#WOCA-NY Show Report
36 messages in this thread
I hate to burst the bubble here, but if the "best" price on an A4000/030
without monitor is $1700, I think it's in big trouble.
That means with a half decent monitor it's around $2150.
I don't know about where others here live, but I've just seen a couple of
systems locally with 486DX2-66MHz processors, local bus 1024x768x256 colors
(which flies if you're not familiar with it), 210-340MB hard drives, 14 or 15"
.28 monitor, Windows 3.1, DOS 6, mouse, etc., etc., for around $2000.
John Dvorak in one of his PC columns this month says 486 PCs are oversold
— that most of them are going to need much more RAM and other hardware to
run the next generation software. And that's not even talking about stuff
as basic to today's Amiga as digital sound. He figures an adequately
configured 486 will go for a best price of around four grand.
There are even $999 486 specials out there now, but they're relatively
useless without expansion — mere boat hooks to trap the unsuspecting into
an expensive lifetime of Intel and Windows servitude.
Now, if you want to run MS-DOS apps only, you may well be able to get in
for around a grand; Windows, a bit more. But if you want to run Windows
NT, dig out your wallet. Windows 3.1 is no alternative to Workbench 2.x
and up, as far as I'm concerned, because I demand preemptive multitasking
in a sane amount of RAM. Windows NT may be an alternative, but it's going
to be a pig: as much as 30 megs just for the OS on hard disk. A fat 486 is
a powerhouse, and it needs to be, for its power is all going to get sucked
up.
I've seen 486s at 33 mhz running animations and I wasn't impressed. Jerky,
slow, and not full frame. Maybe they didn't carry local bus video.
Ron,
A local bus windows accelerator will only help you with windows
commands. I think you will need a special card to display images in real
time. As with CAD/CAM set-ups, you need a special driver. A windows
accelerator will only SLOW you down.
My brother-in-law just bought a 486DX2 66Mhz (actually 33 but don't
try to tell this to the PC crowd). He tried to put in a modem and that
Sound Blaster deal with CD, what a mess. Setting the Com ports and IRQ's,
I did'nt know how easy we Amiga folks had it…and no one can tell me
windows is the way to go. I love my OS 2.04…
Let's hear it for Auto-Configure….
I'm convinced IRQs are PC hell. Some idiot along the way decided no one
ever would want or need more than two active serial port devices, so even
though you can have COM1-COM4 (which is a heck of a limit in itself) just
try using more than two at a time, and then watch it! Lots of PCers are
now discovering this as they try to get modems, graphics cards, scanners,
sound cards, mice and other gizmos all on line at once.
Next time ask me about UARTS. Another arrrgh. My PC has me swimming in
alphabet soup.
Hi Ron. I agree with most of what you say and in particular that most 486
systems sold are underconfigured. 8MB RAM and a 200MB disk is really required
if you're going to install a few bigger Windows applications. And certainly,
if you intend to run NT, you'll need 16MB and 300MB of hard disk probably. One
thing about Windows 3.1 that makes it seem like a resource hog though, is the
immense power and sophistication of the applications. The wordprocessors take
10 megabytes or more of hard disk space and run only adequately with 4MB of
RAM. This is not Windows' fault specifically. Fortunately, Windows at least
supports virtual memory so that a fast disk can make up for a lack of memory in
some cases. Anyway, debating Windows pros and cons in this Amiga forum is
pointless, but I'll just leave with one thing – Windows vs Workbench isn't the
issue – it's applications that are key. The Amiga still needs a fullfeatured
wordprocessor, spreadsheet and database.
As for animation and video however, the PC is totally lame, compared with the
Amiga.
Regards, Paul.
The Amiga needs a "full featured database"? What is Superbase, chopped
liver? <g>
//
-Karl \X/ Amiga and Autopilot: The *only* way to fly!
Karl,
SuperBase Pro 4 is buggy, slow on the screen updates (looks like WP 4.1.10 in
drawing windows) and non-conformant to the Style Guide.
On the other hand, if you sit and really study it, it can be made to do some
real interesting things. I ought to know, I am currently making a living as a
full-time Amiga consultant and SuperBase programmer.
-Chas
Hi Paul!
Wouldn't you consider SuperBase Pro 4 a full-featured database?
Dom Fontana
–> Sent from NY via AP <–
>The Amiga still needs a fullfeatured wordprocessor, spreadsheet and database.<
The scary thing is that 4 people responded to say that there _is_ a
full-featured database, but the silence on WP and SS is deafening!
