Was anyone else disappointed with the A1200?

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by sneckburger

Don't forget Amiga didn't die because of competition from the PC market. It was simply poor mismanagement of Commodore.

Are you sure? There was no stopping the PC juggernaut, even Apple couldn't do that. You can't fight a concept as alluring as open, modular architecture. And I don't think games companies were "holding out" either, more like they saw the writing was on the wall.

Sure, Commodore could've done much, much better and perhaps reposition Amiga as some sort of dedicated fx machine, but even so, in the long run I'm not sure if this could work out economically.

[Amigajay]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

You can't fight a concept as alluring as open, modular architecture.

There was nothing alluring about an expensive DOS based PC

Plus i agree with Sneckbecker, Commodore did the same thing Sega did, by releasing too much hardware in a short timeframe around the same market sector leading to confusion and dwindling sales because of it.

For Sega in the UK alone they sold the expensive Mega-CD (£280) in Apr 1993 an add-on that promised so much but what about people who just bought your Megadrive Sega!?, then later in the same year! they released the redesigned Megadrive II and Mega CD II to somewhat confusion for people, what worked with what etc.

In 1994 they released the £350 Multimega, an all in one Megadrive and Mega-CD (hang on no 32-X it is £350!). After that they released the Sega 32-X, an add-on even Sega of Japan said they originally weren't going to launch, then they started showing off the Neptune an all in one Megadrive and 32-X, but didn’t include the Mega-CD why not Sega killed it off already?! Then the Saturn was in the media before the 32-X came out, at the time that was a laughing stock and got put back and eventually came out for more money than they said originally.

All in all Sega went from 30-40m user base of the Megadrive to 9m with the Saturn mainly because of all the confusion of products from 93-95.

And without having to type out all Commodores mistakes, basically the CDTV, A500+, A600, A1200, CD32 were all mistakes either in timing, pricing, or being released at all.

We all know the AAA chipset got delayed and instead of Commodore not getting trigger happy they should have held their nerve, they got some of it partly right, when they cost reduced the A500 and made the A600 and had the TV modulator built-in another good move, but the name was confusing, it should have been the A500mini or something. Aimed at families who didn't need the numpad, infact they should have cost reduced it more by removing more ports, that model should be just as a games computer, not for printing etc and when it launched in spring 1992 both 16-bit consoles were out, Commodore should known games were key and should have included a 7 button pad with both models and done a deal to have Zool included or another character exclusive to the Amiga, and instead of £399 as the A600 launched at (which was a huge deal and turn off for alot of people and made them turn their back on the Amiga brand coming out more expensive than the A500) made it £299, down to £249 xmas 1992 (Commodore reduced the A600 to £299 in late 1992 so these prices are unrealistic)

Whilst the existing A1200 case design should have been used for an A500plus model (same A500mini chipset) with the same expansions as the A1200 motherboard for the more serious users, giving 100% game compatible with all models (£349 launch, down to £299 xmas 1992) leaving too new models both same numbers as old A500, no confusion, games still compatible with all models, keep cost reducing for a couple of years to fund project hermes and get out the door in 1994.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Amigajay

There was nothing alluring about an expensive DOS based PC

Sure, that's why nobody bought them. Actually, wait...

[Amigajay]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

Sure, that's why nobody bought them. Actually, wait...

One has nothing todo with another, but we both know that right

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Amigajay

One has nothing todo with another, but we both know that right

Myself, I always thought there actually is a correlation between sales figures and attractive feature set, no? Features such as killer software line up and future-proof expansion capabilities, in this case.

Otherwise, I'd be quite curious to learn why exactly it was that the PC took over? Something in the air?

[sneckburger]

With the power of Hindsight.... Commodore should have created the PlayStation instead of the CD32.... and then released a PlayStation desktop version with a keyboard.

Naming convention for Amiga was OK IMO as you could sort of compare the model number with the stack. Albeit there wasn't too many models variants back then.
But just look at the mess of AMD Video cards compared to the more successful Nvidias range and I don't know what the latest Xbox is nowadays? What are Mircosoft thinking?

[nikosidis]

I was very happy with Amiga 1200. I understand now that they could have done things better or different but that did not matter to me back then except for not upgrading Paula. With A1200 there where expansion so first I got 030 then 060. HDD, PCMCIA was good for further expansion. Sure was problem that almost no games could install to HDD but that has changed with whd-load. The A1200 I have now is standard 020 and 8MB fast, Flash HDD, internal scandoubler and 21" CRT. I love it to death Nothing I would change about it

[Amigajay]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

Myself, I always thought there actually is a correlation between sales figures and attractive feature set, no? Features such as killer software line up and future-proof expansion capabilities, in this case.

Otherwise, I'd be quite curious to learn why exactly it was that the PC took over? Something in the air?

But your mistaking people wanting to play Doom with using an ancient DOS based system which is far from being an 'attractive feature set'.

