The reason the Amiga failed.

[JamesD]

That's why revisions of computers always die. But new revisions keep competition for many years to the PC. PS4 f.e.

If such a great market goes down, as with the Amiga, there is something wrong inside the company.

Well, with almost all more advanced designs killed by management in a misguided attempt to focus on the next C64, it was pretty inevitable the Amiga would fall behind.

 

I'm still pretty sure, an "ECS" Amiga can handle a Doom game, and AGA is fast enough for even more.

Yeah, but how many years did it take to figure that out? There was a bit of a lag.

Gloom was the first such game I remember and it came out a couple years after Doom.

Demos like that may be common now but they weren't back then.

One comes to the other. Amiga (OCS) itself has already been a real multi Processing computer. As the Sound- and Screenhandling didn't need the CPU to act on. That's why Multitasking was no problem on the Amiga from the 1st day on.

But, the needed parts didn't grow by software usage, so the successing parts won't be there... so the market will die sooner or later...

And you are making an apples to oranges comparison here.

Multi-processing with multiple CPUs requires a software semaphore system within the OS that only allows one CPU to access critical code at a time, hardware to only allow one CPU to access the buss at a time, probably a high speed secondary cache to get the most speed out of the CPUs, a revamped task scheduler to execute tasks across the next available CPU, and if you really want to take advantage of it, you need compilers that can split processing of time consuming tasks across multiple CPUs.

Existing software that splits up execution among multiple tasks would benefit without a special compiler, but how many programs were already written that way?

[shoestring]

Commodore's sales dropped off the moment Jack left the company. He may not have been well liked but he was the reason for Commodore's success initially before going to Atari.

 

Mehdi Ali basically destroyed the company, he hired Sydnes ( head of Engineering ) who had no clue at all. That's the same guy who designed the PC Jnr, so there's your first clue right there. The management basically had no idea what to do with the Amiga & they screwed up a major licensing deal with Sun Microsystems.

Edited February 22, 2016 by shoestring

[Bill Loguidice]

Commodore's sales dropped off the moment Jack left the company. He may not have been well liked but he was the reason for Commodore's success initially before going to Atari.

 

Mehdi Ali basically destroyed the company, he hired Sydnes ( head of Engineering ) who had no clue at all. That's the same guy who designed the PC Jnr, so there's your first clue right there. The management basically had no idea what to do with the Amiga & they screwed up a major licensing deal with Sun Microsystems.

 

It's easy enough to argue that Tramiel's "aggressive" practices worked perfectly for inexpensive hardware like the VIC-20 and C-64, but not so much for more expensive hardware like the Amiga. In this case, we only have to look at his success or lack thereof with the ST to imagine how the Amiga would have fared under his command, i.e., it would probably have all turned out pretty much the same in the end. Again, to tie this back to the discussion earlier, we have to imagine a world where a platform can thrive against PCs and Compatibles, particularly without the margins of say, a Macintosh. It's hard to envision such a world, unfortunately, because we really have no real world example of it.

[danwinslow]

The real lesson here is a successful computer is an architecture, not a set of chips, in the same way a successful software framework is a collection of patterns, and not a specific application.

[shoestring]

 

It's easy enough to argue that Tramiel's "aggressive" practices worked perfectly for inexpensive hardware like the VIC-20 and C-64, but not so much for more expensive hardware like the Amiga. In this case, we only have to look at his success or lack thereof with the ST to imagine how the Amiga would have fared under his command

I doubt Commodore would have ended up with the Amiga had Jack not gone to Atari. He wasn't interested in the chipset, that's very clear when you consider that he sold the tech to Commodore.

 

He tried to apply the same management techniques at Atari and turn the company into something it wasn't, it didn't work out.

[emkay]

Yeah, but how many years did it take to figure that out? There was a bit of a lag.

As I wrote , it's been caused by early hardware upgrades that made people lazy in optimizing code for the available machines.

And you are making an apples to oranges comparison here.

Sure?

 

The Amiga has the Copper chip, which is able to do graphics movements without any CPU usage.

Your version of "Multitasking" description isn't wrong, but fails the thread.

How else would you try to explain, what the AMIGA had in advance to other computers of that days?

Btw. Using Fastmem ALLOWED to access RAM from the CPU and the Copper at the same time.... And, even IF there is a queue in RAM Access of the integrated chips, they work at the same time when a command takes several clocks... compared to the Atari ST it is up to 3 computers.... "Multitasking" as a term of what even the OCS AMIGA did is an "understatement" ...

Edited February 22, 2016 by emkay

[carlsson]

Perhaps if Jack Tramiel hadn't got booted, the only remains of the Amiga had been brief prorotype mentions of the Lorraine. Where would Atari have been if Tramiel didn't acquire them, who would have lent money to Amiga if Atari didn't show up, why would Commodore have bought the shares if it wasn't for competition with Atari? In the same way of thinking, there may not have been any ST neither, and the whole 16-bit home computer scene had not existed if it wasn't for Tramiel leaving...

 

... yes, I know that is a bit like the analogy about the flapping of a butterfly will cause a tornado somewhere else in the world but who knows?