From what I understand Superbase is an excellent product, but a generation
behind the best PC products, I don't know whether further development is being
done on it.
The most important reason for a top-flight database, I think, would be its
ability to provide an easy way to generate custom applications, but I don't
think most end-users would buy a better-than-superbase db anyway (unless maybe
it was cheap) – that is, I don't think that's what too many Amiga owners and
potential owners are frustrated about. While these kinds of things seem to sell
well on the PC, on the Mac, the heavy-duty relational databases (Helix, Fourth
Dimension, Omnis, Fox) haven't been tremendous sellers. Most people's database
needs seem well served by simpler products like Filemaker and the DB modules
built into the various Works-type packages. And I've always felt that the Amiga
customer is closer to a Mac customer than a PC customer. Still, something that
could co-exist on a net and access shared dbase files might let it get past
some hurdles, in environments where that capability is required for purchase
consideration. (Might that capability already exist?)
An Excel-level spreadsheet (or Improv?) would be more important. Especially
since, unlike large databases which are generally office-only work, it is
somewhat common for someone to want to bring a spreadsheet file from work to
home and back (people don't generally need to bring their company database home
for the weekend, but they might well bring some spreadsheet files). So the
ability to work with Mac or PC spreadsheet files at home, and still retain the
level of features they're used to at the office (and the ability to convert in
both directions) would be useful to a larger group of people. The funny thing
is that most people don't use 10% of what these programs offer, and what
they're doing often _could_ be done even on existing Amiga spreadsheets. But
if, on paper, the Amiga program doesn't have all the functions of their office
program (and some assurance of easy file conversion both ways), people will be
scared that they may end up using some function that they won't be able to
translate. (There's also an unsolvable problem here – even if there _was_ such
a spreadsheet for the Amiga, many people would buy the Mac or PC because they
could steal the software from their machine at work, as opposed to having to
buy the Amiga equivalent if they chose to go that route. But that's a topic for
a whole other discussion.)
[continued in the reply]
[continued]
Similarly, it's true that most people using the better word processors don't
take advantage of many of those program's features, and often aren't creating
many documents that can't be created with less capable programs on the machines
they have, or on the Amiga offerings. But still, there are lots of people who
really _do_ need those capabilities, and of the 3 categories you mentioned, I
think this is the one that affects the largest number of users. And again,
besides having nothing available with the capability of MS-Word, WordPerfect,
or Ami Pro, people using those programs on a Mac or PC at work don't have the
ability to easily transfer docs back and forth (short of bridgeboard/emulator
solutions).
Still, I'm not sure how many more Amigas would sell, even if they had word proc
and ss programs as strong as the best Mac/Windows apps. The role of the
underdog is that it has to be significantly better (and/or substantially more
cost-effective), not merely as good, to get people to choose it, and that means
more than just catching up (especially considering the plummeting 486 and even
Mac prices). I think the presence of just-as-good apps would simply make life
better for people who had already chosen Amiga for other reasons. But are there
enough of us willing to spend the money on them to make it worth someone
developing them? ===Scott
Hi
I agree with your points, and think Maxiplan and Superbase and FCII
could d 99% of what I and many users of Amigas really need to do. If
anyone really needs full compat with the office, he should break down and
get a bridgeboard, especially at the price they go for today. Then he can
steal the SW like everyone else at the office (and that has been aired
fully here in the past).
If you are right about the underdog having to offer much cheaper or
much better to compete, we had beter work hard at being better, because I
am seeingMacP systems equivilant selling for $1300 with the 80mb hd, the
14" color monitor and HD floppy running system 7.
I don't say that the same as a 4000/30 but it is close, and at least
$500 cheaper even if you ignore the monitor. It's a jungle out there.
Tom
Yeah, Apple's finally taking price-point aim against IBM and the clones, and C=
is getting caught in the crossfire. ===Scott
Right on Tom. To succeed against entrenched competition, you must be one or
more of: first (something new/different), best, or cheapest.
The price of the A4000 is about $700 too high.
I agree with everything you said. Some other issues for a software developer
besides how many would be willing to buy… I believe that the installed Amigas
in the U.S. are owned by a much smaller number of people, i.e., many people
have multiple Amigas. This makes the potential market even smaller. In
Europe, the huge majority of machines sold have been A500s, most of which are
no longer powerful enough to run decent software (lack of CPU power, memory, or
hard disk). Therefore, from a business case point of view, trying to develop
high powered productivity applications for the Amiga at this time probably
doesn't make sense. I see CD applications as probably having a brighter
future, although a CD-ROM player needs to be available for the A1200 (which is
possible with GVP's A1200 SCSI/RAM+).