And if you have ever thought PC's have future proof expansion capabilities than that's quite laughable in its own right, they never have and never will unless you replace most of the entire system, i'm sure 0.0000000001 of the people using the same PC's they used in 1992 are having a good time!

Btw PC's took over as you say because they were used in every business, they were business computers, hence the term 'home computer' is used for most other computers bar the DOS PC, they became main steam plainly because of the numbers used and the amount of companies reselling, hence parts getting forever cheaper and cheaper, though never mistake popular with being the best or easiest to use, even with a time machine and unlimited funds i wouldn't touch a PC again with a Microsoft barge-pole.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Amigajay

But your mistaking people wanting to play Doom with using an ancient DOS based system which is far from being an 'attractive feature set'.

If having Doom (and a heap of other cutting edge games) on offer was a mistake, then I'm glad they made it. These games were available on a PC, not Amiga, and the features which made it possible were attractive. The fact PCs were used for business everywhere has nothing to do with the explosion of next-gen gaming and multi-billion dollar industry which followed. Far as I remember Soundblasters and Voodoos were not used by the Excel crowd and it was gaming and multimedia which fueled sales of Pentiums and assorted hardware.

(As an aside, DOS was just fine in 1992. Pre-internet, there was not as much need to multitask as it is now, and Norton Commander had you covered - fast and agile. In fact I still use Total commander as my main "desktop". It wasn't also as hard to use as people like to paint it, it's not rocket science to learn a few shortcuts. The only moderatley painful thing was memory configs, but hey, we were all leet haxxors back then, so...)

Originally Posted by Amigajay

And if you have ever thought PC's have future proof expansion capabilities than that's quite laughable in its own right, they never have and never will unless you replace most of the entire system, i'm sure 0.0000000001 of the people using the same PC's they used in 1992 are having a good time!

Sorry, but this is just farcical. Are you really making an argument that because my PC is not the same as the one in 1992, PCs are not really configurable? Lol...priceless

Originally Posted by Amigajay

even with a time machine and unlimited funds i wouldn't touch a PC again with a Microsoft barge-pole.

Ah mate, you should've said that to start with, saved us some time. Arguing with PC/MS-haters is rather pointless.

I love Amiga as much as the next man here, but prefer not to live in a nostalgia bubble (if this was the case I would stay with ZX Spectrum forever). Amiga had several great years as a Queen of all digital creation, but was dethroned later and some of us have moved on. These days I'd rather celebrate the golden years than got hung up on "If Only!" scenarios and invent some fantastical narratives and hate on other machines.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

The fact PCs were used for business everywhere has nothing to do with the explosion of next-gen gaming and multi-billion dollar industry which followed. Far as I remember Soundblasters and Voodoos were not used by the Excel crowd and it was gaming and multimedia which fueled sales of Pentiums and assorted hardware.

If the PC was so great for games then why did Microsoft produce the X-Box? Answer: 100 million PlayStations

In 1997 I played my first - and last - PC game, Tomb Raider. A customer asked me to get it working properly on his PC. Because the game might run for several minutes before crashing I had to play it - and was hooked. I then got a Voodoo card for my own PC to run it at a reasonable frame rate. That worked OK, but wasn't very user-friendly. So I got a PlayStation - way better! I then got every Tomb Raider game that was released, and the PlayStation ran them all perfectly. Later on I got a PlayStation II, which plays DVDs that my PC can't.

High-end gaming PCs may be a thing now, but back the 1990's they were mostly bought for business purposes and gaming was an afterthought. There was a plethora of clones which had any old video and sound card thrown in. Getting games to run properly on them was often a nightmare. If you wanted a proper gaming machine you had to purchase and install better cards yourself.

Between 1991 and 2001 I owned a computer shop selling Amigas and PCs (later just PCs). I built custom PCs from parts or bought base models and upgraded them to customer's requirements. Very few customers demanded a high-end gaming machine with the fastest CPU, latest 3D graphics card etc. In the early 90's 386-SX's were popular, even though they sucked for games (we demoed one alongside an A1200, and it was obvious which one rocked - not the PC!).

The fact that PCs were used for business everywhere has everything to do with the explosion of 'next-gen' gaming. The PC architecture was never designed for gaming, but its ubiquity in the 'home office' environment made it the platform of choice for publishers wanting to reach the biggest market. It wasn't without problems though. Before Windows 95 and Direct-X etc., incompatibilities were rife and getting games to work properly (if at all) often required a lot of technical knowledge. Good business for those of us who did PC support!

(As an aside, DOS was just fine in 1992. Pre-internet, there was not as much need to multitask as it is now, and Norton Commander had you covered - fast and agile. In fact I still use Total commander as my main "desktop". It wasn't also as hard to use as people like to paint it, it's not rocket science to learn a few shortcuts. The only moderatley painful thing was memory configs, but hey, we were all leet haxxors back then, so...)

