Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!topaz.rutgers.edu!lachac
From: lachac@topaz.rutgers.edu (Gerard Lachac)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Yet more A1000->A2000 upgrade questions
Message-ID: <15385@topaz.rutgers.edu>
Date: Wed, 7-Oct-87 10:09:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: topaz.15385
Posted: Wed Oct  7 10:09:53 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 10-Oct-87 07:51:50 EDT
References: <2398@cbmvax.UUCP> <2342@masscomp.UUCP> <4328@hplabsb.UUCP>
Reply-To: lachac@topaz.rutgers.edu (Gerard Lachac)
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 24

In article <4328@hplabsb.UUCP> pooley@hplabsb.UUCP (Chuck Pooley) writes:

>  Frankly I don't see how keeping the keyboard
>inside the same box as the rest of the system is an "improvement".


Nobody ever claimed that the A500 all-in-one design was an "improvement".
The idea behind the A500 was to produce a cost-effective ("cheap") member
of the Amiga family.  Way back when the Amiga was introduced, I remember 
reading about the "Family" concept in numerous magazines.

Look at the facts.  CBM wants to grab the consumer market again.  The general
consumer doesn't look at detachable keyboard, etc.  They look at price.
Detachable keybards cost more money, cable, shielding etc.  I am impressed
with the workmanship that went into the A500.  A well thought out design.




-- 
		"Truth is false and logic lost..."
					- Neil Peart
	(who at the time didn't realize he was talking about RU)
lachac@topaz.rutgers.edu <--------OR--------> {seismo|ames}!rutgers!topaz!lachac