From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: CBM is a game machine company
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: Amiga GRn V1.28 2/25/92 (Beta) by Mike Schwartz
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:55:50 PST
Organization: Amiga makes it possible

In article <30212@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>In article <mykes.2235@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>>OK, folks, the last 3 machines that CBM has released are all game machines.
>>[...] To be specific, the three machines are CDTV, A500+, and A600.
>
>Didn't CDTV come out before the A3000T?  I thought so...

Isn't the A3000T just a repackaged A3000?  What's it got besides more
slots and a bigger power supply and a nicer case?

>
>>Compare this to the progress the Amiga has made.  The A3000T represents
>>the high end, and it is cool.  But it could have (and should have) been
>>built in 1987.  
>
>Unfortunately, you couldn't get 25MHz '030s in '87.  I got some of the very
>first available (unmarked, room-temperature operation only) in April of '88.
>It would have been nice to jump into "bigger and better" faster, but the
>A3000 series was the second generation '030 system.  And I do stress _system_;
>if you just want a faster CPU like most of the PCs stress, you can use the
>Coprocessor slot in the A2000 and have your high end machine.
>

In '87, a 16MHz 020 system was eminently possible.  It would also be better,
for me the end user, to put an 040 in a cheaper 020 system than into a
more expensive 030 system.  The 030 may as well not be there (after adding
the 040).

>>In 1987, Apple was doing 256 color hires, DIG, and 68020 based computers at 
>>their high-end and those machines cost then what the A3000T costs NOW.  
>
>Apple's Mac IIs went for $5,000+ when they hit the street.  Of course, the
>A2000/20 wasn't too far behind when it came out in '88.  And you kind of got
>it backwards up there -- Apple had 256 color hires specifically because they
>had RTG from the beginning.  That's analogous to the Amiga's DMA driven I/O
>and multitasking, the software enables the hardware.  Mac's QuickDraw was
>its best feature.  A Mac video card is a slam-dunk design; all you need is
>visable memory, it's simple than the A3000's Amber chip.  You got decent
>graphics, but no horsepower.
>

I had one of the first few Mac II's.  The Mac did NOT have RTG until they
did  ColorQuickDraw.  It took a new OS with bigger (2x) ROMs to make RTG
work.  It is not something that the other Macs ever had (color capability).

>>I wouldn't go near the low-end Amigas now, except to use as a game
>>machine.  
>
>You don't think there are kids out there who want something more than just a
>game system?  I know I sure did when I spent $1200 for a 16K character and
>cassette based Exidy Sorcerer back in '79, even though game machines were
>considerably less expensive.  Nowadays I have my A3000, I have no need for an
>A600.  But you and I are about as far from the typical home computer shopper
>as anyone gets.
>

Comparing 1979 computing technology with 1992 technology is a losing 
proposition.  Back in '79, you couldn't get an Apple II, even.

>>At the high-end, the A3000 is becoming obsolete, due to the availability of 
>>much faster computers with better graphics capabilities.  
>
>There's that misconception again...  The existence of something in some way 
>better doesn't take away from what's already good.  If it doesn't do the job
>you got it for, it was obselete before you got it, for that one job.  If it
>still does the job to your satisfaction, it's not obselete no matter what else
>is around.  I'm typing this in my office on an A2500/30.  I could have a much
>better system if I wanted one, for free, since we make the things.  I have no
>need for a better system here; extra CPU cycles would pretty much go to waste
>for the email, wordprocessing, and CAD work I use this for.  I already have too
>much memory (21 Megabytes), thanks to a DKB A2632 board.  
>

It isn't a misconception.  Where's the cheap VGA card I can get for it (HAM-E
isn't it :) ?  Am I going to get a cheap motherboard swap to support 32 bit
chipsets down the road?

The problem (for me) is that the products I make get larger and larger as
the years go on.  I was able to do C64 programs on the C64.  I can't do
Amiga programs on the C64 and make a living at it.  The A3000 becomes obsolete
when I can't emulate the video modes of cheapo game consoles like the
SNES and Genesis.  It becomes obsolete when the target machines I compile
for are bigger and faster than the Amiga (i.e. 600).  A 4x faster CPU
sure helps me assemble 2 Meg ROM images faster than the 030 does...

>>This only leaves Unix boxes.  As much as I hate Unix, I am beginning to 
>>believe that is the direction I will end up going.
>
>If you're a high powered hard core computer type, UNIX may be the way.  I
>have no use for it at home.  Here, I could use a Sun or HP/Apollo on my desk,
>but mainly because those are the systems that support our EE CAD software,
>there's no need for higher resolutions or faster processors to do most of this 
>job -- the Apollos around here are slower than the A3000 in the first place
>(in fact, they are A[pollo]3000s), and you have your choice of monochrome or 
>color in 1024x768, roughly the Moniterm resolution. 
>

I have absolutely no like of unix in any way.  However, I see the hardware
in a $7000 INDIGO and compare that with the hardware in my $7000 A3000 and
I drool (wiping my face right now even :)  4x faster CPU (at least), blinding
disk access speed (grep on a few thousand files is near instant), 16x more
colors, 16-bit DAC, C++ programs can do FFTs and do 3D rotating graphics
while sampling 44KHz in realtime, etc.  It used to be that the Amiga cost
an order of magnitude less, not so anymore.

>>But I'm going to need a 2nd mortgage on my house to afford the kind
>>of computer I feel I need :(
>
>Isn't there some saying about how the more you learn about doing something, the
>less satisfied you're going to be doing that.  Beginners are the happiest of
>all.  And an A600 with hard disk is certainly more than enough computer for a
>beginning computer user.  I would have traded my Exidy, my camera system, my
>bicycle, and my sea shell collection for something like that back in '79.

Again, comparing with 1979 technology is not relevent.  Compared to the IBM
370 I used in 1973, the A3000 is better, so what's the point?

--
Author of Amiga GRn, MailMinder, Budokan, Beyond Dark Castle, Dark Castle,
and Genesis Dick Tracy and Marble Madness.
Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
1124 Fremont Ave.
Los Altos, CA 94024