CompuServe Thread

Byte's NEW AMIGA??

25 messages in this thread
#65887From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiAug 14, 1992 11:05 PM
John, There are third-party 040 boards available for the 3000 that have more features and faster speeds for less money. I'd hardly call this abandoning the 3000, at any rate.
#65922From: John GagerAug 15, 1992 2:50 AM
You didn't read my message carefully Denny. I said I know what it feels like when CBM (and I stress CBM) abandoned the 1000 users. Sure at the present time there are 3rd party boards available for the 3000, but I have seen nothing directly from Commodore. And with the new generation of Amiga's that will be introduced in Pasadena, I have a bad feeling that the 3000 support will get even worse. John – K7KB (via Whap!)
#65941From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiAug 15, 1992 10:52 AM
John, Well, frankly, I just can't get upset about a $1998 68040 card with fewer features than less expensive third-party cards. How many peripherals has Commodore _ever_ released for their computers? Apple is about the only company out there that tries to provide _everything_ with an Apple brand–none of the clone companies do, IBM doesn't, Compaq doesn't. The A1000 is a lot better supported than a Mac or PC from that time. Does Apple support System 7 on the Fat Mac? Nope. Will OS/2 work on an IBM AT from 1985 without spending the cost of a new computer on upgrade hardware? Nope. Does either company manufacture add-ons for those machines? Nope. The entire computer industry is based on third-party support.
#66034From: Jonathan HirschmanAug 15, 1992 10:03 PM
Denny, Your comment is quite enlightening regarding the level of support that the 1000 still gets… Does System 7 run on a Fat Mac? Of course not, no more than OS/2 can run on an original AT clone…because of the progress that has been made for those platforms. In all honesty, things would be good if AmigaDos no longer ran on the older machines, due to the abilities that needed to be supported for the newer machines… Jonathan – via Whap!
#66408From: Chris GentschAug 19, 1992 2:05 AM
Excuse me for buttin' in here, but I have to agree with John. Why does Commodore have to come up with its own 040 board (or any other upgrade) when third party developers are doing such a great job. In general, I'd buy a third party product before choosing Commodore peripherals based on the history of questionable Commodore products like hard drive controllers, bridgeboards, etc. I am very happy to have a progressive 040 in my 3000 (and I sure don't buy the overheating line on 040 products) And yes, I still have my 1000 and am using it right now. Sure, I didn't like that the A500 was built backwards, but hey, I use a GVP hard drive in reverse with no problems. As long as the new stuff is substantially better than the last generation, I don't think upgrades are an issue. New technology is going to replace old technology every few months and you sure c sure can't expect to keep upgrading the old stuff. You just keep using what you have to do what it can do. IMHO, From Maui, Hawaii
#66424From: Charles HillAug 19, 1992 8:12 AM
Hmmmm, I'd have to disagree. If I were buying a machine for a company, I'd prefer the Commodore board simply because of the GOld Service and on-stire warranty coverage. (on-site, that is). To a company that can mean quite a lo. (lot). -Chas
#66669From: Chris GentschAug 21, 1992 1:50 AM
O.K. I have to agree that I wasn't taking warrantee into account and Commodore has an excellant plan. However, all of my favorite things about my Amiga systems are from third parties – firecracker, Progressive 040, Sunrize, etc.
#66680From: Charles HillAug 21, 1992 6:31 AM
Yeah, third parties play a big role in some neat peripherals. Apple tries to do just about *everyting* first for the Mac, but short of monitors and printers (and cpus), third-parties outsell them by a ton. -Chas
#66482From: Marlene Zenker/SYSOPAug 19, 1992 5:14 PM
It's possible that some government buyers and/or government contracts require preapproved configurations. Unless 3rd parties are going to go through the evaluation process, Commodore needs a solution to give those government folks. Steve
#66508From: Mark D. ManesAug 19, 1992 10:04 PM
Questionable Commodore products? Why do people find it so easy to bash Commodore? Sure they are an easy target but now we are bashing them on 'questionable' hardware? Just what did you find wrong with Commodore's disk controllers and bridgeboards? As a GVP and a Commodore dealer I can tell you that the land of GVP is no utopia. The G-Force cards had a major design problem in that you could *easily* cut a trace on the back of the board by installing their drive mounting bracket. Many many customers have trashed their G-Force card this way. I would call that just as questionable design as anything Commodore has done. The difference here is that GVP runs giant full page ads every month in every Amiga magazine and Commodore does not. The implied quality is there when it may not actually be there 100% of the time. Don't get me wrong, I like GVP stuff, and they do take care of their customers–they are just my example for this post! 😉 I guess it is the difference between marketing. GVP does excellent marketing and "ok" to "good" hardware. Commodore does "ok" marketing and does "good" hardware–including disk controllers and bridgeboards. As to the question as to why Commodore must produce an 040 accelerator. The answer is simple. To set the standard. Third parties can not define the marketplace nor the direction of the computer. Only the developer of the hardware can do that. If Commodore never produced an 040 accelerator the 040 would never really be considered part of the "officially sanctioned" upgrades for the Amiga. Ergo, Commodore has not choice but to produce an 040 board. This is why Commodore *must* do what it can to maintain and enhance the current high-end Amiga product line: A3000. Many users *invested* fully believing that the A3000 is the base of the new technology. When our people went to the A3000 launch 2 years ago–Commodore said plainly the A3000 was the base of the new technoology. If Commodore relies on 3rd parties to make that promise a reality they will lose credability with [ MORE ]
