Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!mcnc!taco!hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu!kdarling From: kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: New baseline Amiga? Message-ID: <1991Apr23.192316.21451@ncsu.edu> Date: 23 Apr 91 19:23:16 GMT References: <1991Apr12.155350.20444@convex.com> <20802@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1991Apr20.094721.19579@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <906@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM> Sender: news@ncsu.edu (USENET News System) Organization: North Carolina State University Lines: 21 dltaylor@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dan Taylor) writes: > I still think the A500, with 1M and clock is the ideal "baseline" Amiga. > However, if this A1000-like machine were built, I'd buy one to supplement > my A2500/30 (replacing my A1000), if it were priced between equivalent > A500 and A2000 systems. It may no longer be exactly relevant, but here's an interesting quote from a CIS conference with Jay Miner back in 1987: Q: Jay, what do you see for the future of the 1000... obsolescence or redesign for reduced cost? JM: The cost reduced 1000 was the biggest battle I fought (and lost) at Commodore. It still hurts. I hope they see the error of their ways soon, but I doubt it. They put a godawful lot of money into the 500 and 2000, and could have had a cost reduced 1000 to sell for $30 more than the 500 with 1/10 the budget; and shown that CBM could support a machine for more than one year. It makes me sad. Amazing sometimes, to look back. - kevin