24 February 2021, 06:10 | #21 | ||||||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Hastings, New Zealand
Posts: 2,719
|
Quote:
History of the Amiga Quote:
IBM created a monster with the PC. By the time Commodore managed to get the Amiga into a fully working state PC clones were already dominating the market with exponentially increasing sales. It's truly remarkable that Commodore managed to develop several unique Amiga models and sell so many units, a testament to the engineers' design skills and quality of the machines, as well as proof that Commodore wasn't that incompetent at marketing them. Could the Amiga have done better under a company with better management and a stronger vision? Sure, but such a company did not exist. The market was driven by a rabble of clone manufacturers just trying to make a buck by copying everyone else, and customers who didn't want to think for themselves. Every computer manufacturer that went against that tide drowned, even Apple would have if they hadn't diversified into other products. Quote:
From the start Commodore touted the Amiga's creativity rather than 'productivity', which was echoed in the name Amiga (feminine "friend" in Spanish) compared to IBM's boringly unimaginative 'PC'. The Amiga's amazing built-in graphics and sound was supported by an efficient multitasking operating system that PC users could only dream of, and a truly intuitive GUI that mainstream PCs didn't match until 10 years later with Windows 95. The Amiga's chipset wasn't a mistake, it was necessary to provide the desired features at the price, and it ensured that all Amigas would have the same advanced multimedia capabilities. In contrast, PCs of the day had a mishmash of various hardware bits that made it difficult to produce a fully integrated machine. This didn't worry business users who just needed a text display, but it was a severe problem for games and multimedia applications. In many ways the Amiga was ahead of its time. The use of an advanced integrated chipset was later copied by PCs, to the point where most PCs today only have 2 or 3 main chips apart from the CPU, and many have a combined 'system on chip' which integrates the CPU and graphics etc. The Amiga's properly multitasking OS was much more productive than single-tasking PCs or Macs, it didn't suffer the memory limitations of DOS, and the GUI made users feel they were one with the machine rather than fighting it. Little things, like being able to run each program in its own screen and drag one down to reveal another behind, made all the difference. To support these features at a realistic price the Amiga had to have an integrated chipset which was the same in each model, unlike PCs which came with no graphics card and customer's chose what they wanted, eg. MDA for nice text (only) or CGA for color graphics (but not so nice text). Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Your father is right to point out this weakness of the Amiga chipset, but what if it had included a 'rock solid text mode'? This would have been incompatible with the GUI and gotten in the way of intuitive operation, just like PCs when you tried to run DOS applications from Windows. Wider ChipRAM bandwidth would have fixed this, but it wasn't technically feasible at the time. PCs of the day suffered the same problem when they went full GUI because the ISA bus couldn't deliver the required bandwidth - which is why most apps used text mode! But even if the Amiga had included a text mode just as good as EGA or VGA, it still wouldn't been good enough because it still wasn't IBM compatible. However it would have made life awkward for Amiga owners who didn't want to fork out for a special monitor. The advantage of 640x200 (640x256 in PAL world) was that it was compatible with TV standards - just like CGA (except with a lot more colors etc.). Those of us who were used to running our home computers on a TV appreciated this, and it made the Amiga ideal for video applications (along with built-in genlocking capability). However saying that the Amiga 'maxed out' at 640 x 200 is not quite right, as the the A2000 had a slot for a 'flicker fixer' and the A3000 had one built in. I bought an A3000 with the standard multisync monitor in 1991 when they came out. The flicker fixer did a pretty good job of producing 640x512 (better resolution than VGA) and with the CPU having 32 bit access to ChipRAM it wasn't that slow. As well as that any A2000, A3000 or A4000 user could install an RTG graphics card if they wanted. I had one in my A3000 and it rocked! Since these were the machines that 'serious' users bought, the complaint about not having sufficiently high resolution modes is a bit off (one could argue that it was expensive, but that's a different complaint). Amigas certainly were used in business despite their perceived failings. 640 x 256 was quite sufficient to run business apps, just as CGA was on PCs. I ran my business on EasyLedgers, and also used GPFax, Final Writer, Professional Calc and Professional Page. These programs were at least as good or better than their PC equivalents, and the A1200 and A3000 both handled them fine. At no time did I have any desire for a plain text mode. I also knew of other people who used their Amiga 500s for 'serious' work. Many of them had a hard drive and almost everyone had a printer. These people were using their lowly Amigas to do things that otherwise would require an expensive PC. What your father missed was that the Amiga was not intended to compete directly against boring business PCs, nor did Commodore seriously market it as such (they sensibly produced their own PC clones for that). In the market it was designed for it excelled - the only problem is that market disappeared as everyone got sucked into the PC cult. The Amiga lost from the outset for the simple reason that PCs were already there and had a stranglehold on the market. It could have been designed better and marketed better, but still would have lost to the PC eventually just like all the others. Nothing could stand up to the PC juggernaut because people in general are too lazy and unimaginative to think for themselves. And that's OK. If the Amiga had become 'mainstream' it would have lost its unique character just like PCs did. |
||||||
24 February 2021, 07:01 | #22 |
Inviyya Dude!
