Was anyone else disappointed with the A1200?

[PortuguesePilot]

Originally Posted by pandy71

Doubling CPU clock, adding 64KB cache with CSG made cache controller probably will be not so expensive.

Got any references for this? Even considering the rest of the chipset, look at the launch prices of high-clocked 68000 machines:

Sun Microsystems Sun-1 (68000@10MHz) released in 1982: $8900.00
Capcom CPS (68000@10MHz) released in 1988: $9800.00
Sharp X68000 (68000@10MHz) released in 1987: $2500.00
SNK Neo-Geo (68000@12MHz) released in 1990: $650.00
Capcom CPS Changer (68000@10MHz) released in 1994: ~$700.00

Now compare to the launch prices of the ~7MHz 68000 systems:

Apple Macintosh (68000@7.8MHz) released in 1984: $2495.00
Commodore Amiga 1000 (68000@7.16MHz) released in 1985: $1285.00
Atari ST (68000@8MHz) released in 1985: ~$1000.00
Commodore Amiga 500 (68000@7.16MHz) released in 1987: ~$700.00
SEGA Mega Drive (68000@7.6MHz) released in 1988: ~$190.00

[pandy71]

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

Got any references for this? Even considering the rest of the chipset, look at the launch prices of high-clocked 68000 machines:

Sun Microsystems Sun-1 (68000@10MHz) released in 1982: $8900.00
Capcom CPS (68000@10MHz) released in 1988: $9800.00
Sharp X68000 (68000@10MHz) released in 1987: $2500.00
SNK Neo-Geo (68000@12MHz) released in 1990: $650.00
Capcom CPS Changer (68000@10MHz) released in 1994: ~$700.00

Now compare to the launch prices of the ~7MHz 68000 systems:

Apple Macintosh (68000@7.8MHz) released in 1984: $2495.00
Commodore Amiga 1000 (68000@7.16MHz) released in 1985: $1285.00
Atari ST (68000@8MHz) released in 1985: ~$1000.00
Commodore Amiga 500 (68000@7.16MHz) released in 1987: ~$700.00
SEGA Mega Drive (68000@7.6MHz) released in 1988: ~$190.00

Ask Hammer - he will provide for sure exhaustive list full of numbers - i have impression that since 1989/1990 68000@16MHz will be not so expensive - at worse comparable to price of 68EC020@16MHz one or two years later.
Also Atari MEGA ST shows this design approach i.e. focus on low cost machine capable to deal directly with dumb laser printer (if i recall correctly SLM804 with removed memory and high power CPU to perform rasterization).

[Dunny]

Originally Posted by pandy71

Doubling CPU clock, adding 64KB cache with CSG made cache controller probably will be not so expensive.

You gotta think like Commodore. Not so expensive == more expensive than not doing that. So you don't do it.

You only start spending (the absolute minimum) when it looks more than 80% likely that your revenue streams will start to dip. And not a minute before.

[pandy71]

Originally Posted by Dunny

You gotta think like Commodore. Not so expensive == more expensive than not doing that. So you don't do it.

You only start spending (the absolute minimum) when it looks more than 80% likely that your revenue streams will start to dip. And not a minute before.

Well... this is obvious - history already happened. Commodore is no longer living company, Amiga is dead platform, we are like MD Frankenstein trying to put life in a dead body - of course some of us are even trying to perform cadaver synod over dead body of Irving Gould but "It is done".

[hammer]

Originally Posted by TEG

I was alluding in terms of man willpower not tech decisions. The energies have to be oriented in the right direction and congruent. Management role. But Commodore seems to have been too much engineers driven for sure. Bill Herd deciding to do the C128 by himself because he saw an hole in the planning is just WTF and I said "Not that Jack should have stay".

C128 was a waste of time. It's the original ECS mentality i.e. take an aging gaming hardware and attach a low colors high resolution for "business" e.g. A3000.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

Got any references for this? Even considering the rest of the chipset, look at the launch prices of high-clocked 68000 machines:

Sun Microsystems Sun-1 (68000@10MHz) released in 1982: $8900.00
Capcom CPS (68000@10MHz) released in 1988: $9800.00
Sharp X68000 (68000@10MHz) released in 1987: $2500.00
SNK Neo-Geo (68000@12MHz) released in 1990: $650.00
Capcom CPS Changer (68000@10MHz) released in 1994: ~$700.00

Now compare to the launch prices of the ~7MHz 68000 systems:

Apple Macintosh (68000@7.8MHz) released in 1984: $2495.00
Commodore Amiga 1000 (68000@7.16MHz) released in 1985: $1285.00
Atari ST (68000@8MHz) released in 1985: ~$1000.00
Commodore Amiga 500 (68000@7.16MHz) released in 1987: ~$700.00
SEGA Mega Drive (68000@7.6MHz) released in 1988: ~$190.00

Every company has different profit expectations, economies of scale targets, expense overheads, market demand tolerance and attached revenue recovery (e.g. Sega's game tax for every game sold on Mega Drive platform).

http://archive.computerhistory.org/r...-05-01-acc.pdf
DataQuest 1985-1996 report on Apple Mac. Page 65 of 366.

Apple's Macintosh has only $45 worth of semiconductors in it now
versus $160 worth less than a year ago. Motorola's 68000 processor costs
$6 today versus $15 a year ago. Memory prices have tumbled to the
present level of 25 cents each per thousand RAMs.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by lionagony

This interview from 1988 gives Jay Miner's perspective...

"Considering the internal dissension over how Amiga was to be handled, I think Commodore did a fantastic job for the Amiga. They must have poured 40 or 50 million into the machine and advertising. The initial advertising wasn't productive, or smartly done, but it did cost a lot."

