga is now selling more than 1 million units per year. >sincerely - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu> -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb A: None. It's a hardware problem.
fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu (04/16/91)
Something that people don't seem to be mentioning on this thread about CDTV's
pros and cons:
CDTV is the _first_ CD-ROM technology-using product to be made available to
Joe "I don't WANT a computer" Average. As a *new* KIND of product, it has
at least uniqueness on its side. I figure it'll either be a C64-like
product for CBM, or it'll be a Plus 4-like product...
--Rick Wrigley
fhwri@conncoll.bitnetpeterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.131009.14068@ncsu.edu> kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes: >> >>> Unfortunately it didn't also copy the video technology or disc standard. >> >>If it had, it wouldn't be an Amiga. It might or might not be a better product >>for all of that, but Commodore is (rightly) sticking to the knitting here. > >Ah, but it _isn't_ an Amiga. .... > >The only reasons in this case to stick with existing technology were to greatly >lessen R&D costs, and so that current authoring tools could be used. Sure, >some Amigas will be sold to new authors, but the number will be very tiny. Hmm, don't you share my impression that it is a *BIG* benefit that developers are able to use the current authoring tools for CDTV titles? The Amiga OS and the applications based on it matured for now six years, and looking especially at the graphics and sound tools necessary for CD development, you can well say that the Amiga competes for the best development platform in the industry. And remember: There may exist some more nifty platforms (Mac IIfx with 24-bit graphics), but *they aren't video compatible* from the first moment, so with them another conversion step gets necessary. And when looking at CD-I, well they use OS/9 as OS, which is a very nice, fast and effective multitasking OS, but up to now it's mainly used in industry for process control and such stuff (because of its realtime capability). There yet has to be built a basis of graphics and sound tools for this OS platform, whereas the CDTV developer can choose from a wide variety of long-matured software. >Put it another way: if the player had a _Mac_ core, what real benefits would >Mac owners gain? Can you think of any? What if it had an Atari core? Any? No way, because these platforms aren't as much made for this application as is the Amiga from day one. >Okay, some say: well, it'll make CBM some money they can use for the Amiga. >Hey, that could be said even if CBM had used their PC clones as the core. I think they chose the better alternative :-), see above. > OTOH, it's diverting personnel and >advertising funds from the Amiga itself, which is what most of us care about. No no no! You see, as CDTV and Amiga are so closely related, every development for a CDTV can *easily* be downstripped to be used on a normal Amiga with only floppies instead of 600 MB CD-ROM. And you ask what CDTV will pay for the normal Amiga? Well, you'll get a nice CD-ROM drive with supporting software (diverse filesystems) to dive into the already existing computer-oriented CD-ROM market. And with some emulation software you probably will even be able to run true CDTV titles on an Amiga. You see, it's a difference: The normal customer shall not see the CDTV as an Amiga, BUT we all here who know about it, we know that they are nearly identical. And so my conclusion is that every development for one of the two also pays for the other, there is no trade-off to be made. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
ptavoly@cs.ruu.nl (Peter Tavoly) (04/16/91)
In <1991Apr15.131009.14068@ncsu.edu> kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes: [some deleted] >> >>If it had, it wouldn't be an Amiga. It might or might not be a better product >>for all of that, but Commodore is (rightly) sticking to the knitting here. > >Ah, but it _isn't_ an Amiga. Let me explain that: CDTV will not be sold >as a computer, nor does anyone expect that most owners will do any expansion. >This is an _appliance_ which just happens to use an A500 as the controller. Ah, but it *is* an Amiga. It just looks like an appliance from the outside. This is an *Amiga* which just happens to simulate an appliance, running CD technology. (Yes, apart from some technical differences) You probably meant by your statement that *for Joe Average* it is not an Amiga. (But then Amiga users are not Joe Average ;^) >The only reasons in this case to stick with existing technology were to greatly >lessen R&D costs, and so that current authoring tools could be used. Yes, this is from the point of view of a large consumer electronics producer wanting to enter the CD-* market: Their reasoning would be