Worst Amiga model ever

[KevG]

So why did you buy it?

Because it was supposed to be a better machine. Why do people with an iPhone sell it to buy an iPhone2? Same reason.

It was released for new users, not for people already owing a A500.

Oh, so sorry. I didn't see that specific marketing message on the A500+ box. I must have missed it.

Kev G

[FOL]

Originally Posted by KevG

Because it was supposed to be a better machine. Why do people with an iPhone sell it to buy an iPhone2? Same reason.


Oh, so sorry. I didn't see that specific marketing message on the A500+ box. I must have missed it.

Kev G

I dont even remember any marketing, one minute my dad stocked A500 (Screen Gems) and then it turned into A500+ (Cartoon Classics).
I remember My dad having annoyed customers cause games didnt work. Then he found out, it had updated KS and RAM.

[cosmicfrog]

Need more info paul

more specificity why wast I invited to the reception

[duga]

Originally Posted by KevG

Because it was supposed to be a better machine. Why do people with an iPhone sell it to buy an iPhone2? Same reason.

iPhone 2 (iPhone 3G) has 3G and assisted GPS which was a big update.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone#Model_comparison

Amiga OS 2 was a big upgrade over 1.3 but you could have upgraded your old A500 to OS 2 instead of buying av A500+.

[FOL]

Originally Posted by duga

iPhone 2 (iPhone 3G) has 3G and assisted GPS which was a big update.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone#Model_comparison

Amiga OS 2 was a big upgrade over 1.3 but you could have upgraded your old A500 to OS 2 instead of buying av A500+.

It also had batt backed clock and 1mb as standard.

[duga]

Originally Posted by FOL

It also had batt backed clock and 1mb as standard.

Yes, i know. I also know that A500+ has 1 MB chip ram instead of a A500 with 0,5 MB memory upgrade (with RTC) that has 0,5 MB chip ram and 0,5 MB slow/fast ram.

[mfilos]

unless you are lucky enough (LOL) to have an A500+ rev.8 mobo with:
- OCS Denise,
- New Agnus (8375),
- 512KB Chip (without the extra ICC for the memory split),
- Without battery + clock circuit
- Without jumpers soldered.

Commodore cost killing randomness ftw!

[BrooksterMax]

A1500 - not even on the list and what on earth was it?! Not a A2000 nor a A500 but something odd only sold in UK/Europe IIRC!

A friend had one, it was my first experience of the Amiga, the only thing being different between my A500+ was that it was in a massive box and had two disk drives!

EDIT - I see there is an odd numbers list now

[Paul_s]

The Commodore Amiga 1500 was for the 'creative mind' /cue lingo Commodore blurb with the Pointer Sisters.

It was cheaper than a 2000 but gave the user the added option of adding further expansions at a later date. Probably aimed more at a small business user than a home one.

Infact there was the Checkmate 1500 which is another possibility why the C= Amiga 1500 appeared (UK only). See this entry for more info... Commodore denied all this though at the time.

http://www.amiga-hardware.com/showhardware.cgi?HARDID=6

[mikele]

Originally Posted by Paul_s

If the ACA-520 takes off then the costly/hard to find 500 expansions shouldn't be an issue with compact flash/accelerator/ram/USB stuff for much longer.

well, "if" is crucial in this sentence. When it comes to A600 upgrade options, they are are instant and unconditional. I hope that A500 gets its chance though, that side IDE controller attached to already huge 500, occupying 90% of the desk was ridiculous, even in the 90s.

Apart from technical stuff, I perceive A600 as sort of "slim" approach to the existing product, which was cool itself. I dont see people bashing PS2 slim just for not being more technologically advanced over regular PS2.

The worst Amiga model has to be CD32. Was hesitating between that and CDTV, but figured that at least CDTV didnt have cheap, toyish look that concerns CD32.

[Amiga1992]

Anybody voting for the A600 has no idea of what they are talking about :P
"it doesn't have a numeric keypad", oh please, seriously?

The A500+ is by far the worse. It was not needed back then and it is a complicated platform to work with NOWADAYS like the A500. Lack of expandability? Today? Come on.

But woops, I voted A500. Well deserved anyway :P

[Photon]

If A2000 Model A had been on the list I would have voted for that, very ugly tacked-on A1000 solution. Bleh.

I had no problem with CD32's looks actually, even though the blander but sleeker look of CDTV is nicer in the livingroom.

[DeafDaz]

Had an a500, hated the 500+ and 600. Mainly because of incompatability probs. A1200 was good for a while 'til Commodore died.

[Amigafanboi]

They're all bad.

Just for making me want them all so much.

[kipper2k]

Dont understand why so many A600 haters, mabbe now with all the little extras available it may get recognised as something that filled the gap and has now grown into something that has more appeal. i vote the a1000 as worst simply because of how quickly improvements followed

[desiv]

Originally Posted by kipper2k

. i vote the a1000 as worst simply because of how quickly improvements followed

:
Quickly? 1985 - 1987
Improvements? Slots...

OK...

desiv

[kipper2k]

Originally Posted by desiv

:
Quickly? 1985 - 1987
Improvements? Slots...

OK...

desiv

Not many people knew the a1000 was actually out there over N america (Sept 1985). Once people seen the potential it grew fast. i actually did see 1 of them... out of my price range though... fortunately. I believe the A500 was announced Jan 1987, thats only 16 months.

When you think of whats involved in producing new technology in those days the timeline is not that long

I seen dockyard workers at Liverpool take longer to unload a cargo ship!

[Dreedo]

I voted the A1000 simply cos the 256kb of RAM model must have failed, most likely couldn't run most games, surprised if it ran WB well.

[desiv]

Originally Posted by Dreedo

I voted the A1000 simply cos the 256kb of RAM model must have failed, most likely couldn't run most games, surprised if it ran WB well.

There was no "256kb model". They all came with 256kb on board.
And that was a bonehead decision from Commodore and something that Jay was really mad about...
But, there was the front panel expansion, and everyone got the extra 256k.
Funny thing is, it only hurt Commodore really.
Because 256k was too little memory, so everyone needed / got another 256k, but not from Commodore... Mine is a StarTech ( or something like that).

I agree that was a bad idea, but easily fixed and doesn't affect the 1000's position as one of the greatest Amigas ever.. IMHO.. ;-)
I mean, seriously, Mitchy's pawprint in the other models?? Nuff said!!

desiv
p.s. To be fair to Commodore, they were probably thinking of the Mac at the time. The original Mac was released in 1984 with 128K, so even 256k was twice that.. BUT, Apple realized their mistake (it WAS unusable with 128K and 1 floppy really) and released the 512k model 8 months later, and still BEFORE the Amiga 1000, so..
I take it back.. No being fair to Commodore.. That was a bonehead call!!!! ;-)

[Paul_s]

It's worthwhile noting that 256KB was probably a lot of money around 1983/4/5 when the Amiga 1000 was in development. By the time 1987 came around with the 500... putting 512kB in as standard was probably much less expensive + the 500s lesser manufacturing cost (lose the fancy case, external keyboard, lower cost parts etc)...

10MB of HDD space in the early 1980's was at a premium of around $3398 (I have an old advert quoting that!)