Was anyone else disappointed with the A1200?

[TCD]

Originally Posted by grond

The Next computer apparently was used because Carmack liked it and had access to one and not for economic reasons.

You can read why he bought NeXT machines for the company for example here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2...her-favorites/ (indeed not for economic reasons).

[Bren McGuire]

i was never disappointed with any Amiga i had that is a really sad way of seeing things i was glad and thankful that i had a capable computer i could do so much with

i am not going to read 150 rambling pages but i really dont understand all this "what if" stuff that happens in these forums can't you just enjoy Amiga computing? i thought that's what we were here for

[desiv]

Originally Posted by grond

The video toaster was very unlikely to be used to play Doom, though. It was a special purpose device that wasn't even marketed as an Amiga.

That's because it wasn't an Amiga. :-)
It was a card (or series of them) that would get installed into an Amiga.
Tho I do believe they eventually sold a package with the whole kit together too.
Had a friend who had one in his A2000, and he didn't work in video at all.
Just thought it was fun to play with. (And he had money... ;-)

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by sokolovic

Around 25 000 A3000 and A4000 for Germany alone by the end of Commodore.
Considering how much the video toaster was popular un the US, it isn't unreasonable to thinks that there were a lot more in the US (that also explain also why US mades Amiga games were almost all HD and expansions friendly).
Probably more 030 Amiga in the market than for the whole Next range.

I'd say very few of those A3000s and A4000s were being used for games, even compared to PCs at similar price points. US Amiga games mostly being hard-drive installable and accelerator-friendly is more a function of them mostly being conversions of PC games designed around hard drives and processors faster than 7Mhz (or even 14Mhz in many cases). The good American programmers had mostly moved on from the Amiga by then, compare the performance of most US Amiga games of the 90s to European-coded titles in the same genre and the European one usually performs better on like-for-like hardware (though, yes, American games more often made use of faster systems)

By the 90s, American players used consoles for action games and PCs for strategy / sim / adventure games - the NES especially was much bigger there than in Europe. Hence, America made very few 2D action games for computers (Wings is about the last one, and that's stretching the definition- of an 'action' game) even on the PC there was only really the shareware stuff from the likes of Apogee and Epic Megagames.

[sokolovic]

Yep. I believe people with a Video toaster knew that there was an Amiga underlying there and weren't using it exclusively for video editing.
As I said before, most US games were calibrated for expanded Amiga, probably because many US Amiga user had an expanded Amiga, not a stock A500.

EDIT, in response to Megalomaniac, you're probably right, because History is what it is. But the number of expanded Amigas wasn't that negligeable, that's all.

[Turrican_3]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The consoles were not more capable. All they could do play certain types of games, not any of the other stuff the Amiga could do. And while the consoles themselves were cheap, the games weren't. Consoles were for gamers who didn't have a brain.

With all due respect, I don't believe it is really necessary to insult people who don't share your exact same point of view.

Having said that, while I definitely appreciated - and still do! - that it was much more than just a console with a keyboard, I'd argue it's a very well known fact the Amiga was mostly popular because it was an excellent gaming machine (there's a reason the best selling model by an extremely long margin is the A500), and from a strictly gamer perspective stating the competition was not more capable is not fair nor factual if you ask me, at least seeing what a Megadrive and the Super Famicom could do.

Last but not least, the price console games were being sold for isn't really relevant here; or, it could be argued it was actually very telling and among the reasons the Amiga market failed to prove its long term sustainability, considering we're often talking about TWO orders of magnitude smaller sales (despite just one order of magnitude difference in the installed base - I am not aware of any million seller Amiga game but I understand there's a distinct lack of reliable sources here... heck we're still unsure exactly how many Amigas were actually sold, aren't we?)

[aeberbach]

Consoles were better at some things and worse than others.

Didn't you guys grow out of this 30 years ago? I was going to reply to a thread about the Mac LC, elsewhere, today, but what's the point? People with nothing better to do would find reasons why that sad little pile of compromise was better than any modern machine.

"Never wrestle with a pig - you both get dirty, and the pig enjoys it." Various wise people have this quote attributed to them, but although none agree who actually said it, all agree that person was wise. I just can't believe we'er up to 150 pages here.

[oscar_ates]

If you think about a banker with 100s of millions of dollars in pocket Irvin Gould, and another banker/lawyer Mehdi Ali both have zero computer/tech knowledge and put them on top management positions of Commodore, you will understand why CDTV, C64GS, A600 and AGA were disappointments and flops.

[Turrican_3]

Originally Posted by aeberbach

Consoles were better at some things and worse than others.

That's a far more reasonable stance if you ask me!

[Bren McGuire]

my thoughts frequently when going through these boards especially when it gets down to the amiga fan fiction fantasy realm

Originally Posted by aeberbach

Didn't you guys grow out of this 30 years ago?