Commodore was ripped off by the advertising company they chose to promote the Amiga for sure. Part of that was their fault for assuming that if they paid big bucks they would get a professional result. One would think that for 40 to 50 million bucks the advertiser would make some effort to understand what they were promoting. Clearly they didn't. But this wasn't unusual. The pages of computer magazines from that era are filled with cringeworthy adverts designed by people who probably never even saw the product.

"They had stopped making the 1000, and they expected the 500 and the 2000 to be ready a year earlier than they were. Of course, they weren't. I told Irving that they wouldn't be. What are you going to advertise if you can't deliver product?"

That's funny because in 1987 I had a choice of an A500 or A1000. There didn't seem to be shortage of them. I assumed the A1000 was still around only because they had a stockpile to get rid of.

"they were trying to change it into a single unit, built-in keyboard thing, like the ST so it could compete better. At the same time. Atari was trying lo make their ST look more like a 1000, with a built-in drive and a separate keyboard. It was the stupidest thing."

The Mega ST came out in 1987. So did the A2000. R J Mical said:-

"The A2000 was a good idea in all respects except it turned our sweet litle high-tech box into this big industrial strength metal clad tank of a computer. It was contrary to what we wanted in terms of the cool sex appeal of the original Amiga."

I chose the A1000 for its cool looking case design, but I probably shouldn't have. After attaching a couple of boxes to the side it didn't look so sexy. I was jealous of my A2000-owning friends who could hide all kinds of stuff inside the box. And it had space for a CD-ROM drive! That's when I developed this:-



Wish I had kept that machine! Made up for it with my latest purchase - another A1010 floppy drive. Still sexy!

"I would have cost-reduced the 1000; maybe given it a different name so it sounded like a new product. But I wouldn't have changed anything. It was a good machine compared to the 500. All it needed was a little cost reducing. I would have come out with it much sooner. I could have turned it around in a few months, rather than being caught without any product for over a year."

That's what the Los Gatos team was doing - trying to make a cost-reduced A1000 was one their projects. But they didn't know how. First problem is that it was manufactured in Japan. Second problem was the WCS - but they couldn't take that out until the OS was stable. Then there was the expensive power supply and expensive keyboard, and that huge motherboard with expensive PALs etc.

The way to really get the cost down was make an all-in-one unit with higher integration - ie. the A500. But Jay Miner didn't want that, He talked about not changing anything in the A1000 when he was pushing for VRAM and higher resolutions.

"Amiga lost so much momentum during that year because of lack of product and lack of advertising that I don't know if they'll ever recover. The software base wasn't built at all during that lime, and the IBM and Macintosh mushroomed. I wouldn't have bothered with IBM compatibility, which just slowed down the introduction of the machine."

Yeah well the thing is Jay, you gave them a design that was only half finished. They quickly made it good enough to send out to developers and released it to the public at great expense (they were losing money on every A1000 they sold) to get some momentum going. But nobody actually wanted it. It wasn't a PC or a Mac, so why would they? Perhaps if you had finished the design in 1983 (before the PC-AT and Macintosh were released) the Amiga might have had a chance.

In any case the A500 you hated went on to sell several million units and become the most revered home computer with a software base rivaling the entire PC industry. If you had helped rather than hindered efforts to reach the masses it might done even better. Maybe put aside your anti-PC bias and design an ECS chipset with 256 color chunky mode instead of that useless hi-res workstation screen.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

If you did then you would be in trouble. The Los Gatos team was culled because they couldn't get the job done. They disapproved of the A500 and insisted that Fat Agnus wouldn't work (which gives you an idea of their custom chip design skills).

Commodore's VRAM based AAA generation jump wasn't ready in 1990-1993.

Both Commodore Germany and Los Gatos teams didn't partition Amiga's OCS for easy upgrades.

Reminder, 1993 3DO's 3D acceleration is OpenLara capable.
[ Show youtube player ]

Most 3DO games didn't show 3DO's power difference from fast 386DX and 486SX PCs since ARM60 @ 12.5 Mhz is just 68030-40 / 386SX-40 class CPUs.

Software sells the hardware.

[lionagony]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

That's funny because in 1987 I had a choice of an A500 or A1000. There didn't seem to be shortage of them. I assumed the A1000 was still around only because they had a stockpile to get rid of.

I presume Jay was telling the truth. Maybe they stopped A1000 production for awhile and then when the delay of the A500/2000 became definite or too prolonged they started it back up.

That's what the Los Gatos team was doing - trying to make a cost-reduced A1000 was one their projects. But they didn't know how. First problem is that it was manufactured in Japan. Second problem was the WCS - but they couldn't take that out until the OS was stable. Then there was the expensive power supply and expensive keyboard, and that huge motherboard with expensive PALs etc.

Again I presume Jay was telling the truth and he was never given a chance to try.

The way to really get the cost down was make an all-in-one unit with higher integration - ie. the A500. But Jay Miner didn't want that, He talked about not changing anything in the A1000 when he was pushing for VRAM and higher resolutions.

The VRAM Ranger was meant for the next generation not for the cost reduced A1000.

Yeah well the thing is Jay, you gave them a design that was only half finished. They quickly made it good enough to send out to developers and released it to the public at great expense (they were losing money on every A1000 they sold) to get some momentum going. But nobody actually wanted it. It wasn't a PC or a Mac, so why would they? Perhaps if you had finished the design in 1983 (before the PC-AT and Macintosh were released) the Amiga might have had a chance.

In any case the A500 you hated went on to sell several million units and become the most revered home computer with a software base rivaling the entire PC industry. If you had helped rather than hindered efforts to reach the masses it might done even better. Maybe put aside your anti-PC bias and design an ECS chipset with 256 color chunky mode instead of that useless hi-res workstation screen.

