Originally posted by ant512
Amiga Active was low on editoral, lacked depth and had too many illustrations and too little text. You could argue that this reflects the state of the Amiga market, and you'd probably be right, but I think that if it had been around in the heyday of the Amiga magazine, it'd probably have been comparable with Amiga Computing or Amiga User International. I'd have read it occasionally, but I can't imagine it being a substitute for CU or AF.
Andrew Corn low in editorial? FFS!!!! You are making the wrong comparison here. I do not judge AA in the history of Amiga journalism, I judge AA in the history of the Amiga market. What they came up for, was an amazing magazine in the most crucial point of the Amiga market. Do not forget, that few days before the first issue, Jim Collas (what a nice guys he was) was sucked by Gateway2000 and the new Amiga project was dead. Yet, they stayed loayal to their initial promise supported the Amiga market when everyone else was laughing at us.
BTW, Amiga active was criticised by people as for having too much text and few illustrations. How did you come up with the fact that they had little text? Personally, I thought it was just right for the days being.