As someone who spent a decade dealing with DOS while using an Amiga myself, I can categorically state that it did suck in comparison. It wasn't until Windows 95 that PCs really caught up, and then they needed far more resources to do the same job. Ironically this is part of what gave PCs the edge, since it provided manufacturers with extra incentive to improve performance.

Sorry, but this is just farcical. Are you really making an argument that because my PC is not the same as the one in 1992, PCs are not really configurable? Lol...priceless

I would like to upgrade the RAM in my PC, and I have dozens of various SDRAM modules. Not a single one of them is suitable! Meanwhile I upgraded my A1200 accelerator card to 32MB with a generic module bought from a local computer shop.

It was bad back in the 90's, and doesn't seem have gotten any better. Most PCs today have everything integrated on the main board, and (thankfully) don't need 'configuring'. But when you want something different the choices are more limited. The average PC user today has no clue about what is in their machine, and to be honest I don't have much of a clue either. Everything I knew about them has changed. The only thing that hasn't changed are the compatibility issues.

I love Amiga as much as the next man here, but prefer not to live in a nostalgia bubble

Nostalgia can be good or bad. I don't want to revisit all the frustrations I had with PC's, but the Amiga brings back fond memories so why not? But it's not just nostalgia. People are now doing stuff with their Amigas that we wanted to do back then, but couldn't because the technology was unavailable or too expensive. Some of us are even doing software or hardware development on this 'dead' platform that we couldn't justify commercially, but now that we don't have to compete head-to-head against PCs the pressure is off - and the fun is back on.

My own position on PCs is that I will use my XP machine until it dies, but everything from here on out is either Amiga or Linux - the Amiga for fun, and the Linux boxes for boring stuff. Having to deal with Linux peculiarities sucks, but it's still better than Windows 10. And when the only thing you need it for is watching online TV or doing your internet banking, who cares what's 'under the hood'?

[sneckburger]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

but it's still better than Windows 10.

I think Windows 10 is the best version to date.

[daxb]

Originally Posted by sneckburger

I think Windows 10 is the best version to date.

I think Windows 10 is the best version in data collecting.

[sneckburger]

Originally Posted by daxb

I think Windows 10 is the best version in data collecting.

Sounds like a legit statement.


Pretty sure I've online fingerprint holding more information about me than I know about myself!

Might have to do a John Connor like in Terminator 3!

[AmigaHope]

Originally Posted by sneckburger

Sounds like a legit statement.


Pretty sure I've online fingerprint holding more information about me than I know about myself!

Might have to do a John Connor like in Terminator 3!

The cruelist thing is that you can get a version of Windows 10 that doesn't spy on you, but only if you have a large enough corporation to qualify for the Enterprise license. They won't sell a regular human being this version no matter how much money you offer them. If you want this version as a regular human you have to create a fake corporation and some fake IT Department personas to contact MS and fool them into selling you a license deal.

[ZEUSDAZ]

A1200 came too little to late with a puny game library, stuck with my A500 and It's HUUUUUGE game library which I still own to this day and bought a Megadrive instead of an A1200 for much more gaming pleasure and stunning soundtracks, so my set-up was A500, Megadrive, ZX Spectrum Toastrack and C64c,...perfect gaming heaven!

[redblade]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

If having Doom (and a heap of other cutting edge games) on offer was a mistake, then I'm glad they made it. These games were available on a PC, not Amiga, and the features which made it possible were attractive. The fact PCs were used for business everywhere has nothing to do with the explosion of next-gen gaming and multi-billion dollar industry which followed. Far as I remember Soundblasters and Voodoos were not used by the Excel crowd and it was gaming and multimedia which fueled sales of Pentiums and assorted hardware.

Swinkamor is that you?!?!

[vulture]

Originally Posted by redblade

Swinkamor is that you?!?!

nah, no mention of how big a mistake was the lack of chunky modes, so I doubt it

[lordofchaos]

The Tri-Factor of failure. Memory, speed and storage.

All sadly lacking from this otherwise great machine.

[AmigaHope]

Originally Posted by lordofchaos

The Tri-Factor of failure. Memory, speed and storage.

All sadly lacking from this otherwise great machine.

The really sad thing is that it didn't need that much more memory and speed to be good. Double the clock rate, double the memory, give Alice full-speed access to chip RAM so that the blitter becomes powerful again... That would have been a pretty damn decent system for 1992.

Storage could have been handled by making the case just slightly larger so it could use cheap 3.5" hard drives and not just expensive laptop drives.

[Hewitson]

Originally Posted by lordofchaos

The Tri-Factor of failure. Memory, speed and storage.

How did it lack in storage?

Are you referring to the stupid idea to use 2.5" laptop HDD's instead of standard 3.5" ones, or the lack of a HD FDD?