You sound like you give more credit to C= for the Amiga than to Jay which is silly. Yes C= saved them monetarily but if it wasn't for Jay and the rest of the original team there would be nothing to save. The A500 ended up being a moderate success but who knows if Jay would have cost reduced the A1000 and had it out in 1986 that whatever that machine was called wouldn't have been an even bigger success.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Commodore was ripped off by the advertising company they chose to promote the Amiga for sure. Part of that was their fault for assuming that if they paid big bucks they would get a professional result. One would think that for 40 to 50 million bucks the advertiser would make some effort to understand what they were promoting. Clearly they didn't. But this wasn't unusual. The pages of computer magazines from that era are filled with cringeworthy adverts designed by people who probably never even saw the product.

Commodore's $40-to-$50 million PR approach is wasteful since the "killer app" software sells the hardware.

Steve Jobs made sure the Macintosh have "next gen" GUI based MS Excel as one of its killer apps. MS Excel for Mac was released before Lotus's solution.

Macintosh WIMP GUI-compliant MS Excel, MS Word (wysiwyg), Aldus PageMaker were introduced in 1985 along with 512K Macintosh.

Microsoft's Excel and Word for Macintosh sets up the situation for Windows 2.0's rise and 1990 Windows 3.0 tsunamis.

Microsoft ported Mac's Excel 2.1 in 1988 and Mac's Word 2.0 for Windows 2.0 and exploited Windows/386 (Windows 2.1 for 386) and the VGA standard. Aldus PageMaker 3.0 was also released for Windows 2.0 in 1988. These markets are larger than A2000's video market.

During Windows 2.0 era, OS/2 only works with IBM printers.

Windows 2.0 situation weakens IBM's OS/2 and DOS based Lotus 123 and Word Prefect.

On next generation GUI based professional apps, PC was behind by about 2.5 years behind Mac.

Amiga's Word Prefect 4.x was ported from MS-DOS version.

Amiga's 1988 word processing apps are KindWords 1.0 and ProWrite 1.x (Atari ST port).

https://bytecellar.com/wp-content/up...prowrite_1.jpg
Amiga's ProWrite 1.11.

A2000 didn't have stable 640x400 resolution.
A2000 wasn't mass produced like A500. A500 looks like toy.

ECS should have been released in 1988. ECS's 1990 release is too late.

There's "read my lips, no new chips" directive during A3000 development.

A500 Rev 6A ECS Agnus and reserve 2MB Chip RAM capability existed in 1989, hence it's R&D occurred in 1988 time scale.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The Mega ST came out in 1987. So did the A2000.

https://www.facebook.com/oldcrap.org...41761056/?_rdr
Atari Mega ST released around 1986.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

R J Mical said:-

"The A2000 was a good idea in all respects except it turned our sweet litle high-tech box into this big industrial strength metal clad tank of a computer. It was contrary to what we wanted in terms of the cool sex appeal of the original Amiga."

I prefer A2000's large box, but both A500 and A2000 teams didn't co-operated to develop a common "Amiga OCS card".

The A2000 couldn't leverage A500's mass production.

https://bigbookofamigahardware.com/b...t.aspx?id=1829
Amitech's Amiga 2200 clone used Commodore Canada's common CD32 board with Amitech's Agent 88 board. Agent 88 board restores most of A4000's functionality with extras of its own e.g. A1200 internal edge connector.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

I chose the A1000 for its cool looking case design, but I probably shouldn't have. After attaching a couple of boxes to the side it didn't look so sexy. I was jealous of my A2000-owning friends who could hide all kinds of stuff inside the box. And it had space for a CD-ROM drive! That's when I developed this:-

Wish I had kept that machine! Made up for it with my latest purchase - another A1010 floppy drive. Still sexy!

That's what the Los Gatos team was doing - trying to make a cost-reduced A1000 was one their projects. But they didn't know how. First problem is that it was manufactured in Japan. Second problem was the WCS - but they couldn't take that out until the OS was stable. Then there was the expensive power supply and expensive keyboard, and that huge motherboard with expensive PALs etc.

The way to really get the cost down was make an all-in-one unit with higher integration - ie. the A500. But Jay Miner didn't want that, He talked about not changing anything in the A1000 when he was pushing for VRAM and higher resolutions.

Yeah well the thing is Jay, you gave them a design that was only half finished. They quickly made it good enough to send out to developers and released it to the public at great expense (they were losing money on every A1000 they sold) to get some momentum going. But nobody actually wanted it. It wasn't a PC or a Mac, so why would they? Perhaps if you had finished the design in 1983 (before the PC-AT and Macintosh were released) the Amiga might have had a chance.

In any case the A500 you hated went on to sell several million units and become the most revered home computer with a software base rivaling the entire PC industry. If you had helped rather than hindered efforts to reach the masses it might done even better. Maybe put aside your anti-PC bias and design an ECS chipset with 256 color chunky mode instead of that useless hi-res workstation screen.

ECS should have been released in 1988.

Los Gatos team should stay in Amiga chipset R&D. 128 colors weren't enough. R&D is required for VRAM enabled chipset and AAA is not enough in the 1990s due to 3D.

I wouldn't allocate form factor case R&D to Los Gatos team.

http://amiga.resource.cx/adcoll/adcoll.pl?id=paljr&pg=5



This double stacked A1000 has Fast RAM at C00000. A500 team used C00000 as CPU only Slow RAM expansion.

Witcher 508i accelerator card and PiStorm-Emu68 can enable C00000 as Fast RAM.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by hammer

C128 was a waste of time. It's the original ECS mentality i.e. take an aging gaming hardware and attach a low colors high resolution for "business".

The C128 was only supposed to be a stop-gap until the Amiga got going. That took a bit longer that expected, so it was fortunate that C128 sales exceeded expectations. It also showed that the market was receptive to a machine in that form factor.

