Quote:
Originally Posted by sean_sk
“Amiga” does not necessarily have to be something made by Commodore. I reckon if they were still around, it’s quite likely they’d be making x86 computers like everyone else, or if they were still making “Amiga’s”, they’d be nothing like they were in the 90’s.
|
You know what, this is an interesting point, and this reality was being realized.
Commodore was already pushing toward "me too" PCs with their PC10, 20, 30, etc. If you think about what Intel was delivering to market, it's clear that there was no path forward for C64 & Amiga products. Commodore had to go to Intel PC. Apple resisted with PPC after 68K, but eventually even they went to Intel also. Today they are on ARM, which the PiStorm is. And where is Apple heading toward with M1?
You can muddle and pull the Amiga through each of these eras. We had PPC capabilities on Amiga. We have emulation running on Intel and ARM. Now ARM CPU replacing the 68K. Fascinating how the computer moves into these new architecture and is made to work.
But remember...it works with it's own original chipset and 68K CPU just fine as well. So all of these new things are...I'm going to say "cute" proofs of concept. But in the end...we already have what's needed - Commodore's chipset and 68K CPU.
Maybe that's really why Commodore died in the first place. C64 platform went as far as it could go. Amiga install base wasn't nearly enough to make the jump to PPC - not like anyone made money on PPC Amiga after Commodore, so clearly it wasn't the killer platform that would have made the difference, and for Commodore to stick their name on PCs...it just didn't carry the pull. Other brands were there with IBM compatibles, and were dominating market share.
And so Amiga never went beyond the chipset and 68K CPU. But maybe thanks to that, and being somewhat frozen in time it becomes timeless, and frozen at its peak before it had to become FrankenAmiga on PPC or Intel of ARM?