Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!sundc!texsun!digi.lonestar.org!jgay From: jgay@digi.lonestar.org (john gay) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Industry Publications Ignoring the Amiga. Message-ID: <1347@digi.lonestar.org> Date: 11 Dec 90 18:35:36 GMT References: Organization: DSC Communications, Plano Tx. Lines: 64 From article , by WHE46@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU (Marc Barrett): > > Remember that the Amiga is NOT a serious influence on the computer > industry, especially in the U.S. The installed base of Amigas in the > U.S. is only slightly above 500,000 units, compared to an installed > base of 3 Million Macintosh computers and over 10 Million IBM- > compatible systems. Magazine authors and editors always write for > the largest audience, and the Amiga audience is totally insignificant > compared to the audience of Mac and IBM users. > So, only computers with a large installed base should be talked about in the press. Wow, I guess the Mac and IBMs should never have gotten any press in the first place. Since the only computer to ever have started off with a large installed base was the first one made (don't remember which one, since it is not written about much these days) I guess that is the only one that should have ever gotten any writeups. > Another thing to remember is that over 2/3 of the Amiga systems > currently being used in the U.S. are A500 systems. Most of these > systems are being used for less professional uses, such as games. > I would estimate the installed base of Amiga systems in the U.S. > that are currently actually being used for video, multimedia, and > other professional uses to be somewhere around 100,000. This > compares to the fact that nearly all Macintosh systems sold are > being used for professional purposes, and much of the installed > base of IBM-compatibles is being used for professional and > business purposes. Yeah, nobody would even bother writing a game for IBMs or for the Mac. Nobody would ever buy such a thing. You better tell Sierra, Electronic Arts, etc, etc... to just give up and file for bankruptcy since NOBODY would buy their silly software for use on such a serious PROFESSIONAL platform. Again since the first computer made had 100% of the market and it was used 100% of the time for REAL work it should have been the only computer to ever be written about. > > In summary, the installed base of Macintosh and IBM-compatible > systems in the U.S. already outwighs the Amiga's installed base by > a factor of 6 for the MAC and 20 for the IBMs. Add to this the > fact that most Amigas are being used in homes, while most MACs > are being used in schools, universities, and corporations. > Together this all points to the conclusion that the audience of > people actually using MACs and IBMs for professional purposes > outweighs the audience of people using Amigas for professional > purposes by perhaps 100-to-one. It is no wonder that these > publications ignore the Amiga -- it is not a significant influence > on the computer industry. Get real. To have an influence on industry you don't have to have a huge installed base. If that were true we would never get anywhere and Apple should have given up long ago (before it got its huge installed base) and NeXt, Commodore, Sun, etc aren't going to give up because they don't have 10 million users yet. They will just keep innovating and influencing the computer industry until (and hopefully after) they get their huge installed base. IBM does not have as much influence now, with a larger installed base, than they did 5 years ago. They have been pushed aside by Compaq. At least in the clone world. In summary - what a bad argument for the Amiga not getting any press. P.S. I now own an IBM clone, work on Apollo (HP now) workstations and will be buying an Amiga within the next coupla months. So C= has had at least some influence. john gay. No fancy sig.