The dual video chip system might seem like a huge kludge, but many PC users had a similar setup with MDA and CGA cards (MDA for hi-res text, CGA for color graphics and games). The VIC chip wasn't going to do hi-res text and most TVs couldn't display it clearly enough, so having a separate RGB video output made sense. And it wasn't 'low colors'. The C128 had 80 column text in 16 colors, ideal for business (and faster than the Amiga), which could also be used to display color images.

480x252


640x480 interlace


The on-board Z80 might seem a bit strange too, but there were users who wanted CP/M, and it was cheaper to put it on the motherboard than in a cartridge. The Z80 also helped with C64 compatibility.

Bil Herd...

NOW, we were weeding through just what C64 compatibility meant. Twice a day someone would find some silly stupid thing that we had never even heard of before... (color character mode with IO swapped out in 2K ultra max mode???)...

We wrote the code for the Z80 by hand punching it in to an EPROM burner at 3:00 in the morning. It worked by starting up and looking at the cartridge port with out tripping the hated "grab the bus" mechanism that crashed the C128 before it could initialize the MMU. When it saw the cartridge sitting out there like an ogre on the doorstep the Z80 would initialize the MMU into C64 mode so that the cartridges instructions would make sense. This mode is also forced whenever the Commodore key is held down during boot. So it turns out that the Z80 was vital in making the C64 compatible.

The 'ECS mentality' that you speak of worked well for the C128. In 1985 the C64 games market still had plenty of life left in it (according to Moby Games 545 C64 games were released in 1985, 575 in 1988, and 321 in 1990). The C128 gave you access to all those games and a great development platform and a competent machine for small business applications. It even had Microsoft Multiplan, the precursor to Excel, which ran very well in 80 columns on the 2MHz 6502.

The C128 had some warts for sure ('jail bars' in composite, slow Z80, even slower CP/M), but it was a much better machine for 'serious' use than the C64 while still being 100% compatible with it. Furthermore it looked a lot more serious, without giving up the familiar home computer form factor.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The C128 was only supposed to be a stop-gap until the Amiga got going. That took a bit longer that expected, so it was fortunate that C128 sales exceeded expectations. It also showed that the market was receptive to a machine in that form factor.

From 1985 to 1989, C128's unit sales are 2.5 million. "Exceeded expectations" is meaningless in absolute numbers.

Macintosh hit the 1 million mark in March 1987 (1) with a very healthy profit margin.

1. https://www.cultofmac.com/479113/tod...aring-success/

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The dual video chip system might seem like a huge kludge, but many PC users had a similar setup with MDA and CGA cards (MDA for hi-res text, CGA for color graphics and games).

Integration issue.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The VIC chip wasn't going to do hi-res text and most TVs couldn't display it clearly enough, so having a separate RGB video output made sense. And it wasn't 'low colors'. The C128 had 80 column text in 16 colors, ideal for business (and faster than the Amiga), which could also be used to display color images.

Text based... yawn.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

480x252

I'm not impressed. The real "next gen" to replace C64 was the C65.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

640x480 interlace

Interlace... nope.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The on-board Z80 might seem a bit strange too, but there were users who wanted CP/M, and it was cheaper to put it on the motherboard than in a cartridge. The Z80 also helped with C64 compatibility.

Bil Herd...

I already listened to Bil Herd's lectures.

CP/M Z80 doesn't run CP/M X86.

During 1985, DR CP/M was dying due to MS-DOS-PC clones. DR attempted GEM Desktop 1.0 for X86 PC and for 68K based Atari ST's TOS. DR GEM Desktop 1.0 detected IBM PCs and locked out PC clones like Compaq. Compaq wasn't happy with the situation. DR reversed their decision to lockout PC clones, but the damage is done.

DR GEM Desktop 2.0 1986 was crushed by Windows/386 2.01 1987 release for Compaq 386s. Compaq was heavily involved in the development of Windows/386, having introduced the first i386-based IBM PC compatible machine in 1986, almost a year before IBM itself.

Microsoft released Mac port Excel for Windows 2.0 in 1988.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The 'ECS mentality' that you speak of worked well for the C128. In 1985 the C64 games market still had plenty of life left in it (according to Moby Games 545 C64 games were released in 1985, 575 in 1988, and 321 in 1990). The C128 gave you access to all those games and a great development platform and a competent machine for small business applications. It even had Microsoft Multiplan, the precursor to Excel, which ran very well in 80 columns on the 2MHz 6502.

Reminder, A3000 was released in 1990 which is during A500's golden era of 1990 and 1991.

From 1985 to 1989, C128's unit sales are 2.5 million. "Exceeded expectations" is meaningless in absolute numbers.

In the US market, C64's gaming segment was under assault by NES's October 1985 North America release. C64's North American sales peaked between 1983 and 1985 and gradually tapered off afterward. The bulk of C64's sales shifted to Europe. C64's success wasn't carried over to the Amiga. Nintendo supported low-cost accelerators inside game cartridges for NES and the same tactics were used for SNES.

A500 didn't properly replace C64 due to A500 wasn't cost-reduced enough e.g. two CIAs+Gary integration like on CD32's Akiko (two CIAs, Budgie, Gayle). A600 cost more than A500. A500 wasn't officially bundled with a C64 emulator.

Text-based Multiplan is old and Microsoft knows it's NOT enough for Mac GUI "next gen" and defeating DOS based Lotus 123.

https://archive.org/details/mac_MSMultiplan_1.11
Microsoft Multiplan on the Macintosh and Microsoft is aware this is not enough, hence Excel for the Macintosh was release.