Hey here's a thought – maybe a promising avenue for the A1200 is as an
interactive cable television device. I don't mean like CDTV, I mean actually
working in concert with the cable system to decode data, present it, allow
pay-per-view selections perhaps, etc.
Paul,
I hate to say this, but your cable idea does'nt make any sense. You can
make dedicated machines much cheaper (as they already exist). This is a
market well left alone by the Amiga. The Amiga has the Video market right
now. If Commodore knows what is good for them, they will hold onto it
with everything they have got. This market is giving the Amiga the
respect it has never had.
The people who now have toasters, are now finding that the Amiga is a
productive stand-alone unit. Commodore has this free hype to work with
and should use it to launch the Amiga into other areas. But…they should
only do it when they are completely ready. One screw up, and it is all
over..(or business as usual I should say)
Thanks for the reality check, Gary 🙂 🙂 – it was (clearly) just an idea off
the top of my (empty?) head.
Re: your comments on the video market – the Toaster is GREAT for the Amiga, and
the new A4000 Toaster looks even better. Regarding waiting until they're ready
before launching the Amiga in other areas, they're obviously doing pretty well
in some specialized multimedia applications, and our PhonePak product has made
the Amiga successful as a small business voicemail system.
Bye for now,
Paul.
>and our PhonePak product has made the Amiga successful as a small
business voicemail system.<
I know that phonemail products exist for IBMs as well. PhonePak is
the obvious choice for someone who already has (or wants) an Amiga
for other purposes. But if someone has no computer already, and wants
to buy a computer specifically to implement voicemail, how does
PhonePak compare to the PC-based products? That is, is there a strong
case to be made in recommending an Amiga over a PC for this specific
purpose? ===Scott
The package is networkable, multi-media, fax AND voice, etc….
-Jonathan
Glad you asked! We have done extensive research on systems available
for PCs and we win hands down unless one is willing to pay about 10
times what PhonePak costs.
The difference is not in the hardware really, but the software.
Particularly with our latest 1.02 release, we have just about any
conceivable feature one could want.
We have unlimited voice mail boxes, unrestricted flexibility in
allowing touch tone options at any voice mail box, fax on demand
(call PhonePak from a fax machine and download faxes right there and
then) AND fax back (call PhonePak and leave a phone # where faxes are
to be sent), voice AND fax in a single call / message (extremely
useful as it provides a voice "cover note" for a fax), visual layout
of voice mail system structure, complete privacy / passwords, all
remote functions, complete AREXX hooks for any custom function you can
think of, multi-board support (put as many PhonePaks in one machine
as you have slots, and the software handles them all), transfer calls
between lines with Centrex switching (a service available from most
phone companies), output faxes from any Amiga application with
built-in printer driver, schedule faxes to 1 person or groups at any
time (use off-peak rates), etc, etc.
The PC packages typically support a flat voice mail box structure
(one code per box accessible anywhere, instead of codes assigned to
paths as in PhonePak which allows re-usable codes), and don't support
faxes for individual mailboxes. They typically treat the fax and
voice functions separately, unlike PhonePak. They're also very rigid
in their setup. PhonePak was designed to be a phone touch tone
interface for any Amiga application. I hope this answers your
question.
Can Phone-Pak operate as a voice-mail system that will call a pager
number to let someone know they're mailbox has mail for them?
Where I work they operate a voice mail system that has somewhere
around 700 clients. Some of the boxes are grouped together. Call one
number and all the mailboxes in that group are paged. The paging
service is handled by a different company and we are a reseller of
it.
Each mailbox can have its own customized greeting or can use the
canned greeting recorded by our company.
Will it work with a trunk-line? I think the system they're using now
has access to like 300 lines. I'm not that phone aware when it comes
to multi-line trunk service. But if Phone-Pak can handle what they're
dedicated system can do, it might be the most economical solution for
an area of this company's business that lacks local voice mail
service.
Their present equipment is old, expensive, and the other system they
own is not in service right now, it cost them around $40K and is
expected to be put in service in a more lucrative area than the one
I'm talking about.
It would be interesting if an Amiga and Phone-Pak could replace the
voice-mail system they now use.
