From: aa399@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Len Stys)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:  REAL FALCON 030 SPECS
Date: 28 Sep 1992 22:52:45 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: aa399@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Len Stys)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc5.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, rws@dstos3.dsto.gov.au () says:

>In article <1992Sep24.180851.25046@tronsbox.xei.com>, dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com (Dennis Heffernan) writes:
>> In article <1992Sep23.114231.164614@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> rws@dstos3.dsto.gov.au writes:
>> |I certainly never predicted the TT would kill the Amiga 3000, and I'm not an
>> |atari owner.  Secondly it matters little that you have not seen a TT, and the
>> |world is far larger than the United States you know.
>> 
>> 	Yes, it DOES matter that I have never seen a TT.  What good is it if I
>> can't GET ONE?  What good is it if no one will sell me software for it?


I'll tell you what good the TT/030 is...

There is a growing number of TT software available (even though the computer
might not) that will run on the Falcon 030.  This means that the Falcon 030
already has sophisticated software for it when released.


>> 
>> 	And sure, the world's larger than the US...we're just the imporant
>> part.
>> 
>> |I don't know about the "rabid atari owners" but I certainly did not say that
>> |the falcon would kill the Amiga 4000.  I clearly stated that these machines are
>> |aimed at totally different markets altogether.
>> 
>> 	So we're back to the original comment...who cares about the Falcon?
>> You'd might as well complain that the A4000 doesn't stack up to a Crimson.
>
>So we're back to my original point, I have stated time and time again that the
>4000 and the falcon are not going to be competing they are aimed at different
>markets.  What I am saying and have always said is that commodore need a low
>end machine with falcon type specs.  The home market is very important to
>commodore and the only reason you have a 3000 let alone a 4000 is because the
>amiga has been kept alive by the 500.  


I agree with you COMPLETELY.

The A500 has kept Commodore alive, it wasn't the A2000 or A3000, it was the
A500.  And this machine was purchased by many as an entertainment system.

And what may shock Commodore even more is when people start purchasing the
Super Nintendo and Genesis instead of the A600 because it has better
graphics and sound capabilities.

The Falcon 030 is at least a few steps ahead of the SNES and Genesis.
And, Atari will most likely release a compatible "Jaguar" video game system
that will concentrate on taking more and more of the entertainment market.

Can the A600 successfully compete for the entertainment market in the next
two years?  Surely Commodore didn't release it for a year--only to scrap
it for another system.

And perhaps some day Commodore will release a "A600" with the AA chipset.

They will still need to play catch-up to Sega, Nintendo, and Atari where
entertainment is concerned.  This is because very few companies will develop
games for the limited A4000s...


>
>> 
>> |I think you could be wrong, but we will see.  Atari made the mistake with the
>> |TT of pretending they could crack the big time business users.  With this
>> |product they recognize that their strongest user base is the home/hobbiest,
>> |the ST is in a lot of homes around the world.  This is probably a fact that
>> |commodore would also be well advised to recognize.  Commodore need a cheap
>> |machine comparable to the falcon because let's be honest, most of their market
>> |is in the home also.
>> 
>> 	People are still buying 500's in droves.  Probably 600's too.  Why
>> should Commodore waste money trying to improve a product people already
>> like?  If the Falcon seriously cuts into their sales they'll toss together a
>> cheap '030 AGA machine and step on it.  But like I said before, Atari can't
>> push enough of these things out the door to do the job.  They can't provide
>> decent support for the damned Lynx at this point.

As I have already stated, Atari will have a jump on the A600 in the future.

If the A600 is sold at $399 and the Atari Falcon 030 is sold at $799,
75% of the people may buy the A600 while the other 25% buy the Falcon 030.
As time goes on, the Falcon 030 will cost less and less and more and more
entertainment manufacturers will produce games with great graphics and sound.

This number will quickly reverse with 75% of the people buying the Falcon 030
while 25% buy the A600.

And say Commodore does release an "aa" chipset low-cost computer.
Commodore will still have to get entertainment companies to make software
for it INSTEAD of making it for the already popular Falcon 030.

Do you get the point?

I predict that by January, 1994, the A600 is discontinued for a personal
computer similar to the Falcon 030.

If ANYONE purchases the A600 now, they are really dumb.


>
>People used to buy 64s in droves, atari 800s in droves, vic 20s in droves TRS
>80s in droves.  Just because people are buying things in droves now doesn't
>mean they always will.  The STs and Amiga 500s of this world killed off the
>eight bit market.  In answer to your question, commodore should spend money to
>improve something people like (A500/600) because when people see 030, DSP and
>65K colours they may not like it so much anymore.  They can't provide support
>for the "damned linx" but it's sold a million units to this point.

I agree with your statements to the point of Atari selling only a million
units of the Lynx.

I'm guessing that Atari has sold around 3 million unites already and will
sell another 2 million more by Christmas time if they play their cards
(and marketing) right.

>
>> 
>> dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com   ...uunet!tronsbox!dfrancis     GEnie: D.HEFFERNAN1
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> "I don't understand why you make such a big deal out of everything...haven't
>> you learned; if it's not happenning to me it's not important?" -Murphy Brown
>
>Russell.
>

--