#66548From: Mike SchillerAug 20, 1992 1:26 AM
Mark: Yes, I agree with you that Commodore HAS to market an 040 product for the A3000. What I don't agree with is that they must develop one. There's no reason that Commodore can't go to either PP&S or GVP (the 2 companies that currently market 040 cards for the 3000) and sell one of their cards as a C= card. Does Commodore manufacture the 1950? No, they buy them from a monitor company and market it as their product. Commodore has enough to do, that IMHO that if they can sell somebody elses 040 as theirs. Bad enough that they had to spend the money to reinvent the 040 'wheel', but they did it in a way that is NOT compatible with standard A3000s. Probably the best choice for C= would have been the PP&S original 040 card, as it has all the same specs as the C= card, it DOES work in all 3000s, and it's cheaper to boot! // -Mike Schiller \X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
#66649From: Don Curtis/SYSOPAug 21, 1992 12:08 AM
Mike, BAD IDEA! Monitors, like disk drives (both floppy and hard) are accessories whereas the basic computing engine (vs the CPU itself) is part and parcel of the basic hardware of the machine. I think it would be a major mistake for Commodore to go to an outside vendor for an '040 card. Do you really think they're "stupid" enough to design and market a card that fits only in the product with the lowest sales figures? Do you think there's even the slightest possibility that a similar card is about to be announced for the 3000 and/or 2000 line? Don
#66653From: Mark D. ManesAug 21, 1992 12:16 AM
Mike, You are forgeting one thing. If Commodore picks between GVP and PP&S they are bound to lose one developer. GVP and PP&S invest money to develop, produce and market a product. If Commodore were to go to one of them and sign an agreement to sell that vendors hardware as their own all hell would break lose in the developer community. How many Amiga monitor developers do you know anyway! :-)( You don't know how many developers were lost when Commodore decided to bundle software products with the Amiga several years ago. I might add that GVP would likely win any such bid from Commodore. Not because their board is better, but because of the relationship between GVP and Commodore. You know where you can find a lot of Ex-Commodore employees? You guessed it–GVP. -mark= – whappity whap whap… whap whap!!
#66509From: Mark D. ManesAug 19, 1992 10:04 PM
[ continuation ] their customers-even if the technology is given via a 3rd party. It is the same thing as the MegaChip. The MegaChip from DKB is a *great* product and we sell many of them. However, when the money is down and we have a problem we can't talk to Commodore about any Amiga (except the A3000) that has 2MB of chip memory. They didn't build it, they don't support it. Ergo, the problem must be duplicated without the Megachip in order to get good technical support from Commodore. So lets not bash Commodore for producing new peripherals and extensions to the Amiga line. WE need them if only to define the standard for the third parties to improve on. -mark= – whappity whap whap… whap whap!!
#66549From: Mike SchillerAug 20, 1992 1:26 AM
Mark: Is your reasoning the reason that Commodore built the U of L graphics card? Just to give 3rd parties a product that they can point to and say "see, ours is betters than Commodore's"? // -Mike Schiller \X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
#66654From: Mark D. ManesAug 21, 1992 12:16 AM
My understanding is that Commodore did not build the University of Lowell Board, but the University did. 🙂 Commodore only bought the board so that they could outfit their UNIX box with something that was better than 640×400. -mark= – whappity whap whap… whap whap!!
#66670From: Mike SchillerAug 21, 1992 2:32 AM
Mark: Well, the card I have in front of me says C= A2410 U of Lowell High Resolution Graphics Display Board Rev 6. The card has a typically Commodoreish look to it, and has a Copyright notice from Commodore Electronics. It was my impression that it was called the U of L card because it was designed for C= by U of L, not that it was their product. The copyrights on the card seem to show that too. My board is probably an early one (I don't know if they still make it or not), as it's serial number 00069 ! Do you know anything more about the board? // -Mike Schiller \X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
#66761From: Mark D. ManesAug 22, 1992 12:12 AM
Mike, You may be picking nits with me, I am not sure. It should not surprise you that the UofL board has a Commodore copyright on it. However, my point was that this board was *not* designed by Commodore. -mark= – whappity whap whap… whap whap!!
