swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (04/12/91)
I wish...
I wish that Commodore would redesign the A500 motherboard to utilize a 68020
instead of a 68000. Call it the A500+ or something. Do the same with the
A2000. Include a socket for a 68881 chip. They wouldn't need to bump up the
memory bus to 32-bits; they could leave the motherboard memory just like it
is. The idea would be to have the 020 as the baseline processor for the Amiga
line.
This would involve some NRE costs but it would not be *that* expensive. The
68020 now sells for less than the 68000 did when the 1000 came out. Commodore
could do something as simple as rolling their old 68020 board sans 32-bit
memory port into the A500 motherboard.
There would be a modest performance boost on integer code and a significant
performance boost for floating point code. But the increased performance
would not be so great that people would be discouraged from upgrading to more
powerful machines (as an illustration, people are still getting rid of '020
cards so they can upgrade to '030 cards).
After a year or so they could re-introduce the old Amiga as the
"Amiga Classic". ;^)
They could offer trade-ups (500+ swapped for 500 Classic and some cash). Then
give the refurbished Classics to schools as a promotion.
After this there would never be commercial applications released that were not
"pure".
Well, what do you think, would that be cool, or what?
_.
--Steve ._||__ DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own.
Warren v\ *| ----------------------------------------------
V {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.com
--sysop@insider.zer.sub.org (04/16/91)
> After this there would never be commercial applications released that were not > "pure". Yep... and it would sure put some pressure on those `hackers' that aren't able to `program' but just hack their code... And, think about the possibilities for games with the increased perfomance! (look at Interceptor on an A3000... ;-) ) > Well, what do you think, would that be cool, or what? Sure... but I doubt that C= will ever do that... even though this might sure stomp the `normal' STs in the ground... And, at the same time, C= could add a serial-# in the clock memory... --- SysOp @ INSIDER -- Saddam als Friedensfackel - der brennt sicher gut!
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (04/20/91)
In article <1991Apr12.155350.20444@convex.com> swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) writes: >I wish that Commodore would redesign the A500 motherboard to utilize a 68020 >instead of a 68000. Call it the A500+ or something. Do the same with the >A2000. Include a socket for a 68881 chip. They wouldn't need to bump up the >memory bus to 32-bits; they could leave the motherboard memory just like it >is. The idea would be to have the 020 as the baseline processor for the Amiga >line. What would this buy you? A 68020 without 32 bit memory will, on the average, give you about 15% more speed than an equivalent 68000. Many things will run slower, things that fit nicely in the I-Cache run faster. >This would involve some NRE costs but it would not be *that* expensive. The >68020 now sells for less than the 68000 did when the 1000 came out. Hardly. The 68000 was around $5-$6 when the A1000 came out. You get me a $5 68020 and I won't have too much trouble convincing the Big Boss Men that a jazzed up A500 would be A Good Idea. >There would be a modest performance boost on integer code and a significant >performance boost for floating point code. That's, as you said, optional, so the base machine is only ever-so-slightly faster than an A500 is today. Not good enough, you gotta have 32 bit memory. >Well, what do you think, would that be cool, or what? Personally, I would love to see a cheap-ass 32 bit system. But a real 32 bit system, not some trick. If there's no 32 bit RAM, there's no 32 bit system. I don't think the 68020 pricing is quite there just yet. The main reason the 68000 pricing was so low was competition -- Signetics, Thompson, Hitachi, etc. made 68000s as second sources. That happens to the 68020, and the price could drop. I think packaging concerns may always keep it higher than the 68000 though. >--Steve ._||__ DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own. > Warren v\ *| ---------------------------------------------- -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.
patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Patrick Meloy) (04/20/91)
>Personally, I would love to see a cheap-ass 32 bit system. But a real 32 bit >system, not some trick. If there's no 32 bit RAM, there's no 32 bit system. >I don't think the 68020 pricing is quite there just yet. The main reason the What about going to a faster 68000 instead of redesigning everything for 32 bit? Atari (I said he 'A' word) has released the Mega STe with a 16 Mhz cached 68000 that does really improve system performance quite a bit. ICD has its ADSpeed cached 68000 as well. These seem to work quite well! I know that the overall speed increase wouldn't be so dramatic on the Amiga as is seen on the Atari due to the custom chips, but it would probably kick it up there just enough to smooth out the rough spots on some of the simulators and applications programs. Would there be any real problems doing this? --------------------------------------- | patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca | | 'The Outbound' BBS Vancouver BC | ---------------------------------------
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (04/20/91)
In article <20802@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >In article <1991Apr12.155350.20444@convex.com> swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) writes: > >>I wish that Commodore would redesign the A500 motherboard to utilize a 68020 >>instead of a 68000. Call it the A500+ or something. Do the same with the >>A2000. Include a socket for a 68881 chip. They wouldn't need to bump up the >>memory bus to 32-bits; they could leave the motherboard memory just like it >>is. The idea would be to have the 020 as the baseline processor for the Amiga >>line. > >What would this buy you? A 68020 without 32 bit memory will, on the average, >give you about 15% more speed than an equivalent 68000. Many things will run >slower, things that fit nicely in the I-Cache run faster. > It seems to me the main costs with a mid-end system is you have a choice between an A500 with an expensive HD or buying more than you need in an A2000HD. The ideal mid-line computer would have room for exactly one internal hard drive and one internal floppy, plus 2MB internal, and ONE slot inline with a Video slot. Such a machine would be a lot cheaper than a 2000 (no 9 slot system) and a lot more convenient for most people. You could probably add a flicker-fixer in it (CBM one) for the same price as the 2000HD is now. >-- >Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" > {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy > "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M. -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb A: None. It's a hardware problem.
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) (04/22/91)
[]
I think the focus should be on getting the price of the A500 to as low
as possible. Get it lower than it is today, and it will be more accepted
by the mass market.
Out of curiosity, given that a 16 bit, 7 Mhz 68000 based A500 with
1M of RAM goes for $600.00 (just a guess, use this figure for our
comparison here), what would a 14Mhz 68020 based (or whatever clock speed
would be easy and cheap to implement in a redesign) with 1M of 32 bit
RAM retail for. Say with a 68881/2 socket, but no math chip.
Basically what would the guestimate of the retail price on an 020 based
32 bit A500 be?
-Roger
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun
ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil
INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.comdltaylor@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dan Taylor) (04/23/91)
In <1991Apr20.094721.19579@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >more than you need in an A2000HD. The ideal mid-line computer >would have room for exactly one internal hard drive and one >internal floppy, plus 2MB internal, and ONE slot inline with a >Video slot. Such a machine would be a lot cheaper than a 2000 (no >9 slot system) and a lot more convenient for most people. You >could probably add a flicker-fixer in it (CBM one) for the same >price as the 2000HD is now. I think there's a market there, too. The A2000, without accelerator, just isn't enough more COMPUTER to be worth the price difference. It only has lots of slots. I would add a built-in SCSI, though. That way, the slot would be free for specialized expansion, like 24-graphics. Stay with the 68000, for price. I'd say, use a package like the A1000. There is enough room, since you don't need the KickStart RAM, or 256K expansion. The "slot" could exit on the right, leaving the A1000-style connectors on the motherboard. I'd leave an expansion port there, too. Or, if the package were a little deeper, you could put the expansion output at the rear and leave the CPU in the same location as the A1000, so the A1000 internal expansion products would fit. I still think the A500, with 1M and clock is the ideal "baseline" Amiga. However, if this A1000-like machine were built, I'd buy one to supplement my A2500/30 (replacing my A1000), if it were priced between equivalent A500 and A2000 systems. Dan Taylor /* My opinions, not NCR's. */
xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) (04/23/91)
In article <8737@crash.cts.com>, uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes: >[] >I think the focus should be on getting the price of the A500 to as low >as possible. Get it lower than it is today, and it will be more accepted >by the mass market. I don't think this is the right way to go about marketing the A500 at all. A lower price would not necessarily guarantee it success. I would much rather have the price remain the same, and have the O.S. software upgraded to AmigaOS2.0, and full ECS utilitized, without being crippled. (No more of that stupid practice of putting the Super Agnus in, and only having it address 512K) > >Out of curiosity, given that a 16 bit, 7 Mhz 68000 based A500 with >1M of RAM goes for $600.00 (just a guess, use this figure for our >comparison here), what would a 14Mhz 68020 based (or whatever clock speed >would be easy and cheap to implement in a redesign) with 1M of 32 bit >RAM retail for. Say with a 68881/2 socket, but no math chip. > >Basically what would the guestimate of the retail price on an 020 based >32 bit A500 be? As many people would probably remember, I used to be a very strong advocate of putting a 68020 into the A500 and A2000. I no longer am. I have since realized that is plenty more that is important besides the processor. Instead of putting in a faster CPU into these systems, I would much rather see Commodore include the display enhancer hardware, an HD floppy drive, and a SCSI controller. The display enhancer alone would be far more useful in these systems than a faster CPU. > >-Roger > >UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun >ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil >INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.com ------------------------------------------------------------- / Marc Barrett -MB- | BITNET: XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET / / ISU COM S Student | Internet: XGR39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU / ------------------------------------------------------------ \ Wanted for foreign language courses at Iowa State: One \ \ Babble Fish. Willing to pay Top Dollar. If you have one \ \ for sale, please respond to one of the above addresses. \ -------------------------------------------------------------
kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) (04/24/91)
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes: > I think the focus should be on getting the price of the A500 to as low > as possible. Backyard _rumor_ is that they're working on a lower cost chipset now. Supposedly for a <$400 A500 version, or something like that. > Out of curiosity, given that a 16 bit, 7 Mhz 68000 based A500 with > 1M of RAM goes for $600.00 (just a guess, use this figure for our > comparison here), what would a 14Mhz 68020 based (or whatever clock speed > would be easy and cheap to implement in a redesign) with 1M of 32 bit > RAM retail for. Say with a 68881/2 socket, but no math chip. Beancounters tell me that the 020 isn't worth the gain for the added cost. I think they're missing the worth of "bragging rights" <g> to some owners. But word is that 020 availability will drop to near nil levels before long (if not already). Companies are just skipping straight to the 030+ instead. A friend of mine designed a 4x8" 6-layer board with an 030, two 1 or 4 meg SIMM sockets, part of the CD-I video chipset, and SCSI/serial/par/etc out the wazoo. I think he put one together for about $600 (a half a year ago). It was a screamer, with great gfx to boot. I've been after him to sell it with no 030, RAM or case (let the buyer dig up the best deal) for $200-250. Instead, he came up with a 68340-based CD-I video 1-meg card to sell for <$300 (no case/keyboard/mouse/drive... those cost more than the computer!) The reason I bring those up is to point out that: if he were able to start from scratch, an engineer could use _off the shelf_ parts to make a neat new model fairly cheaply. If custom chips have to be created tho, that can add up quickly in time and cost. Just some more meat for the grinder. best - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu> PS: I agree with those who think a SCSI/display enhancer addition would be both easier and more useful.
kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) (04/24/91)
dltaylor@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dan Taylor) writes: > I still think the A500, with 1M and clock is the ideal "baseline" Amiga. > However, if this A1000-like machine were built, I'd buy one to supplement > my A2500/30 (replacing my A1000), if it were priced between equivalent > A500 and A2000 systems. It may no longer be exactly relevant, but here's an interesting quote from a CIS conference with Jay Miner back in 1987: Q: Jay, what do you see for the future of the 1000... obsolescence or redesign for reduced cost? JM: The cost reduced 1000 was the biggest battle I fought (and lost) at Commodore. It still hurts. I hope they see the error of their ways soon, but I doubt it. They put a godawful lot of money into the 500 and 2000, and could have had a cost reduced 1000 to sell for $30 more than the 500 with 1/10 the budget; and shown that CBM could support a machine for more than one year. It makes me sad. Amazing sometimes, to look back. - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) (04/25/91)
xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: < uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes: < >I think the focus should be on getting the price of the A500 to as low < >as possible. Get it lower than it is today, and it will be more accepted < >by the mass market. < < I don't think this is the right way to go about marketing the A500 at < all. A lower price would not necessarily guarantee it success. I would < much rather have the price remain the same, and have the O.S. software < upgraded to AmigaOS2.0, and full ECS utilized, without being crippled. < (No more of that stupid practice of putting the Super Agnus in, and < only having it address 512K) I would tend to agree, though I question whether the ECS can be added without increasing the price of the unit. Also, the addition of the ECS would imply the necessity of a multi-sync monitor, which adds to the cost to the consumer. < >Basically what would the guestimate of the retail price on an 020 based < >32 bit A500 be? < > < >-Roger < < As many people would probably remember, I used to be a very strong < advocate of putting a 68020 into the A500 and A2000. I no longer am. I < have since realized that is plenty more that is important besides the < processor. Instead of putting in a faster CPU into these systems, I < would much rather see Commodore include the display enhancer hardware, < an HD floppy drive, and a SCSI controller. The display enhancer alone < would be far more useful in these systems than a faster CPU. < < / Marc Barrett This is interesting. I think these would be valuable additions to the A500, although there is the ever-present question of real estate. Fitting all these things in a stock A500 case might prove difficult. Then again, a case re-design might be in order, anyway :-). The only real problem I would have with this is the display enhancer. Maybe there should be two models, one with, and one without. Why? Cost. There is no way that Commodore could include the display enhancer without bumping the list price of the machine. Also, there are still those who are not bothered by the flicker, or simply won't be using their A500 in any of the interlaced modes. Why should they pay for the extra hardware, not to mention the required multi-sync monitor? Perhaps an A500, without the enhancer, and an A500E, with it, would be a good solution. Regards, Chris -- Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | ___-/^\-___ qatul batlh. cseaman@sequent.com <or> | //__--\O/--__\\ qatul Huch. ...!uunet!sequent!cseaman | // \\ qatul roj. The Home of the Killer Smiley | `\ /'
sdfusc@mac.cc.macalstr.edu (05/01/91)
In article <58430@sequent.UUCP>, cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) writes: > xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > < uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes: > < >I think the focus should be on getting the price of the A500 to as low > < >as possible. Get it lower than it is today, and it will be more accepted > < >by the mass market. > < > < I don't think this is the right way to go about marketing the A500 at > < all. A lower price would not necessarily guarantee it success. I would > < much rather have the price remain the same, and have the O.S. software > < upgraded to AmigaOS2.0, and full ECS utilized, without being crippled. > < (No more of that stupid practice of putting the Super Agnus in, and > < only having it address 512K) > > I would tend to agree, though I question whether the ECS can be added > without increasing the price of the unit. Also, the addition of the > ECS would imply the necessity of a multi-sync monitor, which adds to > the cost to the consumer. > > < >Basically what would the guestimate of the retail price on an 020 based > < >32 bit A500 be? > < > > < >-Roger > < > < As many people would probably remember, I used to be a very strong > < advocate of