Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!pyramid!decwrl!sun!cmcmanis From: cmcmanis@sun.uucp (Chuck McManis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Future Amigas & suggestions (Very Long) Message-ID: <9304@sun.uucp> Date: Fri, 14-Nov-86 21:30:14 EST Article-I.D.: sun.9304 Posted: Fri Nov 14 21:30:14 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 15-Nov-86 23:56:17 EST References: <320@plx.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Lines: 150 [..reaching the tongs into the flaming boiler....] I can't find the original reference but these are comments on Ed's comments so that shouldn't be to much of a problem. >> In summary, I don't believe Commodore should even think about directly >> competing in the workstation market - the support would be too expensive. > >In summary, I don't believe Commodore has ever *SERIOUSLY* thought about >competing in *ANY* market. Harumph! I think if you talk to Commodore you would find that they do indeed have some definite ideas about where their market is but what generally seems be the case is that the Amiga got rushed out the door because Commodore had cash flow problems. This has caused a somewhat jumbled view of the product in the market place. Had they been able to afford to make the last 12 months a "beta and developing" phase and introduced it today it would make a much better impression I am sure. As far as I know Commodore is successfully penetrating the graphics arts markets, video effects market, and home computer market. >> What Commodore seems to be doing from the rumors makes sense - improve what >> they have! Yes it will compete with what's being sold now but what's being >> sold now might not go on being sold forever. I.e., new machines REPLACE, >> not compete with, the existing ones. I doubt, for example, if Apple sells >> too many basic Macintoshes anymore. The Mac Plus is a much better machine. > >You're missing the point. Apple allowed those folks who bought the early >128K "Wimp-Mac" the opportunity to upgrade their systems rather than junk >them. Amiga has no such plans. No Ed, I think you have missed the point. First, Amigas base machine is 256K, and it is easily and inexpensively upgraded to 512K. The Mac upgrade to 512K was $900 when it came out. With $900 you can upgrade an Amiga to 2.5 Meg. Anyone can upgrade their Amiga today, everyone seems so paranoid about the "next Amiga" why? No one seems paranoid about the "next Mac". All this crap about a 1024 X 1024 68020 machine is just that crap. Have you gone out and priced 1024 X 1024 color monitors? Can you say $2000 wholesale? Can you say $10,000 list price? Who cares? There are machines like that out their now, and you could probably run TriPos on them, big deal. You cannot produce such a machine as cheaply as an Atari or an Amiga so why worry. The only things Commodore could concievably improve without significantly increasing costs would be memory size and put in a 68010. You can do that to an A1000. Finally, your last statement is probably the most perplexing, did someone at Amiga tell you that a) There would be a more powerful machine, and b) they would not offer an opportunity to upgrade them, or did you just believe this to be true? >> Commodore is in the home and personal computer business, as I see it, and not >> the "micro-mini" or workstation market. > >If so, why are "Hackers & Engineers" so endeared to the product? >Why is there a *DEARTH* of decent Productivity tools and an overabundance >of games and obscure languages (FORTH etc.) no spreadsheets, no WYSIWIG >wordprocessors, no affordable Hard Disks. Your making statements based on some preconcieved standards. I assume from your previous postings that those standards are an IBM PC/XT with a 10Meg hard disk. The answer to your first question is because for the first time in the United States there is an inexpensive microbased machine that has a *real* operating system. (My standard of reference here is the definition of an operating system as put forth by the "Operating System Fundamentals" by Wiley Press Publ.) It actually manages resources, is not artifically limited to a certain kind of hardware, can equally manage bigger and better hardware, and has a real interface to it. My biggest complaint with CP/M and MS-DOS was the fact that they are really just a collection of subroutines that are always in memory and can be called to talk to the hardware. An operating system is a resident program that you send requests for resources to and it allocates them for you and passes them back. As for your second question the answer is *TIME* and *TOOLS*. To write a decent WYSIWYG editor or a fast spreadsheet takes a lot of time and even better tools. And why games you ask? Because they can be written quickly with a minimum of tools and generate revenue now. They also teach the programmers what the hardware can do and what they must do themselves. Those obscure languages like Forth can be used to write Fast spreadsheets. And affordable hard disks? $1500 isn't affordable? I would submit that is is impossible to create a going concern that can make 20 megabyte hard disks for less than that. This isn't Amiga's fault, this is economies of scale. If you sell hard disks to 1% of the IBM PC market then you have sold 60,000 hard disks. If you sell to 1% of the Amiga market you have sold 1,000 hard disks. Call up Seagate and ask them for prices based on 1000 units and 60,000 units. Then do the same for printed circuit boards. >The personal computer marketplace demands THREE (count 'em 3) basic >features to insure a product's success: > > (1) Spreadsheets > a. IBM has Lotus. > b. Mac has EXCEL. > c. AMIGA has MAXIPLAN which was written in C (READ: shit!) > or VIP which ignores all the wonderful hardware. > > (2) Word Processing > a. IBM practically defined it with Wordstar. > b. Mac did it one better with the Laserwriter & WYSIWIG. > c. AMIGA is nonexistent. > > (3) A comittment to keeping the product alive > a. The IBM PC has been around for eons. > b. The Apple ][ lives on and the Mac has been > here for about 4 years. > c. AMIGA is about a year old and will be > "Replaced" (you said it, I didn't) in > a few months. > My only comment to this is that the Mac and the IBM PC have both been around for 4 or more years. If you believe it is possible to create a Lotus or Excel or Wordstar or Word in one year on a new machine you are very naive. The *only* reason wordstar came out when it did was due to the 8080 -> 8086 translator that Intel was selling. Prior to that MicroPro had spent *years* developing it on CP/M. Apple made a special commitment to getting MacPaint and MacWrite out for the Mac before they shipped, if Commodore wasn't so low on funds maybe they could have done that too, as it stands Deluxe Paint literally *blows* away MacPaint, and Aegis Draw+ does the same for MacDraw, is there a MacWrite equivalent? Not really, although NotePad does some of the same stuff (multiple fonts mostly). As for your last comment the Amiga A1000 *may* be supplanted by a different box by I seriously doubt it would be as major as you make it sound. No more than the Mac 512e is replacing the Mac 512, or the Apple ][e is replaceing the Apple II or the IBM PC/XT is replacing the PC. Lastly, you mention Commitment to a product. Hasn't the Commodore 64 been around for years, still supported, still produced. Yes there is a fancier Commodore 128 but the 64 lives on. Isn't that commitment enough? (Oh and there are suprisingly good spread sheets and word processors available for the Commodore 64 given the limitations in speed, memory, and disk space, check out GEOS sometime) >So how does AMIGA stack up? Remember, the buying public do drowning and has begun to focus on the more germane aspects of getting a computer sold to the public. Since they have the 'better mousetrap' I think they will succeed. >Nuff Said! Amen! >Ed Chaban (former AMIGA owner!) >Plexus Computers Inc. >Phone: (408) 943-2226 >Net: sun!plx!ed Chuck McManis (current AMIGA owner!) Sun Microsystems Inc Phone: (415) 691-4312 Net: sun!cmcmanis -- --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.