Any chance of an A3000 version of PhonePak? I know, I know just get
any 3rd party memory board with 512K of RAM… Any chance of an
A3000 version of PhonePak? The PhonePak looks awesome. Even with
having to shell out extra money for a memory board it is still a
reasonable cost. I'll be getting one eventually, but I'm holding out
until I absolutely have to have it hoping that there will be a better
A3000 solution or someone buys me an A4000. It could happen.
A fellow on another board told me he investigated phonemail products
for several platforms, including Mac, IBM and Atari ST, and that the
GVP Phonepak for the Amiga beat them all. The Amiga's ability to
smartly multitask helps a great deal in the comparison. Many Windows
users, for example, have truly terrible problems with anything that
uses a modem or fax device, even though the interfaces look cool.
Re: "A fellow … investigated phonemail products for
> several platforms, including Mac, IBM and Atari ST,
> and that the GVP Phonepak … beat them all.
It's great to hear this from someone other than the vendor, of course. 🙂
> The Amiga's ability to smartly multitask helps a great
> deal in the comparison.
PhonePak and the Amiga were made for eachother. An efficient
multitasking environment, and a good DMA system make it all work very
efficiently indeed. I have used Amigas while installed PhonePaks are
answering calls, taking messages and receiving faxes and there's no
slow down at all! It's great. What was that phrase… Only Amiga?
🙂
> Windows users and multitasking with modems or faxes …
Tell me about it. I have a 386 for work, running a "background" fax program.
Every time the fax wants to work, I have to stop doing anything else for fear
of freaking the poor software out. I run telecom software that uses an
interapplication command protocol like ARexx to shut off the fax when it needs
the phone lines, but the fax software never comes back correctly. The bottom
line is: if I've used the modem for anything else, I need to close down the fax
software, turn the modem off and on, restart the fax software, and if the fax
tries to send or receive anything, I need to stop whatever I'm doing and wait
for it to finish.
This on a 33Mhz '386. If only I worried less about how well it worked, and
more about how nice the buttons on the toolbar look 🙂
Paul,
Not going to burst my bubble. The A4000/030 is way out of line in my
opinion. The dealer cost is just above $1620.
-mark=
Otto Pilot Engaged..
Computer Chronicles mentioned that Commodore had 'lowered the price' on
their 4000 line of computers.
The MSRP of the 4000/EC030/4MB/100HD was $2495.
Good bye Commodore. :^(
Another lost customer,
Erik Flom
Computer chronicles blew it as usual, That's the present price on a
4000/040.
The price on the '030 version is just under $1700.00
// Brian — Cruising on AutoPilot…..
\X/
Sorry, they didn't blow it.
MSRP for the A4000/040 is $3699.
MSRP for the A4000/EC030 is $2699
-mark=
Otto Pilot Engaged..
According to my price list from CBM, the MSRP for the A4000/EC030 is
$2399. (still way too much.)
Denny,
Your price is correct. I mistyped. 🙂
-mark=
Otto Pilot Engaged..
Any bets on how long that lasts?
The intro price for the 4000/EC030 was just under $1700. I doubt that
they'll make it any larger…. Too many people would scream.
// Brian — Cruising on AutoPilot…..
\X/
Unfortunately, $1700 is about what Apple is charging for it's basic
040/20MHz machine.
I thought it was too high at $1700 (street price), and would not be
surprised if C= is ACTUALLY putting a Manufacturer's SUGGESTED Retail
Price of $2400 on it.
Thanks,
Erik Flom
Brian,
You probably shouldn't quote a figure that low.. Anyone selling the
machine for "just under $1700" is making less than $75 profit on hardware
that costs him over $1600 to get into his store–and likely won't be
around for long selling hardware on margins like that. It's not reasonable
to expect intelligent dealers to sell the machine that cheap.
A more realistic street price is $1800 to $1900, minimum.
More realistic only accepting C='s dealer price of $1620 or whatever,
which is ludicrous. Hopefully that'll fall REALLY fast. An ideal street
price of the 4000/030 should be in the VERY low teens, just to compete
with Macs. As far as PCs go, that would be reasonable too only if average
buyer person understood about buses and expandability and so on. Most
don't.
Paul
Paul –
My local dealer just lowered his price on the 4000/030 from $1895 to
$1799. Still a bit much for my wallet (right now, anyway) but it's looking
better. He also has a 1200 w/85M HD for $849, his previous 40M price.
Harry
Funny, I thought the intro price was that low…..
($1700 area….)
// Brian — Cruising on AutoPilot…..
\X/