During 1990 to 1992 Q3, the Amiga platform wasn't building a 256-colors install base while SNES was building its install base from 1990. The Atari ST mentality is to build a slightly better Tandy 1000 or slightly better EGA (Atari ST is missing hardware C2P, EGA has some hardware scroll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_tile_refresh) and this mentality was applied for AGA against VGA or SNES.

Text-based Lotus 123 lost its dominance due to the late Mac entry and late Windows 2.0 entry. C128/C64's text-based Multiplan died along with text-based Lotus 123.

Your argument sounded like this guy's [ Show youtube player ]
Ballmer listed $99 Motorola phone with Windows Mobile's use case features... Missing the crasftmanship with the OS.


[ Show youtube player ]
Steve Jobs on the role of product and marketing people.

[Amigajay]

Originally Posted by hammer

Most 3DO games didn't show 3DO's power difference from fast 386DX and 486SX PCs since ARM60 @ 12.5 Mhz is just 68030-40 / 386SX-40 class CPUs.

Software sells the hardware.

The 3DO had the software, it had massive EA backing, truly impressive games in 1993-4 that blew most people’s minds…..

But software can’t sell the hardware alone if the hardware is priced out of the market it’s aimed at, $699 was Neo-Geo expensive at launch, and even when it did come down in 1994 it was still too much. Launched in the UK at £399, nobody was buying consoles for £400! Even Sega found this out in the summer of 1995 when it launched the Saturn for £399! Despite a good launch in Japan, software does not sell the hardware….has to be a balance.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Amigajay

The 3DO had the software, it had massive EA backing, truly impressive games in 1993-4 that blew most people’s minds…..

But software can’t sell the hardware alone if the hardware is priced out of the market it’s aimed at, $699 was Neo-Geo expensive at launch, and even when it did come down in 1994 it was still too much. Launched in the UK at £399, nobody was buying consoles for £400! Even Sega found this out in the summer of 1995 when it launched the Saturn for £399! Despite a good launch in Japan, software does not sell the hardware….has to be a balance.

3DO price was reduced from $699 to $400 USD range. Goldstar (LG) model launched at $399.

Neo Geo's strong 2D focus is aging and not price competitive against SNES's strong 2D at low cost e.g. $199 USD.

PS1 has $299 nuke on Sega Saturn's $399. Many of the initial Saturn games are aging 3D titles.

EA is not enough e.g 3D accelerated Road Rush texture map 3D racing chase. Crash n Burn is not enough. Tomb Raider is an action adventure. Name a 3DO game in the same class as Tomb Raider? 3DO has Wing Commander III (1994) port from PC. EA's "Need for Speed" wasn't a console exclusive.

Large chunks of 3DO's games are like PC's Rebel Assault style CD-ROM games on rails, ports of European "last gen" Amiga 2D games, Microcosm (CD-ROM game on rails), fast 386DX-40 Doom results, some fast 386DX texture map 3D ports, Mortal Kombat 2D knockoffs. Shovelware is on 3DO.

3DO missed IndyCar Racing (1993, PC), IndyCar Racing II (1994, PC), Doom II (1994, PC, ported to PS1), Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss (1992, PC, ported to PS1, EA purchased Ultima in 1992), The Elder Scrolls: Arena (1994, PC), Star Wars: TIE Fighter (1994, PC), System Shock (1994, PC), Rise of the Triad (1994, PC), Heretic (1994, PC), Hexen: Beyond Heretic (1995, PC, ported to PS1), Star Wars: Dark Forces (1995, PC, ported to PS1), Duke Nukem 3D (1996, PC, ported to PS1/Saturn/N64), The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall (1996), MDK (1997, PC, port to PS1).

3DO didn't have a chance.

PS1 game scene was to able sustain texture mapped 3D Pentium class consistency. Sony has a tighter game quality control. PS1 has Grand Thief Auto, Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy 7, Crash Bandicoot, Grand Tourismo and etc. 1st party 3D games from PS1 exclusives can compete against gaming PC's exclusives.

PS1 was launched in Q4 1994 Japan which blocked 3DO in Sony's Japanese home market.

N64 has Legend of Zelda in 3D, adventure action 3D game. Strong exclusives sells the platform. N64 was launched in 1996.

Gaming PC switched to Pentium class gaming when PS1 released in west's Q4 1995. PC was building Pentium install base since 1993.

Pentium 150 based PC clone reached my usual $1500-to-$1600 AUD range in 1996. That's $1000 USD range.

The Amiga has Phase 5's costly 68060 and CGX experience in 1995 starting from ground zero and bound by a few thousands of A2000/A3000/A4000.

[grelbfarlk]

Honey production in 1987 from producers with 5 or more hives totaled 227 million pounds (103 thousand metric tons), up 13 percent from 1986. There were 3.19 million colonies producing the honey, down slightly from 1986. Colonies that produced honey in more than one State were counted in each State, and calculated yield would therefore be reduced. Yield per colony averaged 71.1 pounds, up from 62.5 pounds in 1986. Stocks were 33.1 million pounds or 14.6 percent of production. Problems developed late in the year as infestation of the Varroa mite were discovered.

Honey Prices

Prices for the 1987 honey crop averaged 50.7 cents per pounds, down 0.4 cents from the 1986 price of 51.1 cents per pound. Prices are based on sales to private processors and co-ops, and on retail sales by producers. Prices for each color are derived by weighting price for each month of sale by the quantity sold. Higher prices for the amber honeys reflect the larger proportion of retail sales relative to the white honey class. All government payments and loans are excluded from the honey prices published in this report.

