From: tmc@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Tim Ciceran)
Subject: RTG vs. AGA (was Is ECS dead?)
Organization: Brock University, St. Catharines Ontario
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 19:13:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.205837.22859@clipper.ingr.com> kontos@clipper.ingr.com
(Thorne Kontos) writes:
 
>     With the introduction of the AGA chipset (Available only for the
>A4000, and the A1200), it seems to me that anything that is pre-AGA
>will pretty much end up the way of my original Apple ][+...

And yet the same situation will arise with the AGA chipset, which has an
even more limited lifespan. Once again, it's not the hardware which
is creating the problem, it's the OS. Once RTG arrives, this situation
will be a non-issue.

>its just that I now question who will continue to develop for anything
>not AGA-based. Certainly not the top developers whose packages are
>considered a must for productivity.

Under 3.0, the display database makes it incredibly easy to develop on the
basis of the graphics capabilities of the host machine. It's merely a
matter of selecting the resolution and number of colours. There's 
absolutely no reason that downward compatibility cannot be guaranteed.
You merely have more colours at your disposal.

>    One could draw the analogy that Commodore is pulling off one of the
>best scams to hit the industry in a long time...
>C= is basically asking its 4 million+ user base to upgrade their hardware
>system. My real question here is, just how many will open their mouths
>and swallow the bait?

I don't see this as problematic at all. You have to sustain your market
by introducing improved products, regardless of whether you're Apple, CBM
or IBM. Retrofitting existing platforms is a losing proposition.

>    Consider the following:
>A4000 - Pricey compared to a clone...

Isn't everything? 

>A4000 - IDE, not SCSI...be prepared to sell off your old peripherals
>        until C= comes out with the SCSI adapter card (Scratch one
>        expansion slot)

I agree to an extent, but how many people take full advantage of SCSI on
their existing platforms? IDE is a reasonable compromise for most.

>A4000 - No sound improvement (Scratch one expansion slot)

From what I hear, the DSP can be plugged into the daughterboard.

>Other future problems...No C++ (The industry leaders rant and rave about
>object oriented programming, but fail to realize that writing software
>is still a creative process.)

Good point. OOP is becoming essential in an even-oriented GUI
environment. We could certainly use SAS C++ or Objective C.

>No hardware manual for the AGA chipset. This is still very upsetting to me
>when one takes into account that most Amiga users are a slight cut above
>the clone users and bought the Amiga for its ability to hit the hardware.

I disagree entirely. Releasing the AGA chipset documentation will be more
of a regressive move than anything. If RTG is to become a reality,
banging on the hardware is out of the question. I'm sure most people would
prefer to see their software work with alternative graphics systems
immediately.  

>It was the demos that first made people buy the A500 at a time when most
>clones were still in their technological diapers...

What's preventing someone from deciphering the AGA code? It's inevitable 
that the AGA registers will be hacked and well known in the near future.

>So where does this leave the non-AGA machines? I'll make a small prediction
>and say they will rapidly become extinct...(Except for toaster-based
>system whose life-expectancy will last only until Newtek comes out with
>an AGA-based toaster...

I'll make a prediction that RTG will be released and graphics coprocessors
will become increasingly more capable and cheaper than custom chipsets.
Software will seamlessly access increased resolutions and palettes and
graphics enhancements will become modular for ZorroII+ machines.