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Amiga Island
Posts: 2,797
|
@Frogs: I think and feel, that the counterargument to this is the ST failing. Which did everything the Macs did much better and at a much cheaper price.
The only answer to this is the PCs steamrolling the US market. |
24 February 2021, 11:02 | #23 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Ur, Atlantis
Posts: 2,046
|
Quote:
With better vision from Commodore it could have perhaps lasted longer, if A1200 had more cutting edge design, perhaps, but sooner than later it would have to ultimately fade away, like everybody else. PCs have not won because its users were brainwashed cultist idiots, like Mr. Abbot kindly suggests*, but because nothing could compete with the idea of an open design which anybody can put together and innovate for. In that respect I'm actually glad that Amiga "lost" because I don't want the computer market to be controlled by one corporation, no matter how much nostalgic sentiments I might have for it. *if you are wondering why I called this topic "flammable", here's your answer |
|
24 February 2021, 11:32 | #24 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 2,871
|
|
24 February 2021, 11:45 | #25 |
Longplayer
|
|
24 February 2021, 12:11 | #26 |
Settler
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Serf City
Posts: 1,760
|
Here we go, another person from the US playing down the Amiga. There are other lands across the atlantic sea! In Europe the Amiga did THRIVE and did so for many years, up with the top in the business and gaming market while Americans were still working on their apple IIs and playing with the NES!
|
24 February 2021, 12:41 | #27 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Ur, Atlantis
Posts: 2,046
|
Quote:
The best way for Amiga to really thrive nowadays would be being reborn as an interesting hobby machine, some sort of affordable open-source Vampire with no copyright BS baggage. |
|
24 February 2021, 13:58 | #28 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: NSW/Australia
Posts: 462
|
Quote:
Respect! DEC made the best hardware of the day. I think he has some really valid points. I started IT on DEC systems - some of them still running to this day. It's something you can even still see today - give someone a nice screen, keyboard and mouse and what's under the hood matters less and less. |
|
24 February 2021, 14:07 | #29 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Norfolk, UK
Posts: 1,157
|
In its latter days I think the lack of chunky display and limited display bandwidth held back the Amiga. I'm not just talking about Doom, etc., but also - to build upon OP's points - actually text rendering performance too.
Rendering scalable outline fonts on a planar display is much more difficult than rendering that same font to a chunky display. By the mid 90s MS Word on a PC could scroll a page of crisp truetype text smoothly, pretty much in realtime, while Amiga apps struggled to do the same with any level of fluidity. |
24 February 2021, 14:29 | #30 | |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 2,871
|
Quote:
|
|
24 February 2021, 15:41 | #31 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Druidia
Posts: 389
|
Instead of speculating and exchanging personal opinions I would highly recommend reading: Commodore: The Amiga Years and Commodore: The Final Years.
Both were eye-opening and gave me a much wider view than my perspective living through the Amiga years in the UK. |
24 February 2021, 16:14 | #32 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northampton/UK
Posts: 529
|
The Amiga didn't take off until the A500, if the wedge was released first,
some market share could have been stolen two years earlier from other platforms. As soon as possible after that, an expandable big box with more ram and a faster processor. I would have actively courted prominent ST and MAc devs with cash if necessary. I wouldn't have released the A100 at all. Additionally a high res 31 KHz mode, and perhaps scan doubled TV modes would have made it a lot more professional. The move from planned 5 micron to commodores 3 micron process might have allowed this. |
24 February 2021, 20:34 | #33 |
OctaMED Music Composer
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Venice - Italy
Age: 49
Posts: 672
|
All this makes sense but the biggest reason for me is that Commodore (like Atari with ST and Acorn with Archimedes) didn't have the power and/or the will to act as a lobby towards professional software publishers like MS and apple did. For the same reason these days applications like for example Cubase VST or Photoshop aren't ported to Linux, because if they were MS and apple would have plenty of legal ways to make the publishers sorry for it. We all are very well aware of this.
|
24 February 2021, 20:56 | #34 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 2,871
|
I think the TV drama Micro Men summed it up best, especially for computing in the UK: The competition at the time consisted of smaller companies like Acorn and Sinclair, with their competing products the Atom / BBC Micro and ZX Spectrum / QL respectively, with the big giant American corporations eventually steamrolling over everything. The visual metaphor with Sir Clive Sinclair on his tiny C5 electric car being overtaken by huge lorries with American brand names on them like Microsoft and IBM is so appropriate, if sad.