U.S. Honey Prices by Color Class, 1987 and 1986

Color Class Price Cemts Per Pound
1986 1987
Water White, Extra White, and White (0-34 MM) 49.5 48.9
Extra Light Amber (35-50MM) 52.7 52.2
Light Amber, Amber and Dark Amber (51+ MM) 51.9 52.0
All Other Honey - Area Specialties 53.7 58.9
All Honey 51.1 50.7

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by hammer

From 1985 to 1989, C128's unit sales are 2.5 million. "Exceeded expectations" is meaningless in absolute numbers.

Meaningless? Right.

Macintosh hit the 1 million mark in March 1987 (1) with a very healthy profit margin.

Let me try that. Ahh...

Meeeaningless

Wow, that was a lot easier than I thought! No need for a carefully reasoned argument based on reliable data. Bare assertion is all you need!

1985: Apple Computer Reports a $17.2-Million Loss

Confirming its earlier estimates, Apple Computer said it lost $17.2 million in the third quarter, the first loss ever for the company.

Apple blamed the loss on a $40.3-million “one-time expense” caused by its recent decision to eliminate 1,200 jobs and close three of its six factories, moves made in response to a persistent industry sales slump.

Apple’s revenue for the quarter underscored the industry’s tailspin. For the three months ended June 28, revenue totaled $375 million, about 11% below a year ago. Profit for the same period last year was $18.3 million

After Steve Jobs was kicked out of Apple in 1985 they managed to turn the Mac around and make a good profit. But by the early 90's it was starting to unravel.

Apple Computer's Financial Performance

Apple in financial free fall
During 1991 and 1992 Apple lost approximately 10 percentage points of gross margin... In 1993 gross margin fell again, by almost 10 percentage points in one year. This year, cost cuts – or further sales growth – were harder to find. All the easy strokes had been made and the benefit from the new lower priced machines had already been captured. Compounded by a 4% exceptional charge, Apple’s EBIT margin fell from 12.1% to 1%...

In mid-1996, Apple reported a loss of $69m and laid off a further 1300 workers. Having allegedly told the board to expect a $150m profit, Spindler was ousted and replaced by Gilbert (‘Gil’) Amelio... He streamlined the product range, cut another 2800 jobs and rebuilt cash reserves. His stated aim was to restore Apple to its traditional position at the top of the market, where premium prices could again be charged, and he planned to move into high-margin market sectors such as PDAs and servers. Apple’s market share continued to contract, and Amelio prolonged the agony by repeatedly cancelling the new operating system that Apple insiders hoped would restore the company’s edge. The Newton
stumbled, with just 6% of the PDA market in 1997, and an ill-fated set-top box named Pippin sold just 12,000 units. Another cull of staff in March 1997 saw another 4100 people leave Apple, and Amelio was forced out after just 500 days in the job.

Note that this is an unbiased case study from the London Business School, not a partisan attempt to make Apple's management look bad - though the parallels with Commodore are striking.

Originally Posted by hammer

Text based... yawn.

It may not be exciting, but in the business world text mode was king. And the C128 could do it better than the Amiga despite its slower CPU. Furthermore texted-based applications were much easier to develop. The C128 got Multiplan - the Amiga didn't.

I'm not impressed. The real "next gen" to replace C64 was the C65.

The C65 sounds great until you dig deeper. 256 colors, but implemented with bitplanes that can't be scrolled and use up all the video memory. Same old sprites. Poor compatibility with the C64. Two SIDS, woohoo! But no PCM sound. And way too late to be relevant.

Interlace... nope.

So you didn't watch TV or use a VCR or DVD player, right? Because they all produced interlaced displays.

CP/M Z80 doesn't run CP/M X86.

I have used Z80 CP/M machines since the early 80's (starting with the Intertec SuperBrain, an awesome machine for the time), but I never saw CP/M-86 on anything. It was completely eclipsed by PC/MS-DOS.

During 1985, DR CP/M was dying due to MS-DOS-PC clones. DR attempted GEM Desktop 1.0 for X86 PC and for 68K based Atari ST's TOS.

Amstrad used CP/M as the DOS for its CPC range, along with 3" disk drives. People were surprised that they used such 'outdated' technology. But CP/M integrated into Locomotive BASIC worked well, and it cost very little. The 3" disks with 180k per side were very reliable too. Amstrad used this in their very successful PCW 'word processor', which was actually a complete computer that could even run games on its 720x256 monochrome bitmap graphics screen.

Amstrad manufactured the PCW series from 1987 to 1994 (7 years). A total of 8 million were sold - not bad for an 8 bit system with outdated CPU, OS and disk drive!

Originally Posted by hammer

From 1985 to 1989, C128's unit sales are 2.5 million. "Exceeded expectations" is meaningless in absolute numbers.

Your record is stuck - it keeps jumping back to the same tired old refrain!

[sokolovic]

Originally Posted by grelbfarlk

Honey production in 1987 from producers with 5 or more hives totaled 227 million pounds (103 thousand metric tons), up 13 percent from 1986. There were 3.19 million colonies producing the honey, down slightly from 1986. Colonies that produced honey in more than one State were counted in each State, and calculated yield would therefore be reduced. Yield per colony averaged 71.1 pounds, up from 62.5 pounds in 1986. Stocks were 33.1 million pounds or 14.6 percent of production. Problems developed late in the year as infestation of the Varroa mite were discovered.

Honey Prices

Prices for the 1987 honey crop averaged 50.7 cents per pounds, down 0.4 cents from the 1986 price of 51.1 cents per pound. Prices are based on sales to private processors and co-ops, and on retail sales by producers. Prices for each color are derived by weighting price for each month of sale by the quantity sold. Higher prices for the amber honeys reflect the larger proportion of retail sales relative to the white honey class. All government payments and loans are excluded from the honey prices published in this report.

