#IMO
18 messages in this thread
In the U.S., the Commodore name is associated primarily with the Commodore 64,
which is considered a "toy". When the Amiga was introduced, the combination of
colors, sounds and the Commodore name made it a "game machine" in many people's
eyes. The people selling PCs encouraged that impression…
Marion Deland
CROSSINGS – Newsletter for Amiga/PC/Mac compatibility
Marion,
> When the Amiga was introduced, the combination of colors, sounds
> and the Commodore name made it a "game machine" in many people's
> eyes
I disagree. When Amiga first came out, the 286 was just making it's
over-priced debut. But Commodore screwed-up in 2 ways (IMO):
1. They made the 1000 a closed-console system (which actually linked it to
being a game machine in us computer geeks eyes) instead of the open-box PC
architecture.
2. They relied only on C64 transplants to foster their sales. There was no
aggressive marketing.
If those 2 things had changed from the start, Amiga's would be the standard now
(and we would not be stuck in 8086 forever land).
Michael McMain [ADP SoftPay]
You'll get no argument from me that Commodore screwed up. I was just replying
to Alexandre's post that the Commodore name in Europe was associated with PCs.
Marion Deland
CROSSINGS – Newsletter for Amiga/PC/Mac compatibility
The 1000 was not a closed console. While not as easy to expandas a
slotted machine, as you needed an external chassis, you could expand them.
At the time of its debut, it was not considered a game machine. It was
actually considered almost too high tech. The IBM user line went, "It's a
hackers machine, you have to be really technically oriented to use the
multitasking, you don't need all those bells and whistles, 16 colors is
enough, and only musicians really need that kind of sound."
That was until such things became available for IBM's. Then it was ours
is good enough, until they felt theirs was better. Then it was, if you
aren't at our level, you must have a toy and it really isn't useable.
While I agree with much of what Mr Saperstein (sp?) from Font Bank says,
his is the typical attitude as witnessed in the localization discussion.
If the Amiga can do something cheaper, better, faster, it really is of
small difference. Much along the lines of "really nice case screws".
"If the Amiga can do something cheaper, better, faster, it really is of
small difference."
But that isn't what I said, Alex. I was responding specifically to someone
who was trying to make a small feature seem more important than it appeared to
me. Please bear in mind that I purchased one of the first Amigas and was
seriously impressed. It was only after meeting Jack Tramiel at a trade show in
the mid-80's that I decided the machine had a limited, if any, future.
Jerry
"Please bear in mind that I purchased one of the first Amigas and was seriously
impressed. It was only after meeting Jack Tramiel at a trade show in the
mid-80's that I decided the machine had a limited, if any, future."
How would Tramiel have influenced you? He had nothing to do with Commodore at
the time the Amiga was introduced. He was at Atari.
It was, however, the one of the reasons I never took the Atari ST seriously. I
knew he'd drive that machine into the ground.
"He had nothing to do with Commodore at the time the Amiga was introduced. He
was at Atari."
You're right. It was a meeting with whoever was President in the year the
Amiga was introduced. Met him and other Commodore honchoes at the CES Show in
Chicago. Listened to them all and left with the impression that these people
simply weren't players. Now who was President at that time?
Jerry
I'm not even sure, there was such a revolving door of execs back then. 🙂 I
think the person who you're refering to was before Copperman. For the life of
me, I can't recall who that was.
Copperman struck me as a pretty good guy, but wasn't he just North America, and
wasn't he pretty much thwarted?
Mr. Zombie
Thwarted? I think he was the one that was escorted from the building when his
number came up, if that's what you meant.
I remember it being a middle aged kind of guy, salt-and-pepper hair and kind
of paunchy. Kind of the way I look now. <G> I've never forgotten the
discussion, though. Walked away from it wondering who the heck those people
thought they were. No retailer or OEM in their right mind would want to deal
with that kind of attitude.
Jerry
Attitude of corporate execs is completely amazing sometimes… I don't blame
you for remembering a conversation like that. It says a lot about the company
in question. (Not just Commodore, I'm talking about any company).
The really scary thing is that management, marketing and development are
completely out of sync with each other at so many companies. All too
frequently, one is kept out of the loop while the other two discuss "the grand
plan" of the way the company will be heading. I've seen marketing get upper
management's ear, and leave development completely out of the loop. Talk about
crisis mode all the time….yikes. "What? Oh, we sold 50 of those, you'll
need to have them done next week." What a nightmare.
In Commodore's case, I think development, marketing, and senior (Gould, Ali)
were all off in different directions. From various postings I've seen from
Commodore engineers, it looks like marketing kept yanking development around
pretty good for a long time.
Steve
Yep. And momentary success can really ruin a company fast.
Jerry
Was that "momentary", or monetary?
By definition, momentary success, would indeed be brief. Thus, if a
compaies success were brief, then it would seem to follow that there would
indeed be trouble after the momentary success were over. <grin>
The big problem is that there wasn't any marketing. Just isolated country
sales companies, upper management, and development. Maybe upper management
thought that they were marketing, and that picking the color of a new box or
how many resistors it could have constituted marketing…
dale@iam.com http://www.iam.com
Intangible Assets Manufacturing
Alex,
> The 1000 was not a closed console. While not as easy to expandas
> a slotted machine, as you needed an external chassis, you could
> expand them.
>
>
That was exactly the problem. How long before we saw the expansion boxes
become prevelant at a reasonable price? By that time the 2000 was out and the
1000 was obsolete. If the 1000 had a 2000/IBM type case, then upgrading your
1000 would have been a piece of cake (like going from a 286 to a 386 to a 486
to a Pentium).
The really sad thing is, the Amiga came out at the perfect time. The IBM 286
was way overpriced (heck, the XT was more expensive than the Amiga) and not
really established yet. But the clone wars quickly changed all that.
I think if any of us had the helm, and could turn back the clock, we would have
all the money, and my office would be filled with Amigas 🙂
Michael McMain [ADP SoftPay]
Sad part is, that when the C64 first came out, people were astounded that
you could get a full 64K computer for that price. At that time Appple
]['s with a full 64K were selling for more than a base Pentium does now.
What really hobbled the 64 was no 80 column mode, and slower than dirt
floppy drives. They shoulda shot the engineer that designed those.