CompuServe Thread

#Philadelphia Inquirer

14 messages in this thread
#157296From: Paul HigginbottomJul 23, 1994 9:44 PM
Pleasance's respect for the Amiga engineers is fine, but I'm sure you realize that the one's he's thinking about are no longer with Commodore.
#157336From: Dan StetsJul 24, 1994 7:56 AM
Whom do you have in mind?
#157352From: Dale LarsonJul 24, 1994 12:27 PM
Damn near all of us. From 20+ Software Engineers, there are now 2. I'm pretty sure the last of the people working on the new chipset has left. Many systems people is gone, though a couple of key people remain there — with the exception of Dave, the systems group probably fared best in Engineering. Dale L. Larson Intangible Assets Manufacturing (info@iam.com) "That's the best part about being crazy. You see things no one else can see."
#157411From: Paul HigginbottomJul 24, 1994 11:14 PM
With Dave Haynie and Jeff Porter leaving, plus almost all the key software (OS) engineers, there's hardly anybody left at all. The remaining folks are just there as caretakers should anyone buy the technology and want to find out something about it. But as far as moving the Amiga technology forward, that is (IMHO) an insurmountable task.
#157438From: Mark D. ManesJul 25, 1994 8:35 AM
Paul. Come on.. why is that? Are you saying that a new owner of the technology can't hire engineers to continue the work that has already been done? Are you saying that the engineers that are at Scala will not be 'accessible'? Slow yes, insurmountable not hardly. -mark= Otto Pilot Engaged..
#157441From: Dale LarsonJul 25, 1994 10:18 AM
In any engineering, much more so at Commodore, there is some extent to which the stuff in the heads of the engineers who started a project is irreplacable. The time it takes a new engineer (or team of engineers) to duplicate that original effort can be a serious problem. It's going to cost a lot more than just hiring the same number of engineers that there once were, and its going to take a lot longer than it would have without the interuption — if it would have taken six months to put out AAA with the engineering team that was in place, it might take a brand new, larger and better-funded engineering team 18 months. [These are purely made up numbers for illustrative purposes ] Scala has contractual obligations to its partners. The engineers at Scala are pretty damn busy with things that have nothing to do with the Amiga. There are no spare resources there in the near future. In theory, they could be bought, but the price might well be too high. Dale L. Larson Intangible Assets Manufacturing (info@iam.com) "That's the best part about being crazy. You see things no one else can see."
#157489From: Mark D. ManesJul 25, 1994 9:57 PM
Dale, You know of course that I work for Scala right? 🙂 I am not denying that a new engineering team would not take more time to move projects along. That is a obvious to anyone who knows anything about engineering and software design. I railed at the comment that moving the Amiga forward was an insurmountable problem. It clearly isn't. Whoever gets this technology will be getting it to move it, or parts of it ahead. Otherwise why buy it to begin with? It is egotistic to believe that only the Commodore engineers could move Amiga projects forward. Simply not true and not fair to the many talented people out there. My only reference to Scala was based on these people being accessible, not necessarily free to do work for such a owner of the technology. There is a difference Dale. As far as Scala's engineers commitment to their partners and such go, well, I can't really comment on that, other than to say they are definately busy. 🙂 -mark= Otto Pilot Engaged..
#157519From: Dale LarsonJul 26, 1994 5:31 AM
Yes I know you work for Scala in VA. The engineering types are in PA. 🙂 Insurmountable in theory and not worth the amount of money it would take aren't the same thing. But it is a semantic difference. Realistically, if I handed you everything it would take to produce AAA Amigas, how many of them do you think you would sell? Remember, you have to charge a lot more than the PowerPC and Pentium systems because you can't use most of the commodity parts and have custom parts that you can't get a really high volume on. The market for AAA Amigas is no larger than that for AA Amigas — though it might slow the downsizing of the market. So how much R&D money is it worth? I'm not saying its impossible. I'm not even saying it would be stupid. I'm just saying that I wouldn't be suprised at all to never see any serious revisions to produce new Amiga desk top computers. All bets are off, of course, for what happens with any specialty systems. Dale L. Larson Intangible Assets Manufacturing (info@iam.com) "That's the best part about being crazy. You see things no one else can see."
#157544From: Richard EricksonJul 26, 1994 1:36 PM
>I'm just saying that I wouldn't be suprised at all to never see any >serious revisions to produce new Amiga desk top computers. All bets are >off, of course, for what happens with any specialty systems. It sounds like we shouldn't be concerned who buys the Amiga since from what you are saying there isn't likely to be any new Amiga desktop computers anyway. Is that correct? If it is, why be concerned about who buys the Amiga, assume the Amiga is now nothing more than a chipset in something else, and just go buy a PC. I guess I haven't gotten to that point yet. Richard -> AutoPilot on the A1000, the only Amiga without the C= logo.
#158126From: Mr. ChalleronAug 1, 1994 1:00 AM
>it is egotistic to believe that only the Commodore engineers could move Amiga projects forward But then, we ALL know that Paul H. was the cornerstone on which the Amiga foundation was laid, don't we?… <g,r,d> "The problem with owning an Amiga is that it lets you think." Mr. C
#157568From: Paul HigginbottomJul 26, 1994 6:17 PM
I'm saying that the Amiga technology uses chip processes that are out of date for one thing. I'm saying that simply too much time has been lost in the past few years. Basically, if "Amiga" continues, it will essentially have to be a brand new computer with little relation to the current products. I think the "value" of buying Amiga technology now would be to use it as is in embedded applications, and maybe to build some more 1200s and 4000s to take advantage of remaining (but dwindling) demand in Europe.
#158125From: Mr. ChalleronAug 1, 1994 1:00 AM
PMFJI here, but: "Amiga technology uses chip processes that are out of date." Unless you're referring to the manufacturing processes which are inconsequential, I have to ask: Are you kidding? Fast as a Pentium is, strong as OS/2 is, good as SVGA is, to date the PC world _still_ hasn't even figured out the Video Interrupt Chip, so old that it pre-dates the Amiga itself (like I have to tell _you_ this), yet so _intrinsic_ to the nature of a (shudder) Windowed environment that We Who Must Use Other Platforms can't _imagine_ why closing a requester-window should leave a blank spot on the screen that has to be re-drawn. I'd say it's the PC world that's about ten years behind…. Maybe IBM will get off its petrified butt and design a new desktop computer with an _integrated_ hardware/software design, like the Amiga had … something like OS/2 on a PS/2 … uhh … never mind…. "The problem with owning an Amiga is that it lets you think." Mr. C
#158181From: NathanAug 1, 1994 4:36 PM
I loved that msg! The "blank spot" you're referring to is annoying! I'm forced to uze a PC on OS/2 and Winslows sometimes! As for the VIC chip, I'm very familiar with it from my C-64 days! BTW: DID anyone know that Q-link (the C-64/128 ONLY online service) is STILL in existence from America OnLine, with a fully graphical interface! All make mistakes,only a winslows user persists in his error -cicero,44BC Nathan Jones, via amiga autopilot. –FLAME ON!–
#158223From: Malcolm O'BrienAug 1, 1994 11:53 PM
Nathan, I knew Q-Link was still around. It's not the thriving community it once was though; C64 users have moved on to better systems. 🙂 Malcolm