putting a 68020 into the A500 and A2000. I no longer am. I > < have since realized that is plenty more that is important besides the > < processor. Instead of putting in a faster CPU into these systems, I > < would much rather see Commodore include the display enhancer hardware, > < an HD floppy drive, and a SCSI controller. The display enhancer alone > < would be far more useful in these systems than a faster CPU. > < > < / Marc Barrett > > This is interesting. I think these would be valuable additions to the > A500, although there is the ever-present question of real estate. > Fitting all these things in a stock A500 case might prove difficult. > Then again, a case re-design might be in order, anyway :-). > > The only real problem I would have with this is the display enhancer. > Maybe there should be two models, one with, and one without. Why? > Cost. There is no way that Commodore could include the display > enhancer without bumping the list price of the machine. Also, there > are still those who are not bothered by the flicker, or simply won't be > using their A500 in any of the interlaced modes. Why should they pay > for the extra hardware, not to mention the required multi-sync > monitor? Perhaps an A500, without the enhancer, and an A500E, with it, > would be a good solution. > > Regards, > Chris > > -- > Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | ___-/^\-___ qatul batlh. > cseaman@sequent.com <or> | //__--\O/--__\\ qatul Huch. > ...!uunet!sequent!cseaman | // \\ qatul roj. > The Home of the Killer Smiley | `\ /' Neither the ECS nor the A2320 REQUIRE a multisync; both will function just fine with a VGA monitor (using some, but not all modes, namely PAL) or a standard 1084/1084s/1084SD/1084whateverCBMfeelsliketoday. With a 1084 series, you simply won't gain the benefits of the additional hardware.
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (05/02/91)
In article <58430@sequent.UUCP> cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) writes: > > Also, the addition of the >ECS would imply the necessity of a multi-sync monitor, which adds to >the cost to the consumer. THIS IS WRONG! You get *additional* features with ECS, but also *all* the old ones. So you need a multi-sync *only* when you really want to *use* the new features, ok? Your argument is the same as if you said "every A500 owner *must* purchase also a BAS monochrome monitor, because there is an output jack for one". :-) -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
mike@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Smithwick) (05/05/91)
["oh dear, I think reality is on the blink again!"]
The previous discussions on the new "baseline" Amiga have been woefully
off target. Most of the participants say things like "and it should have
an '040, and, and 10 meg, and and, uh, a built is Toaster and of course
a hyper-quantum defoobilizer....". Trouble with that line of thinking is
that when Betty and Barney Jones go looking for a new computer for Junior's
birthday, (when neither of them have a computer themselves) you will most
likely not hear them say something like "oh look dear, this computer
has AmigaDos 2.0!! Let's get it!". What you would like to hear is, "Mr
Salesman, do you have that Amiga computer thingie. I understand it has
real jazzy graphics, great games and a fantastic Astronomy program [ <-unabashed
commercial plug]. Do you think a 10 year old would like it?".
The key to selling to knowledgeable people is price/performance. The key
to selling mass market is price/name-recognition. What Commodore needs is
the mass market. How many IBM PeeCees have been sold merely because "IBM"
was stamped on the side, even though it was fairly pedestrian hardware
when you could get a better deal going with a clone?
Notice that much of advertising, if not all sets out to fill one
primary goal : Make you remember the product and/or company name
(and too a lessor degree, buy the product even though you
may not have planned to). That was the goal of CA's 1989 advertising
blitz. Alot of the net.whiners complained that the commercials
didn't explain about muli-tasking or HAM or virtual screens or a fast
buss. They just showed a house lifting off of it's foundation, or a bunch of
astronauts saying "ooh, look at that!". However, alot of the people
I know at work came in and told me that they saw those ads (i.e., they
REMEMBERED the product).
CDTV should help in this regard.
Since CDTV is clearly a mass-market product it can only help Commodore's
name recognition so may generate Amiga sales. So too would a cheaper
"Amiga" so people would learn that name. Trouble is that CDTV is
rather pricey, and an entirely new concept for most people.
I still think that
an Amiga cartridge based game machine would be a winner. No keyboard or
mouse, or disk-drive, just a small, slick looking box with a cartridge
port (and possibly other ports so a person could turn it into a real
computer). It could use the CDTV IR controller to bridge the two products.