[TEG]

Originally Posted by oscar_ates

If you think about a banker with 100s of millions of dollars in pocket Irvin Gould, and another banker/lawyer Mehdi Ali both have zero computer/tech knowledge and put them on top management positions of Commodore, you will understand why CDTV, C64GS, A600 and AGA were disappointments and flops.

I think the age of Gould played a role too. Not easy to have the same motivation when you're years old than in the middle of your life. What we lack of knowledge, is about the team around him. Was he mostly alone? What was the influences around him?

If someone have seen some articles on him, it would be interesting to point them out.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by oscar_ates

If you think about a banker with 100s of millions of dollars in pocket Irvin Gould, and another banker/lawyer Mehdi Ali both have zero computer/tech knowledge and put them on top management positions of Commodore, you will understand why CDTV, C64GS, A600 and AGA were disappointments and flops.

So tell me, which contemporary home computer models from other manufacturers were not 'disappointments and flops'.

The problem with your theory is that we have a very good idea of what Commodore would have produced if Gould wasn't in charge. In 1984 Jack Tramiel took Commodore's best engineers with him and built the home computer he wanted with the ST, which was in many ways very similar to the Amiga. ST sales started off strong but by 1992 the Amiga was outselling it 3.5:1. The Falcon was introduced in 1992 at almost the same time as the A1200. Sales were very poor and Atari killed it a year later. This despite Tramiel and his sons having considerable computer/tech knowledge.

Gould didn't know much about computers but his engineers did, and he gave them a fairly free reign to design what they wanted. That was one of the things Mehdi Ali wasn't happy with. He forced the engineers to come up with firm plans for marketable machines. If it wasn't for him they probably would have pissed away another 2-3 years on AAA and expensive machines that were out of reach of the average home computer buyer.

But as I have said before in the end it wouldn't matter what Commodore produced. It could be the most wonderful home computer in the universe and people would still buy PCs because that's where the action was. Amiga fans were bound to be disappointed by any new machine because it was 'just more of the same' ie. an Amiga, whereas PC's were exciting because they were different. In the Amiga's best year, 1991, it achieved 5.5% market share, while PCs had 77%. Most of those PCs were business machines but they were used to play games on too. By 1994 PCs had 91% of the market and everything else was being squeezed out. Even Apple was losing market share despite the Mac having a strong business and creative pedigree, and despite offering several more powerful and cheaper new models.

Reviewing the posts here I see a trend of seasoned Amiga fans being 'disappointed' by the A1200 because it didn't represent a paradigm shift like the original Amiga did, whereas those who were introduced to it later were more satisfied. This is just the same old 'familiarity breeds contempt' effect that occurs everywhere. It says more about the users than the machines.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Reviewing the posts here I see a trend of seasoned Amiga fans being 'disappointed' by the A1200 because it didn't represent a paradigm shift like the original Amiga did, whereas those who were introduced to it later were more satisfied. This is just the same old 'familiarity breeds contempt' effect that occurs everywhere. It says more about the users than the machines.

It's quite amazing how you have managed to completely avoid responding to being called out for insulting console owners as "having no brain" (which coincidentially also insults a large chunk of Amiga userbase, since we liked the same games), and your only offering is just more old tripe about how Amiga users are an ungrateful and ignorant lot for not recognizing A1200 brilliance.

Stay classy, eh.

[TEG]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

So tell me, which contemporary home computer models from other manufacturers were not 'disappointments and flops'.

Apple MacBook Pro with M3 Apple processor. The first processor including technologie for AI. October 30 2023.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The problem with your theory is that we have a very good idea of what Commodore would have produced if Gould wasn't in charge. In 1984 Jack Tramiel took Commodore's best engineers with him and built the home computer he wanted with the ST, which was in many ways very similar to the Amiga. ST sales started off strong but by 1992 the Amiga was outselling it 3.5:1. The Falcon was introduced in 1992 at almost the same time as the A1200. Sales were very poor and Atari killed it a year later. This despite Tramiel and his sons having considerable computer/tech knowledge

There was a fundamental difference between the Atari line and the Amiga/Mac one: the OS.

An huge ecosystem was produced for the Amiga. Especially there was a ton of free software which mean a large community supporting the machines. And it's why the Amiga is somewhat still alive. Example:

20 Dec 2023 : Aamp 2.1
This package offers a development environment on your Amiga, with which you can create and test your own web projects. Similar to the well-known XAMPP package for Linux and Windows, it contains the HTTP (web) server "Apache" with compiled-in support for the scripting language "PHP" (version 8.0.28 and 5.2.10) and the database server "MySQL" version 5.5.10. The PHP development server (PHP 8 only) and the Subversion server "svnserve" are also included.
http://os4depot.net/?function=showfi.../misc/aamp.lha

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Gould didn't know much about computers but his engineers did, and he gave them a fairly free reign to design what they wanted. That was one of the things Mehdi Ali wasn't happy with. He forced the engineers to come up with firm plans for marketable machines. If it wasn't for him they probably would have pissed away another 2-3 years on AAA and expensive machines that were out of reach of the average home computer buyer.