|
24 February 2021, 20:56 | #35 | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Hastings, New Zealand
Posts: 2,719
|
Quote:
The IBM PC was not really an 'open' design. It used a specific CPU and other chips made by Intel, with a proprietary BIOS and OS. IBM enforced its BIOS copyright to prevent 'clone' manufacturers from producing fully compatible machines, and Intel went after any chip manufacturer who tried to make a compatible CPU. Why do I say it was a 'cult'? Even before IBM released the PC, people were clamoring for a 'cheap' desktop computer from them because "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM". Despite its flaws and poor performance it instantly achieved 'cult' status, and from then on the question on every computer purchaser's lips was 'Is it IBM compatible?'. The PC didn't promote innovation, it stifled it. Users demanded that machines be '100% BM compatible' because then they didn't have think about what they were doing, and clone manufacturers spent all their efforts sating that desire. Other manufacturers who tried to make truly innovative alternatives were pushed out of the market. IBM PC compatible Quote:
|
||
24 February 2021, 21:25 | #36 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Hastings, New Zealand
Posts: 2,719
|
Quote:
The Amiga's bitplane implementation has the added advantage of being able to tune the color depth to the application for faster rendering and lower memory usage. For example I run IBrowse on my A1200 in 8 colors because I prefer speed to eye candy, and 16 colors doesn't look any different on my TV. With VGA you don't have that option - it's either 2, 16, or 256 colors and nothing in between. The real problem with a 256 color hires screen is simply the amount of data that has to be moved around. This is a problem both for Amigas with a 16 bit Blitter and for PCs with a 16 bit ISA bus. Until faster buses were developed for PCs, a 256 color desktop was terrible to use - especially with some of the cheap (and therefore popular) VGA cards of the day. |
|
24 February 2021, 21:31 | #37 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: NSW/Australia
Posts: 462
|
Quote:
Yes and the marketing around "IBM Compatible" which struck fear into the hearts and minds of many a Mum or Dad lest they choose poorly for their children and be shown up in front of their peers. |
|
24 February 2021, 21:52 | #38 | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Hastings, New Zealand
Posts: 2,719
|
Quote:
Another reason was that the A1000 wasn't finished when they produced it, and needed a large daughterboard to hold the 'writeable control store'. Squeezing this into an A500 would have been tricky. Many people complained about the A500 needing to have an external modulator and power supply too, because they couldn't fit those things into the 'wedge' case. Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
24 February 2021, 22:12 | #39 | |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 2,871
|
Quote:
However, in my case, I was using an old wooden computer desk that was snug enough for an Atari 800XL as it was, for the A500, which was really too big for it, a good inch of the bottom of it was hanging off the edge! |
|
24 February 2021, 23:09 | #40 |
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Eksjö / Sweden
Posts: 5,655
|
The title is incorrect. The Amiga did thrive. Try to get an answer on an 8086 PC forum today
Your dad is an average American. He just didn't get it. I'm sorry but it just sounds like making up excuses from hindsight. Illegal software monopolies 'made' the IBM PC (clones), not anything else. From research and talking to friends from the US, early 1980s, the conclusions are that a) most Americans couldn't afford a new computer, and b) those that could weren't enthusiastic about any computer unless it emulated DOS 8-bit from the 1970s. Stuck in the old. And they already had such a computer. It sounds like your father expected the Amiga to be the WYSIWYG, print to laser printer work computer of the mid-1990s, but he's a decade off there. The Amiga would do that too, at that time. Here are some facts: (if they are relevant after slaughtering your father - but it seemed like he was justifying making the wrong choice back then. It was the wrong choice, we could all be running Amigas with expansion cards instead of waiting a decade and then run PCs with expansion cards.)
So, no. Even if Denise is what actually let your father do workstation work at the fraction of price, print to matrix printers, run WordPerfect, etc, your father's explanation rings completely false. I'm very curious. Ask your father if he stopped doing video titling, after which he switched platform because of a printer driver. (This is what my crystal ball says to me.) Last edited by Photon; 24 February 2021 at 23:16. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Things the Amiga didn't get right from Day 1 | drHirudo | Nostalgia & memories | 826 | 10 March 2022 15:02 |
Is it true the Amiga nearly DIDN'T use RGB for colour? | Foebane | Amiga scene | 14 | 28 June 2018 02:12 |
Best Amiga pinball game that Digital Illusions *didn't* make | PixelsAtDawn | Nostalgia & memories | 30 | 05 December 2017 02:43 |
Why game companies didn't make better games for Amiga | ancalimon | Retrogaming General Discussion | 35 | 17 July 2017 12:27 |
New Amiga one & Os4 thoughts | sewerkid | Amiga scene | 7 | 01 December 2002 17:31 |
|
|