U.S. Honey Prices by Color Class, 1987 and 1986

Color Class Price Cemts Per Pound
1986 1987
Water White, Extra White, and White (0-34 MM) 49.5 48.9
Extra Light Amber (35-50MM) 52.7 52.2
Light Amber, Amber and Dark Amber (51+ MM) 51.9 52.0
All Other Honey - Area Specialties 53.7 58.9
All Honey 51.1 50.7

In 1987, honey and maple syrup were both significant agricultural products in North America, but their production scales and uses varied considerably.

### Honey Production in 1987

In 1987, the United States produced approximately 181 million pounds of honey. Honey production involved the maintenance of bee colonies, primarily managed by commercial beekeepers, who harvested honey from beehives. The honey industry was valued for its contribution not just to food production but also to agriculture through pollination services provided by bees.

### Maple Syrup Production in 1987

In contrast, the production of maple syrup in the United States was significantly smaller in volume compared to honey. In 1987, the U.S. produced approximately 1.24 million gallons of maple syrup. Maple syrup production was concentrated in the northeastern states, with Vermont being the leading producer. The process involved tapping sugar maple trees to collect sap, which was then boiled down to create syrup.

### Comparison of Production

1. **Volume**: Honey production far exceeded maple syrup production by weight. For reference, 1 gallon of maple syrup weighs about 11 pounds, so the total U.S. production of maple syrup in 1987 was about 13.64 million pounds, which is substantially less than the 181 million pounds of honey.

2. **Geographic Concentration**: Honey was produced widely across the United States, while maple syrup production was concentrated in the northeastern states and a few parts of Canada.

### Qualities of Maple Syrup over Honey

1. **Flavor Profile**:
- **Maple Syrup**: Offers a unique, rich, and complex flavor profile that includes caramel, vanilla, and a hint of smokiness, depending on the grade and region of production. The flavor can vary from light and delicate to dark and robust.
- **Honey**: Has a wide range of flavors, depending on the floral sources. Honey can be floral, fruity, earthy, or herbal. The flavor intensity can vary widely based on the type of flowers the bees pollinate.

2. **Nutritional Content**:
- **Maple Syrup**: Contains higher levels of certain minerals, such as manganese and zinc. It also has antioxidants and contains fewer calories per tablespoon compared to honey.
- **Honey**: Rich in antioxidants and has antimicrobial properties. It contains vitamins and minerals like vitamin C, calcium, and iron.

3. **Culinary Uses**:
- **Maple Syrup**: Typically used as a topping for pancakes, waffles, and oatmeal. It is also used as a sweetener in baking, marinades, and glazes.
- **Honey**: Versatile in cooking and baking. It can be used as a sweetener for tea, in dressings, sauces, and as a spread. Honey also serves as a natural preservative and an ingredient in skincare products.

4. **Health Benefits**:
- **Maple Syrup**: Known for its anti-inflammatory properties and lower glycemic index compared to refined sugars, making it a slightly better option for those managing blood sugar levels.
- **Honey**: Known for its antibacterial and wound-healing properties. Raw honey, in particular, retains enzymes and antioxidants that can be beneficial for health.

5. **Shelf Life**:
- **Maple Syrup**: Requires refrigeration after opening to prevent mold growth. It has a limited shelf life compared to honey.
- **Honey**: Has a virtually indefinite shelf life if stored properly. Honey can crystallize over time, but it remains safe to eat and can be liquefied by warming.

### Conclusion

While both honey and maple syrup have unique qualities and applications, honey production was significantly higher in volume compared to maple syrup in 1987. Maple syrup, however, is prized for its distinctive flavor and higher mineral content, making it a unique and valued sweetener in culinary applications. Honey's versatility, health benefits, and longer shelf life make it an indispensable pantry staple.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Meaningless? Right.

Let me try that. Ahh...

Meeeaningless

Wow, that was a lot easier than I thought! No need for a carefully reasoned argument based on reliable data. Bare assertion is all you need!

1985: Apple Computer Reports a $17.2-Million LossAfter Steve Jobs was kicked out of Apple in 1985 they managed to turn the Mac around and make a good profit. But by the early 90's it was starting to unravel.

(snip)

That's not Apple's full fiscal year.

https://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/15/b...-products.html
Published date: Oct. 15, 1987

For the year, Apple recorded net income of $217.5 million or $1.65 a share, an increase of 41.2 percent over the $154 million, or $1.20 a share, recorded last year. Sales grew 40 percent, to $2.66 billion, from $1.90 billion.

Apple fiscal year starts from the 1st October.

October 1985 to September 1986: $154 million net income.
October 1986 to September 1987: $217.5 million net income.

Commodore's
https://dfarq.homeip.net/wp-content/...and_profit.png
At 1985 mark, -$113 million loss,
At 1986 mark, -$127 million loss,
At 1987 mark, $28.6 million profit,

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

It may not be exciting, but in the business world text mode was king.

Text-based Lotus 123 for MS-DOS was entrenched.

To displace the entrenched text-based Lotus 123 (DOS), the new entrant needs to do better than the entrenched!

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/7ed729f...7-0913376f9e02
"Your family name ain't the best in the Navy. You need to be doing it better, and cleaner than the other guy." - Top Gun, 1986

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

And the C128 could do it better than the Amiga despite its slower CPU. Furthermore texted-based applications were much easier to develop. The C128 got Multiplan - the Amiga didn't.

C128 Multiplan does nothing better than PC's entrenched text-based Lotus 123.

When Microsoft didn't copy iOS for Windows Mobile via tile-based UI which is a retro back to Windows 1.0, MS lost the mobile phone business. Google Android roughly copied Apple's iOS, hence Android gained the mobile phone business.

Excel 2.1 for Windows 2.x is a Mac port.
Word 2.0 for Windows 2.x is a Mac port.
This sets up the situation to unseat text-based Lotus 123, Word Prefect and WordStar.