something like this: (At the board meeting) "So, we all agree that entering this market might prove profitable within 3 years. To cut on R&D cost we need to investigate currently existing technology first. Hmm, let's see. Ah, yes, the Amiga is perfect. Existing technology, it is cheap, since they have been around and producing it for some years now; good graphic capabilities, if not state- of-the-art; expandability could prove a potential market for owners of a CDTV wanting to upgrade to a computer. Naturally, we will send, ahem, our own marketing people." But, it is Commodore who initiated the CDTV project, seeing a potential profitability. From their point of view, CDTV is a step further for the Amiga line (not a sequential but differentiated step, see the A3000(UX) ) So, not on top of a gold mountain, Commodore goes halfway to that big (Japanese?) consumer electronics producer, and signs an agreement for production, and a possible later licensing of the product. >Put it another way: if the player had a _Mac_ core, what real benefits would >Mac owners gain? Can you think of any? What if it had an Atari core? Any? The same as C= owners, support (maybe recognition) for their particular machine, directly as a spinoff of third party development for the core=their computer, or indirectly because of the company receiving money from sales or license royalties. >Okay, some say: well, it'll make CBM some money they can use for the Amiga. >Hey, that could be said even if CBM had used their PC clones as the core. I don't think so. As they would use widely recognized and available technology the place would be swarming with 'clones' in no time. What would make the difference then is the ad-department, in which C= is not the best around. >Aren't there 2.5 million Amigans which need attention, more so than A/V nuts? The ratio of those A/V nuts : Amiga users is enormous, and to be counted with. Now how many of those A/V nuts could be converted to 'the right faith'? :) Summarizing: C= have the edge with CDTV in that: 1. It's their proprietary technology, meaning a) a headstart on others, b) $$ in possible license fees. 2. This has not been verified, but if true, meaning a lot: Backing by Matsushita (Panasonic) 3. Expandability BOTH ways (Amiga <--> CDTV) 4. They are here *now*, with applications, multimedia, games etc. (See 1.a) >sincerely - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu> -Thomas T. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ____ Thomas Tavoly, Commercial Computer Science - HEAO Utrecht, NL. / / / "Whoever talks too much, has no time to think." - Peter Tavoly. AMIGA / Favourite quote: "The Mac OS is amazingly complex, ____ / / / .sig v3.0e given how little it does." - Peter da Silva \ \ \/ / / ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>> ptavoly@praxis.cs.ruu.nl <<~~~~~~~~~ \_\_\/_/
tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (Kenneth Jamieson) (04/16/91)
In article <50848@nigel.ee.udel.edu> fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu writes: >Something that people don't seem to be mentioning on this thread about CDTV's >pros and cons: > >CDTV is the _first_ CD-ROM technology-using product to be made available to >Joe "I don't WANT a computer" Average. As a *new* KIND of product, it has >at least uniqueness on its side. I figure it'll either be a C64-like Bzzzt. Arguable, CD players are CD-ROM's. -- ========[ Xanadu Enterprises Inc. Amiga & Unix Software Development]======= = "I know how you feel, you don't know if you want to hit me or kiss me - = = --- I get a lot of that." Madonna as Breathless Mahoney (Dick Tracy) = =========== Ken Jamieson: uunet!tronsbox.xei.com!tron1 =================== = NONE of the opinions represented here are endorsed by anybody. = === The Romantic Encounters BBS 201-759-8450(PEP) / 201-759-8568(2400) ====
gerber@bigbad.mko.dec.com (Robert Gerber) (04/19/91)
In article <1991Apr16.120407.12005@cs.ruu.nl>, ptavoly@cs.ruu.nl (Peter Tavoly) writes: [some deleted] |> |>Summarizing: |>C= have the edge with CDTV in that: |> |> 1. It's their proprietary technology, meaning a) a headstart on |>others, |> b) $$ in possible |>license fees. IMHO: True |> 2. This has not been verified, but if true, meaning a lot: Backing |>by |> Matsushita (Panasonic) This is the only place that I've seen this mentioned, however, when I looked inside the battery space in the remote, it had Panasonic batteries... |> 3. Expandability BOTH ways (Amiga <--> CDTV) IMHO: True |> 4. They are here *now*, with applications, multimedia, games etc. |>(See 1.a) IMHO: Very True |> |> -Thomas T. |> I basically agree with Thomas ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Robert M. Gerber UUCP: ...!decwrl!nobozo.enet!robert INET: robert@nobozo.enet.dec.com Any opinions represented here are definetly not those of my employer. Come to think of it, they may not be mine either!