🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8611062128.AA11889@cory.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
>The current Amiga is hot.

Agreed.

>If you intend to create 'new' Amiga's
>with 'better this' and 'better that', DON'T MAKE ANY MISTAKES!

I guess they'll try to heed that warning from now on!

>It had better be a *lot* better.  Don't go half-way.
>I would strongly advise that any 'new' Amiga have AT LEAST 1024x1024
>resolution (obviously you need a custom screen here).  Also, I suggest you
>increase the # bit planes allowed without contention to 8.
>
>...more wishes on DMA addressibility...
>
>USE A 68020!!!   Do NOT use an MMU (it's going to be expensive as it
>is and an MMU would make it incompatible with the Amiga's already
>well-designed OS).  Forget about waiting for Motorola's 68030
>(just in case you get the thought).
>
>And you had better make this cheap.... the machine will flop if it's
>price is anywhere near SUN's workstations due to the fact that SUN has much
>more prestige than C-A in the high-end workstation area.  The idea is to have
>two machines on the market, the Amiga, and the (Ranger?).  Which are medium
>and high-level versions of the same basic design.  The current state
>of the OS is such that you could easily make the software upward compatible,
>and us program-writers could easily make it compatible the other way as well.
>...
>					-Matt

It's the last paragraph that gets me - the overall message sounds like:

"Oh puleeaz make it a color Vax workstation for under $2000!!"

YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING - the monitor ALONE to give decent 1Kx1K COLOR
resolution is gonna run $2000.

Also, who says Commodore wants to compete with Sun?  If they do they've got
a lot of work to do!  How about a network file system?  How about even a
Commodore-brand HARD DISK!?!?!?  The Suns these days use (around) 16Mhz
68020's - how much do you suppose they cost a crack - probably $100.
And, if you're going to use that fast a processor, you might as well put
in FAST RAM chips and they ain't cheap either, especially now that
Uncle Sam regulates the price.

In summary, I don't believe Commodore should even think about directly
competing in the workstation market - the support would be too expensive.

What Commodore seems to be doing from the rumors makes sense - improve what
they have!  Yes it will compete with what's being sold now but what's being
sold now might not go on being sold forever.  I.e., new machines REPLACE,
not compete with, the existing ones.  I doubt, for example, if Apple sells
too many basic Macintoshes anymore.  The Mac Plus is a much better machine.

Commodore is in the home and personal computer business, as I see it, and not
the "micro-mini" or workstation market.

Oh, and one last thing - like it or not, Commodore would have to put Unix
on a workstation product - it's become the defacto standard - and the going
price for a System V distribution license is ONE MILLION DOLLARS last time
I enquired.

	Regards,
		Paul.

Disclaimer: I work for myself, and my opinions are my own.


Commodore is in the home and personal computer business (as I see it), and

In article <8611062128.AA11889@cory.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
>	The current Amiga is hot.  If you intend to create 'new' Amiga's
>with 'better this' and 'better that', DON'T MAKE ANY MISTAKES!  It had
>better be a *lot* better.  Don't go half-way.
>
>	I would strongly advise that any 'new' Amiga have AT LEAST 1024x1024
>resolution (obviously you need a custom screen here).  Also, I suggest you
>increase the # bit planes allowed without contention to 8.

We already disagree here.  I would advise against designing out one of the
biggest Amiga markets, VIDEO!.  I'd rather see a new Amiga that went to
12 (or 24 or whatever ) bit planes at 640x400 NTSC  (yes, interlaced) than
to require an expensive 1kx1k monitor while eliminating features like Genlock,
etc.  I'd like to see built in floating point hardware, 32 bit bus, etc. but
I'd much prefer 640x400x24 to 1kx1k or 2kx2k or 4kx4k or whatever you can
dream up.  I want more colors with anti-aliasing hardware!  NOT more pixels.
But that's *my opinion*.

Keith Doyle
ihnp4!ptsfa!well!kdd