Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!spool.mu.edu!uunet!cbmvax!daveh From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Re: Revised Amiga line Message-ID: <21183@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: 3 May 91 01:28:32 GMT References: <4702@orbit.cts.com> Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA Lines: 57 In article metahawk@itsgw.rpi.edu (Wayne G Rigby) writes: >In article <4702@orbit.cts.com> chucks@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Erik Funkenbusch) writes: >>(slab) design. my reasons for this are severalfold. MOST people who buy a >>500 over a 2000 do so because "I don't want to expand, so why should i pay for >>all those slots".... this machine could make heavy use of VLSI to reduce cost. >>although the scsi controller would add to the cost, there being no expansion >>would reduce cost more i would think making it a net cheaper cost to produce. >The cost of setting up the new VLSI chips wouldn't be very cheap, though. >>2) A redesigned 2000. Well, keep in mind that what everyone thinks of as VLSI generally isn't. Unless you're talking about some proposal to put all three Amiga chips on a single chip, there is no VLSI needed to build a more integrated A500 type machine. In fact, there's very little on an A500 anyway, since most of the extra TTL parts of the A1000 were pulled into Gary, which is a small gate array. Those new Macs don't use VLSI, either, they just use somewhat larger gate arrays, more along the lines of the A3000's. And surface mount packages, which makes for a smaller motherboard. As for expansion costs, it depends on what you are talking about. Four A3000 Zorro III slots probably add around $100 cost to the system, taking into account the cost of the Buster, bus buffers, backplane, connectors, PCB space on the motherboard, and extra power supply. Certainly no more. The cost of an A500 expansion edge is nearly indistinguishable from free, unless you shrank the PCB down to the point where that edge would cost significant PCB space. You don't pay for power supply size or buffering, because there isn't any extra. A Zorro II backplane in an A3000-type configuration would be a bit cheaper than the Zorro III implementation, it takes the same extra power supply and same backplane, but the cheap thin Buster and fewer buffers, as long as a 68000 is the heart of the system (the 68000 replaces a good portion of what Buster adds to convert 68030 signals into Zorro II signals). You could put the buffers and bus controller on the expansion card, but it would eat the bottom Zorro slot, there's absolutely no room there on the A3000. >I think Commodore has already developed its new lowend machine: the >A3000-16. The startup cost for any design is rather expensive, and >starting up a line for a low end machine just really isn't worth it. That's true, though no A3000 is going to be considered "low end" as long as there are A500s around. That's what you'd call an entry-level high end machine, or cheap-ass high end machine, depending on your terminology. In general, you only start new computers every once and awhile, and then spin off that developed technology at several levels. A significant amount of redesign of the A1000 led to both the A500 and the A2000. The A3000 was another new one, and the first spinoff is the A3000T (who knows if there will be more). A2500, A3000UX, 16MHz vs. 25MHz are really just bundling options, not new machines, of course. > Wayne Rigby -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.