Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!cbmvax!andy From: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: CBM and upgrade paths Message-ID: <2696@cbmvax.UUCP> Date: Fri, 6-Nov-87 13:14:23 EST Article-I.D.: cbmvax.2696 Posted: Fri Nov 6 13:14:23 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 8-Nov-87 16:40:44 EST References: <8711040542.AA29099@violet.berkeley.edu> Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA Lines: 195 In article <8711040542.AA29099@violet.berkeley.edu> mwm@VIOLET.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike Meyer, My watch has windows) writes: >Yet another round of bitching at CBM about their total lack of an >upgrade path. > >Let's get to the important thing first. I claimed that a posting from >a CBM employee asking people to contemplate what the A1000->A2000 >upgrade deal means was scary, because so contemplating leads to the >conclusion that CBM is going to do something *truly* nasty to A1000 >owners. > >That was weeks ago. I've gotten private mail from CBM employees, and >most of the CBM names seen on the net have replied. > >None - NOT ONE - has said that no such thing was planned. They haven't >even used the cop-out "To the best of my knowledge, no such thing is >planned." Any of you CBM people care to say that? Better yet, you want >to provide an "insurance" bet on such? > >The best that came from them was when I postulated a specific series >of events. Dave said "it can't happen." The key point was: > ><< Any hardware upgrade would have to happen to ALL systems out ><< there if it were to be made a viable required upgrade. > Well, lets look at the issues/incompatibilities: They are: 1) Form factor of Zorro I vs Zorro II First, I still can't get over that you're flaming about it now, over a year after it was announced. Anyway... By now it has been pointed out, at length that the cards are electrically/logically compatible. The thing that changed was the form factor between Zorro I and Zorro II. So now you know that you *can* a) use Zorro I and Zorro II and SOTS cards on an A1000 b) use Zorro I and Zorro II and SOTS cards on an A2000 c) use Zorro I and Zorro II and SOTS cards on an A500 I'm not speculating here...I've personally done it. Now, you may dislike the methods used to connect. That's your right. (I don't like leaving the cover off the A2000 either) But the point is, there *is* an expansion path of sorts. It shouldn't matter to you that the path depends on the efforts of 3rd party hardware vendors like Microbotics or ASDG. 2) Coprocessor slot on A2000 Neither the A500 or the A1000 has one of these. Think of it was a new feature of the A2000. 2) Video slot on A2000 3) ROM vs WCS Here we get into an interesting question. The A1000 is equipped with 256K of ram, called the Writable Control Store. Cost/Power/User demand/and other issues prompted us to replace the WCS with ROM. So far, so good. Because the WCS is designed to hold a ROM image, you will always be able to copy the ROM onto a disk, and boot an A1000. Now, here's the interesting part... the address space for the ROM is 512K. What if we were to take advantage of this, and start putting in 512K of ROM into the A500 and the A2000 ? What would happen to the A1000 owners ? Well, I'll tell you. There are two possibilities. One is we make the additional modules available as Workbench disk loaded modules. This would mean the A1000 owner could always remain up to date on the software, while retaining the WCS. The other possibility is for the A1000 owner to *put ROMs into the A1000*. Yes, that's right. Just either remove the WCS, or remap it to another address to use as RAM, and put in the A500/A2000 ROMs. Then your A1000 will be just like the others, at a slight cost in flexibility. Is there much of a problem ? I think not. 4) Fat Agnus enhancements Here's the tough one. While it may be possibly to add a Fat Agnus to an A1000, I wouldn't count on it. Improvements to Fat Agnus probably (note I say probably) won't be carried back to original Agnus. This may cause problems. On the other hand, the Sun 1 blitter isn't compatible with the Sun 2 blitter or the Sun 3 blitter, and this 'feels' to me to be a similar situation. >Most of the replies from CBM on the net were just "Shut up" in more or >less (mostly more) polite tones. Hey, not from me. I've tried to respond to your postings with facts! >I agree, it should be viable on all systems. But tell me about the KS >1.2 that's now required for new software,or the "optional" 256K of >ram (that is required for the blasted TUTORIAL shipped by CBM!!!). >Given that track record, what assurance do we have that CBM won't do >it again, this time with something that won't run on an A1000? I can't believe that *you* actually said this. My jaw drops in disbeief! You are kidding, right ? Or did you mean something different ? Are you saying that you'd like the software authors shouldn't use the new features of an OS ??? Is that really what you mean ? I'm speechless! You're saying that enhancements should never be added because someone *might use them* ? BTW, if you insist that all programs be written to support the the minimum configuration your expansion problems would be solved. Again, do you really mean this, or are you just checking if anyones reading what you're typing ? >CBM is trying to pretend that the >customers with old hardware don't exist, with the exception of trying >to turn them into customers with new hardware. You can only thing this if you ignore everything I've been posting in response to you. >And from "the B2000 guy" himself, we hear: > ><< So you don't REALLY have to upgrade to stay in the Amiga family and ><< use nearly every software product you can expect for this generation. > ^^^^^^ ^^^^^ > >Ah, so you won't be able to run *all* A2000/A500 software on the >A1000? Neat, really neat. Of course, it's only natural for a company >to junk an old software standard after junking an old hardware >standard. This is not a real problem. Dave was no doubt commenting on the imaginative ways that software authors find to break the rules and ensure compatibility problems. (Usually these are called bugs :-) ) Everyone has them. For instance, lets say someone calls ROM routines through the image at F80000. Directly. This person is commiting 2 no-nos...calling ROM routines directly, and calling at the incorrect address. If different ROM ever appears in the shadow area, their program will break. We had a different one just recently...Alert assumed that ExecBase would be down low. (An incorrect assumption, ie bug). Its things like these that Dave was taking about. Moving on to SOTS as an issue: ><< I think the time to drop SOTS was before SOTS existed. > >Of course, this is in the same message as: > ><< Want to run any SOTS box for the A1000 on the A500, add a power supply ><< and a short extender. >Or: "SOTS is lousy, and we should never have done it. But we do have a >brand new SOTS machine if you really want it." Unfortunately, the SOTS >interface is on the *wrong bloody machine*. No, I think you're entirely wrong. The expansive machine should have the card cage. Why ? Because its more expensive to put in a card cage. Second, its not a SOTS interface. It was meant to interface to an expansion BOX, or *ONE* SOTS. Just because we've experienced problems with SOTS is no reason for us not to tell you, a SOTS person, how to make it work with an A500 or an A2000. If you don't want to know, fine, come right out and say so. But why flame at people expressing their opinions, who then go on and try to help anyway ? >It's because the market for >cards to plug into my expansion box is drying up, there probably won't >be any new cards, and CBM is apparently up to something nasty. That, >coupled with lack of any kind of upgrade path is what the problem is. Only because you don't want to adopt any of the solutions offered to you. (only one of which involves changing machines) (BTW, its fairly easy to put an extended cover on an A2000 to keep dust off) >The bottom line is I made a stupid mistake. I assumed that a company >marketing a serious computer would act like a serious computer >company, even if they'd only sold toys in the past. The bottom line really sounds like you've already made up your mind, no amount of help or advice will change it. Which is a shame. >