Reply to post:

Farewell then, Mr Elop: It wasn't actually your fault


Ah, a former ally! :) And I'm from the States too. I had a good VGA monitor attached to my Amiga 3000. The De-interlacer in the A1200/4000 was substandard with its slight "bars" effect running down the screen... also, you needed a more expensive special monitor to use that mode - rather than the A3000's simpler dual VGA / RGB output. Once I saw the A1200, I bought the A3000 and hoped someone will save C=/Amiga. I preferred the detached keyboard of the A1000 & 3000, having grown up with Apple II and Commodore VIC and C128. The A1200 was a decent price, but the A3000 was discounted to the same $800 USD price on closeout + it included more memory. The A4000 was priced out of my price range and was butt-ugly. White and brown? Really?

But yeah, many of us were shaking our heads... WHY! WHY were people buying MS-DOS and crappy Windows 3 PCs when for a cheaper price, the Amigas kicked their ass?!

Software and business networking. C= wasn't willing to pay and work like a business. Apple paid for development of software conversions. C= counted on US, their customers to grow their business.

They couldn't keep up with rapidly better technology because they didn't get their heads out of their butt. Still counting the quarters they made from making C=64s in 1992!

They were on the right path when they introduced the Amiga 1000. No C= logo. New styling. Then they threw it away with the replacements. They had the low-cost A500 and the way-to expensive A2000 without a replacement in between for the A1000. They Should of made an A1200 too. For $1000, basic like the A500 with 1 or 2 internal slots (ZorroII) and space for a single HD.

Commodore never should never have bothered with the damn PC-slots/compatibility on the A2000. (unless it could actually make use of those PC cards in Amiga mode). It really added about a year of down time making the Bridge work between the ZorroII and PC compatibility. Then the A2000 would have been smaller overall with only 6 slots instead of 8/9 (depending on how you look at it) and a smaller and lighter PSU... and of course a lower-cost computer too.

How many Amiga users ACTUALLY used those PC-slots with PC emulation? I'd bet less than 1%.

People voted me down on my previous post. Sorry, but MS-DOS was pure crap. If you actually used AmigaOS back in 1986~1992, you'd know these things. It's like comparing Windows7 to Windows3.0.

- AmigaOS had multitasking in 1986. Which felt natural, it was awesome. Then going to a MAC or DOS was horribly counter-productive.

- AmigaOS/Hardware had PNP since 1986. For which MS didn't have it until late 1995 with Windows95 - and it was horrible.

Amiga had stereo audio sine 1986. In which the PC didn't catch up until the 1994 version of Soundblaster, which was a $125 audio-card add-on. Otherwise, you had a buzzer. oh-wow!

It really did take MS 15 years to equal the Amiga, with WindowsXP... and in some ways, it was still sub-standard to AmigaOS. When you first install the OS on an Amiga with an HD, you had a GUI panel to format your HD, name it, partition, etc. With XP, you boot into a DOS-type screen with very rudimentary tools.

The past is a fact. MS won the PC war with brute business force. Congratulations! But not with talent. Amiga lost because they had NO business sense whatsoever.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019