#66555From: Wayde HiguchiAug 20, 1992 1:48 AM
Mark, > GVP… we can't talk to Commodore about any Amiga… that has 2MB of > chip memory. They didn't build it, they don't support it. That's why I needed DKB's address (in another message). I recently upgraded from a revision 4.2 to a revision 6.3 CBM A2000 motherboard. The reason that I had to upgrade is that the GVP G-Force 030 Combo 40 board is incompatible with the 4.2 motherboard. The GVP board does work alright with the CBM 6.3 motherboard. However, the CBM 6.3 motherboard has a small raised circuit board that prevents the installation of the DKB MegAChip board. Well, DKB knows of the problem and has a version of the MegAChip board that will will work with the CBM board. I am now sending the DKB board to them to get an upgraded one that will work with the 6.3 motherboard. IMO, it shows the attitudes of the three companies involved: DKB sees and tries to support what people have, CBM doesn't look around to see what people are using, and GVP doesn't look back to support people with older hardware. Wayde
#66650From: Don Curtis/SYSOPAug 21, 1992 12:13 AM
Wayde, > … CBM doesn't look around to see what people are using… Was Commodore supposed to have a crystal ball and peer into the future to see what all possible add-ons will be designed and make sure that these future products will fit? Don
#66889From: John GagerAug 23, 1992 5:01 AM
>> Was Commodore supposed to have a crystal ball and peer into the future >> to see what all possible add-ons will be designed and make sure that >> these products will fit? If they had a properly funded R&D department, yes. The Amiga's success is certainly not based on the fact of CBM's marketing, but of innovative hardware and system software. If CBM is to continue to be a force in the computer market, then they have to continue to produce hardware that is innovative. Like they say, "Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way." John – K7KB (via Whap!)
#66997From: Don Curtis/SYSOPAug 23, 1992 11:37 PM
John, Go back and read the message I was replying to. Then you tell me how any manufacturer can figure out all possible add-ons some THIRD party manufacturers will come up with at some point in the future…and then make sure that the stuff that's made by the original manufacturer will work with any one or more of those future add-ons. My message had nothing to do with R&D budgets, it had to do with the fact that there are 3rd party products out there that don't follow the rules, and thus don't work. The problem in those situations is NOT the original manufacturer or design…but rather with the 3rd party hardware. Don
#66655From: Mark D. ManesAug 21, 1992 12:17 AM
Wayne, I don't think Commodore should have to pay attention to what they probably consider a non-standard, non-supported method of enhancing the Amiga. Believe me, I don't mean to attack the good quality people at DKB or any other hardware manufacturer for the Amiga, but it is my opinion that upgrades that require you to remove a chip and place a board in the chip socket are 'hacks'. I can't expect Commodore to support these types of upgrades throughout the life of the computer. Commodore built expansion slots to expand the Amiga computer. That is where they intend to allow hardware developers to expand the system. However, as we all know, some hardware additions like the DKB Megachip could not be done via a slot. It is to Commodore's advantage to seperate the product lines. The Amiga 500 has had an artificial life for a long long time because of third party 'hacks' to the motherboard. These hacks have caused most people to decide not to upgrade to the A2000 because they feel that the A500 will do everything that the A2000 will do. This is not good for dealerships that require a customer base that wishes to upgrade to make a profit. It requires dealerships to become familair with popular hacks so that they might sell something to the Amiga public. That of course, does not help Commodore, nor does it help us when we want to sell profitable Amiga computers. I think that one of the reasons that the A600/A600HD has surfaced mounted technology is to stem part of this upgrade a computer for life plan that has kept the current systems alive. Surface-mounted technology is a cheap way to decrease product life-time and product cost. It will force the A600 owner to consider an upgrade to another larger Amiga computer when the A600 owner feels cramped. This is good for the dealer, this is good for Commodore. The one thing that you have got to remember when it comes to Commodore. They are not in love with computers like you and I. They are in business [ MORE ]
#66656From: Mark D. ManesAug 21, 1992 12:17 AM
[ continuation ] to make a profit anyway they can. It takes foresight and wisdom to make business decisions that benefits the customer base and the future of the company. That is where my problem lies with Commodore. Commodore *always* looks 2 weeks ahead instead of 2 years. That is what is wrong with Commodore and American business in general. -mark= – whappity whap whap… whap whap!!
#66647From: James RoathAug 20, 1992 11:43 PM
I think that Commo keeps making the upgrade boards not for the general public but for the governmental customers they have. Like GSA and such they wont let you outsource too many 3rd party products. At least they don't with our GSA stuff…