Call it an Amiga-Something or other, and flood the market.
There is tons of software available already. Both games and possibly simple
productivity software that could be used if you have the keyboard (Nintindo
is marketing keyboards now for their machine). Sell it for <$200 bucks.
Current Amiga software developers will love it. It will also generate
loads of new interest in more mainstream software houses. While
current Amiga owners will cry "foul!" and complain that it makes their
computer look merely like a game-machine once again, packaging it in a very
professional case like the CDTV would avoid that kind of stigma. Look how
cheap the Nintendo boxes appear, they look like toys so how could anyone
take a PC made by Ninteno seriously.
The next step up could then be the A500 (include A500 advertising literature
in the Amiga-Cartridge box, rebate coupons, etc.). Send out direct mailers
to the owners encouraging them to consider buying a full-fledged Amiga :
"Not only will this play the same great Amiga-Cartidge software
you know and love preseving your investment, but it will help
Johnny with his homework as well!"
Also encourage educational software houses to publish edu. titles for
the cartridge machine to get them in the schools. So now if little Johnny
has an "Amiga" in his classroom, mom and dad would be tempted to buy him one
for home.
Commodore still has it's "game machine" image from people who may
vaguely remember the C-64. So why not play upon that, and change
people's minds as to what a real "game machine" is like.
--
"There is no problem to big that can't be solved with high explosives"-Rush
Mike Smithwick - ames!zorch!mikepeter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (05/05/91)
In article <1991May4.193613.6143@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> mike@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Smithwick) writes: > a hyper-quantum defoobilizer... No, no, it needs a dilithium containment chamber! > I still think that > an Amiga cartridge based game machine would be a winner. Great minds think alike. 512K of RAM, or 1M? After all, it does have the ROM in the cartridge to hold code, >512K would probably never be used even by the folks who JPEG compress disks within an inch of their lives. > mouse, or disk-drive, just a small, slick looking box with a cartridge > port (and possibly other ports so a person could turn it into a real > computer). It could use the CDTV IR controller to bridge the two products. Basically a 500 w/o keyboard and a cartridge slot where the disk drive goes. Leave the expansion slot on the other side, it's effectively free. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) (05/07/91)
In article <1991May5.114613.24114@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <1991May4.193613.6143@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> mike@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Smithwick) writes: >> a hyper-quantum defoobilizer... > >No, no, it needs a dilithium containment chamber! > >> I still think that >> an Amiga cartridge based game machine would be a winner. > >Great minds think alike. 512K of RAM, or 1M? After all, it does have the ROM >in the cartridge to hold code, >512K would probably never be used even by the >folks who JPEG compress disks within an inch of their lives. > >> mouse, or disk-drive, just a small, slick looking box with a cartridge >> port (and possibly other ports so a person could turn it into a real >> computer). It could use the CDTV IR controller to bridge the two products. > >Basically a 500 w/o keyboard and a cartridge slot where the disk drive goes. >Leave the expansion slot on the other side, it's effectively free. How about a CD ROM drive instead of the cartridge slot? Then you've got CDTV, which already exists. The drawback to CDTV is that it will be 10 years :) before it is as cheap as a Genesis or SuperFamicom. By the way, the Genesis joystick/controller works great on the Amiga, and it gives you a joystick and 4 buttons... Once upon a time I used to ask a couple of trivia questions (no longer true...) Q1. What computer company has sold more computers in the world than any other? Q2. What piece of software exists on more machines than any other in the world? A1. Commodore (C64) A2. MicroSoft Basic (C64) The answers today are: A1. IBM PC/Clone A2. MS DOS If the A500 (or a cheap game machine version) sold at $150, the situation would change drastically. >-- >Peter da Silva. `-_-' ><peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. -- **************************************************** * I want games that look like Shadow of the Beast * * but play like Leisure Suit Larry. * ****************************************************