The Amiga has the option to run Mac version of MS Excel and MS Word, but this is leveraging the Macintosh platform. I used Mac's MS Word on my A3000 via 1995 Shapeshifter. AMax before Shapeshifter.

[ Show youtube player ]
AMax II on A3000.

[ Show youtube player ]
Amax II on A500.

1. ECS should have been released in 1988.

2. Develop a common Amiga card for A500 and A2000 product segments like the later Amitech / Commodore Canada's A2200 clone and CD32. The mass-produced small A500 card could scale from A500-B, A1000-B and A2000-B. Further cost reduction applied such integrating two CIAs and Gary.
16-bit Fast RAM memory controller should been integrated into 16-bit Akiko.
PC ISA bus integration into 16-bit Akiko for ISA-based IDE and later PCMCIA. Might as well use the ISA slots in the A2000. This should occur between 1987 to 1988 for 16-bit Amigas which sets up 32-bit Amigas. This avoids the later IDE mandate interference when the focus should be graphics and 3D R&D.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The C65 sounds great until you dig deeper. 256 colors, but implemented with bitplanes that can't be scrolled and use up all the video memory. Same old sprites. Poor compatibility with the C64. Two SIDS, woohoo! But no PCM sound. And way too late to be relevant.

https://files.mega65.org/files/m/meg...nce_cnFcKB.pdf

Scrolling using the C65 bitplanes requires copying the entire bitplane, as the
hardware support for smooth scrolling does not extend to changing the bitplane
source address in a fine manner. Even using the DMAgic to assist, scrolling a
320×200 256-colour display requires 128,000 clock cycles in the best case
(reading and writing 320×200 = 64000 bytes). At 3.5MHz on the C65 this
would require about 36 milli-seconds, or about 2 complete video frames. Thus
for smooth scrolling of such a display, a double buffered arrangement would be
required, which would consume 128,000 of the 131,072 bytes of memory.

It's a case of bad craftsmanship.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

So you didn't watch TV or use a VCR or DVD player, right? Because they all produced interlaced displays.

Note why the Amiga wasn't a Mac.

The Amiga was useful for 15kHz TV work, but this is a small market niche. The Amiga didn't deliver video NLE to the masses.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

I have used Z80 CP/M machines since the early 80's (starting with the Intertec SuperBrain, an awesome machine for the time), but I never saw CP/M-86 on anything. It was completely eclipsed by PC/MS-DOS.

By early 1983, DRI began selling CP/M-86 1.1 to end users for US$60 with Graphics System Extension (GSX). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(d...vironment)#GSX
GSX evolved into GEM. Under GEM, GSX became GEM VDI (Virtual Device Interface), responsible for basic graphics and drawing.

one survey found that 96.3% of IBM PCs were ordered with DOS, compared to 3.4% with CP/M-86 or Concurrent CP/M-86

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP/M-86

There were CP/M-86 installs.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Amstrad used CP/M as the DOS for its CPC range, along with 3" disk drives. People were surprised that they used such 'outdated' technology. But CP/M integrated into Locomotive BASIC worked well, and it cost very little. The 3" disks with 180k per side were very reliable too. Amstrad used this in their very successful

Amstrad CPC has 3 million install base with a life-time from 1984 to 1990. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amstrad_CPC

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

PCW 'word processor', which was actually a complete computer that could even run games on its 720x256 monochrome bitmap graphics screen.

Amstrad manufactured the PCW series from 1987 to 1994 (7 years). A total of 8 million were sold - not bad for an 8 bit system with outdated CPU, OS and disk drive!

Your record is stuck - it keeps jumping back to the same tired old refrain!

Weak. NEC PC-98 has an 18 million install base. NEC PC-98 was popular in Japan.

Amstrad PCW was popular in UK and Europe.

https://www.timesheraldonline.com/20...he-mac-legend/
Apple sold 14 million Macintosh at around 1994.

Apple has sold 14 million Macintoshes largely on the strength of this design. Many of the Macintosh”s features have been copied widely, most notably and successfully by Microsoft Corp.”s Windows program, which has sold more than 40 million copies.

Note that PcW16 wasn't compatible the previous PCW systems.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by grelbfarlk

Honey production in 1987 from producers with 5 or more hives totaled 227 million pounds (103 thousand metric tons), up 13 percent from 1986. There were 3.19 million colonies producing the honey, down slightly from 1986. Colonies that produced honey in more than one State were counted in each State, and calculated yield would therefore be reduced. Yield per colony averaged 71.1 pounds, up from 62.5 pounds in 1986. Stocks were 33.1 million pounds or 14.6 percent of production. Problems developed late in the year as infestation of the Varroa mite were discovered.

Honey Prices

Prices for the 1987 honey crop averaged 50.7 cents per pounds, down 0.4 cents from the 1986 price of 51.1 cents per pound. Prices are based on sales to private processors and co-ops, and on retail sales by producers. Prices for each color are derived by weighting price for each month of sale by the quantity sold. Higher prices for the amber honeys reflect the larger proportion of retail sales relative to the white honey class. All government payments and loans are excluded from the honey prices published in this report.

U.S. Honey Prices by Color Class, 1987 and 1986

Color Class Price Cemts Per Pound
1986 1987
Water White, Extra White, and White (0-34 MM) 49.5 48.9
Extra Light Amber (35-50MM) 52.7 52.2
Light Amber, Amber and Dark Amber (51+ MM) 51.9 52.0
All Other Honey - Area Specialties 53.7 58.9
All Honey 51.1 50.7

I'll take two glasses of Light Amber. Thank you.

[Amigajay]

I can’t read anymore of this A.I bot posting walls of text! Why can’t you talk normally instead of just pasting ‘facts’ copy and pasted from wikipedia!? Goodbye Hammer!