Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cbmvax!daveh From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware Subject: Re: Is the Amiga a BIG Atari 800? (was Re: Hardware Idiots ? Message-ID: <22121@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: 3 Jun 91 16:31:25 GMT References: Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA Lines: 35 In article c506634@umcvmb.missouri.edu (Eric Edwards) writes: >In article <22009@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >Hmmm. AmigaDOS as we know it, was developed after Commodore bought Amiga, >Inc. and was, as I understand it, one of Commodore's big contributions. Keep in mind that the DOS subsystem (eg, AmigaDOS, "dos.library", CLI, etc.) was just about the last piece to go in place. This did happen after C= bought Amiga, though the action mainly took place between Amiga in Los Gatos and Metacomco in England. >It, along with things like ZorroII, came out of Commodore, not Amiga, Inc. The Zorro II specification was completed after Commodore bought Amiga, but it was done in Los Gatos. Commodore folks did the later systems work: A500, A2000, A2500, A3000, and Zorro III. There are still a few people from the Los Gatos gang consulting here and there in software and chip design, but the all current Amiga work is centered in West Chester at Commodore. >If they had not run into financial trouble, what kind of OS did J. Miner >and the gang at Amiga, Inc. have in mind for the Loraine? Again, the OS they were working on is what we got. The DOS related components are different. Andy Finkel wrote an article for Amiga Transactor about the original "CAOS" DOS subsystem. >Did they intend for it to be a bit Atari 800? Nothing of the kind. CAOS was apparently more advanced than AmigaDOS in some ways. -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "This is my mistake. Let me make it good." -R.E.M.