Yeah but what was forced to be included in the plans? And more importantly for a team, did the man have unanimous support? Was he a visionary? At least a leader? Or did he have its own agenda?


Commodore employees "celebrating" Mehdi Ali name. Extract from "The Deathbed Vigil and other tales of digital angst".

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

But as I have said before in the end it wouldn't matter what Commodore produced. It could be the most wonderful home computer in the universe and people would still buy PCs because that's where the action was. Amiga fans were bound to be disappointed by any new machine because it was 'just more of the same' ie. an Amiga, whereas PC's were exciting because they were different. In the Amiga's best year, 1991, it achieved 5.5% market share, while PCs had 77%. Most of those PCs were business machines but they were used to play games on too. By 1994 PCs had 91% of the market and everything else was being squeezed out. Even Apple was losing market share despite the Mac having a strong business and creative pedigree, and despite offering several more powerful and cheaper new models.

As usual, you read the history as if the futur is something settled. Sure that if no other forces than the PC was in existance, the PC was what everyone wanted. If at a point of time there's no other choices, you use the only solution available. And not only the other option should exist but must be made know to those who need it.

The stakes was not "Amiga fans" but the world we live in.

[TEG]

A quote about the perception of Commodore management from an Apple point of view:

Gassée both admired and feared Commodore Amiga during his tenure at Apple. "We were really scared of the Amiga," he says. "Fortunately, Irving Gould helped Apple by running Commodore into the ground."

Source : Amazing Computing, November 1996, Commodore: The Final Years.
Jean-Louis Gassée Wikipedia entry : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Louis_Gass%C3%A9e

[TCD]

Interesting quote. The market shares from 1991 come from this source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market...%E2%80%931995)

Amiga was about half of the Macintosh in 1991, but it is really interesting to see the development from that point onward.

[TEG]

Very interesting chart, thanks for the link.

[Edit]
Notice the PET sales dropping to 0 in 1983, letting Commodore without a professional solution to offer to the market and so letting the Apple II fill the blank. So Apple brand was more and more associated with serious work while Commodore was losing ground on this side.

The management was already chaotic. Why a "PET machine" based on the C64 hardware was not quickly release to have something to offer to the educational market and so to the foundations for the futur of the brand perception?

For each year, it would be interesting to know of how many engineers were in the Apple team. And of course the CBM one to compare, knowing that the original Amiga team brains had flew away by 1987 I think.

[TEG]

I see there was a PET emulator for the C64. So keeping the compatibility was possible instead of throwing it with the B-series machines and having a flop.

ARE THERE ANY PET COMPUTER EMULATOR PROGRAMS AVAILABLE?

There are only a few, the first popular one was produced by Commodore for the Commodore 64, it is able to run many PET BASIC games with POKE commands properly converted and a little M/L. It's intent was to help those PET owners who upgraded to a 64 back in the early 80s…

Source: https://portcommodore.com/dokuwiki/d..._and_emulation

So it would have been a real challenger for the Apple II market to have a C64 in a PET case with a board having expansion ports. And it would have been an opportunity to have a C64 with a debbuged floppy drive connexion and so at full speed. Another argument to justify the professionalism of the machine. You just sell it a few $ less than the Apple one.


Apple II board, expansion ports on the left.

However I don't know about the feasibility about adding several ports to the C64 from an electronic point of view.

[Turrican_3]

Originally Posted by TEG

Yeah but what was forced to be included in the plans? And more importantly for a team, did the man have unanimous support? Was he a visionary? At least a leader? Or did he have its own agenda?

Commodore employees "celebrating" Mehdi Ali name. Extract from "The Deathbed Vigil and other tales of digital angst".

Yup, there's a ton of statements by former Commodore employees blaming Mehdi Ali and Bill Sydnes for their mishandling engineering, for the lack of a better wording.

I also agree about the need to see the amount of the respective engineering staff (and perhaps it should be added, their budget too) to make any comparison somewhat meaningful.

AAA as far as I remember was told to be inadequately funded: unless we finally get a DeLorean and be able to rewind&rewrite history nobody can state for sure that a properly funded - hence also likely timely released! - A500-like, AAA-equipped Amiga (which btw was planned: the most recent "leaked" AAA docs even have an estimated bill of materials, which is no coincidence at all appears to be very close to the A500) would have been irrelevant.

Not to mention Hombre might have offered a further chance (and I'm sure if successful sooner rather than later AmigaOS would have been ported as well)

PS: JL Gassee briefly talks about the Amiga in his recent book, I'll try to take and quote the relevant stuff later

[Pyromania]

Originally Posted by oscar_ates

If you think about a banker with 100s of millions of dollars in pocket Irvin Gould, and another banker/lawyer Mehdi Ali both have zero computer/tech knowledge and put them on top management positions of Commodore, you will understand why CDTV, C64GS, A600 and AGA were disappointments and flops.

Correct!