Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!mmdf From: S36666WB%ETSUACAD.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu (Brian Wright) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: not good news Message-ID: <33678@nigel.ee.udel.edu> Date: 17 Oct 90 01:01:33 GMT Sender: mmdf@ee.udel.edu Lines: 128 On 16 Oct 90 07:47:40 GMT you said: > > The new MACs are definately trouble for Commodore. The original ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I doubt that. >MAC II was trouble for Commodore, and it cost over three times more than a Hmmm. I don't think so. I bought my Amiga in '88 around the time the Mac II was introduced. I called a Mac dealer to get a price on the Mac II and the salesman told me, "It's $6000." I was floored. I just couldn't believe a CPU alone could cost that much. I then went to my local Amiga dealer and again was floored. This time by the capabilities v. price. I bought one. People buy Macs and IBMs (mainly) because, "Every person I know has one." or "Because I want to run ." I don't think I have every heard anyone say, "I bought my Mac because it's powerful." That isn't meant to slam the Mac. It's meant as an observation. >similar Amiga system. The new MAC LC brings the same capbilities as the >MAC II for less than the price of a similar Amiga system. It is the >Amiga that is the more expensive one now, and unless something drastic >is done soon, the Amiga is in big trouble. Commodore did not exactly >succeed against the MAC II when it cost more than the Amiga. Commodore >will NOT succeed against the MAC II now that it costs less. Commodore didn't succeed not because of price, rather because the lack of advertising. Apple, on the other hand, is able to produce lots of advertising. Remember, Apple was originally started by Jobs and others. Jobs now has clout in the Computer market. This is one reason people are so willing to invest in a NeXT. Although that isn't to say the NeXT isn't a good machine, it just lacks software to make it usable at the moment. > This situation reminds me of the John Deer commercials in which a >bunch of company employees are touting the capabilities of John Deer >tractors, with the executive asking "What are we going to do about it?" >In this case, Commodore is the one looking at all that the MAC IISI and >MAC LC can do, and asking "What are we going to do about it?" I >don't know what Commodore is going to do about it. Like the pathetic >company in the commercial, Commodore is in a rut that I don't think >they will EVER emerge from. They now find themselves producing systems >with weaker graphics than any other system in the industry, at higher Well, I wouldn't exactly say that. 4096 colors is still more colors than any standard computer comes with even if it is HAM. Although that is the total palette. You will get better transititions with 8*24 cards, but not the colors on the screen at once. So it's still a trade off. More colors with less palette or less colors with more palette. Either way you still have limitations. >prices than most of these other systems. What is Commodore going to >do about it? Like the pathetic company, they will probably try some >hacks to improve their products, like non-standard video hardware with >clunky new OS hacks to attempt to get it to work with a few programs. >This won't stand up well, though, against the MAC which has totally >standardized, superior video, with an OS that has had device-independent ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It isn't superior it's just different. It has as many limitations by the way that they work it as Amiga does with its system. And the system isn't standardized. If you want more than 8*24 you have to go buy an additional card and drivers for that card. What is the chance that the next MAC user will have such a card? Not to mention that MOST people who own Macs own SEs which are B/W anyway. Amiga started color and still is. >video from day one. "What are we going to do about it?" Go out of >business, I guess. Yes, I guess you can go out of the business. These comments aren't productive. Constructive critisizm is but you have gone beyond that. Here are some of my observations of the Amiga. > > -MB- First, you have to think about what you have said and then compare it to reality. The cold hard facts are as follows: 1) Commodore has managed to sell 2 million Amigas despite ANY other system which includes the Mac, the NeXT (definitely more competative than a Mac), and IBM. It is hardly worth saying that these low cost Macs will be the end of Amiga. 2) The Amiga is CLEARLY the choice for a multimedia machine. The MAC's display system is just TOO non-standard to output good enough NTSC images without premium price. For that matter the same can be said about the IBM too. 3) Software on the Amiga is clearly lower priced than on just about any other system which includes the Mac. 4) The MAC still can't multitask using MAC's OS. 5) The MAC still can't page-flip or do real-time animation with the fluidity that Amiga can. What you don't seem to realize about the Amiga; if you start adding bitplanes to increase colors and the amount of displayable colors, you will no longer be able to page-flip and move those images with all the fluidity that is now available. Also the older Amigas will not be able to upgrade to such a video system (1000 or 500). The 2000 might possibly be able to. The 3000 will have no trouble. What it will probably come to is that you will be required to purchase another NEW Amiga to get such a beast as you want. Also the 68000 based Amiga probably doesn't have enough power to move more than about 8 bitplanes (if it can move that now). That was the whole idea behind HAM. A low cost 12 bitplane solution and still allow moveable graphics. Because of the way the Amiga's graphics system is designed it will be hard for Commodore to break that mold. There are noticable advantages to Amiga's graphics system, while, at the same time, there are disadvantages. The same can be said for about every graphics system on the market including Mac's, NeXT's and IBM's. I can't seem to understand why you bought an Amiga, when all you really wanted was a Mac. If all you are interested in is 8*24 graphics why don't you go buy yourself a Mac IIcx. How about an IBM with a Targa or Vista card. Or why not just go to ILM and buy PIXAR. Then you'll probably nitpick that to death too. I can hear it now. "But I wanted 256 million colors, not 32 million", said in a whiny voice, "and look at that resolution it's just too low". (or however many colors PIXAR is currently able to produce.) :-) And the one thing that everyone has been overlooking. A Mac is a Mac is a Mac. It has always been and will always be. It hasn't changed any by the lowering of the prices. It's the same computer it has always been. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ======================================================================= ||NeXT- (nekst) N. The only PC to have sold less than 10,000 units and || || not be considered a flop. || ||------------------------------------------/ /------------------------|| ||---Brian Wright | / / || ||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga || ||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! || =======================================================================