[Keatah]

Personally, I think the real reason the Amiga "failed" is because Keatah made Amiga voodoo dolls and did evil things to them.

 

I've come to terms with hating the amiga in recent times. It is what it is. It simply wasn't suited for my tasks and expectations. Surely all can understand that.

 

Perhaps customizing it with HDD and '030 and 2nd floppy and more memory may have made it more palatable, but by that time I was well on my into the PC world.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Keatah

[JamesD]

As I wrote , it's been caused by early hardware upgrades that made people lazy in optimizing code for the available machines.

Well, a modern demo sure doesn't help sell computers in the late 80s or early 90s so it's a moot point.

 

Sure?

 

The Amiga has the Copper chip, which is able to do graphics movements without any CPU usage.

Your version of "Multitasking" description isn't wrong, but fails the thread.

How else would you try to explain, what the AMIGA had in advance to other computers of that days?

Btw. Using Fastmem ALLOWED to access RAM from the CPU and the Copper at the same time.... And, even IF there is a queue in RAM Access of the integrated chips, they work at the same time when a command takes several clocks... compared to the Atari ST it is up to 3 computers.... "Multitasking" as a term of what even the OCS AMIGA did is an "understatement" ...

What are you, the thread master?

The copper is a dedicated part of the graphics architecture.

While it can perform operations at the same time as the CPU, it's far from being a general purpose CPU.

It isn't going to speed up raytracing, image processing, compressing/decompressing video, etc... things that make the Amiga competitive against faster and faster PCs.

 

In the early 90s you had 50MHz 486s, True Color graphics cards with hardware acceleration, multi-speed CD-ROMs for software that actually shipped on CD, Windows 3, and much more software support. What exactly is superior about the Amiga at that point with what was available?

 

Everything Commodore released from about 1989 on was too little too late.

[JamesD]

I've come to terms with hating the amiga in recent times. It is what it is. It simply wasn't suited for my tasks and expectations. Surely all can understand that.

 

Perhaps customizing it with HDD and '030 and 2nd floppy and more memory may have made it more palatable, but by that time I was well on my into the PC world.

It was a JOKE. Sheesh

[Keatah]

Ha.. Well, like I always say, I needed some things done and the PC got them done. So I adopted it as my platform of choice.

[Keatah]

Tramiel wasn't technical was he? I thought so. He could market toys like the Amiga and other "home" computers. But he wouldn't know what to do with a real PC.

 

ADDED: anyhow.. A few demos here and there aren't what sells a computer. It might was the geeks and stuff. But when the task is due, the hardware needs to put up or shut up. In fact, all these democoder demos projected a toy-like aura.

 

And programming custom chips is just as exotic and off the beaten path as doing classic game emulation in FPGA. Few people do it. But everyone could have access to, and easily learn, x86.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Keatah

[JamesD]

Tramiel wasn't technical was he? I thought so. He could market toys like the Amiga and other "home" computers. But he wouldn't know what to do with a real PC.

 

ADDED: anyhow.. A few demos here and there aren't what sells a computer. It might was the geeks and stuff. But when the task is due, the hardware needs to put up or shut up. In fact, all these democoder demos projected a toy-like aura.

 

And programming custom chips is just as exotic and off the beaten path as doing classic game emulation in FPGA. Few people do it. But everyone could have access to, and easily learn, x86.

If you think he wasn't technical, listen to the floppy days podcast with the former Tandy guy that was largely responsible for the Model I.

It's a wonder they ever made one at all. He was the only guy in the company that really supported building it.

I always wondered why Tandy made so many dumb decisions... well, I don't wonder any more.

Edited February 23, 2016 by JamesD

[shoestring]

Tramiel wasn't technical was he? I thought so. He could market toys like the Amiga and other "home" computers. But he wouldn't know what to do with

He left Commodore in 1984. The Amiga came later.

 

I think the only 16bit machine in the works at the time was the 900 which was cancelled in favour of the Amiga. All this happened when Tramiel was already settled in at Atari.

[atarian63]

The Amiga lasted longer than the Atari so what does that tell you of Atari?

That Atari lasted longer than commodore as a company.

[carlsson]

Don't neglect the fact that Commodore built the PET/CBM computers years before the VIC-20. While the PET may not have been a market leader on business computers in the US, where I understand Apple ][, TRS-80 and other CP/M systems had significant shares before the IBM PC, the PET line was very strong in some European countries and used for business well into the 1980's.

 

So yes, I think Jack Tramiel knew what to do with a "real" personal/business computer. After all, that is where the company came from before testing the waters with home computers.

[MarkO]

 

Personally, I think the real reason the Amiga "failed" is because Keatah made Amiga voodoo dolls and did evil things to them.

I've come to terms with hating the amiga in recent times. It is what it is. It simply wasn't suited for my tasks and expectations. Surely all can understand that.

 

Perhaps customizing it with HDD and '030 and 2nd floppy and more memory may have made it more palatable, but by that time I was well on my into the PC world.

 

So you've Pulled the Pins from the Amiga VooDoo Dolls, and Burned them up, so All is Well?????

 

 

 

MarkO

[Keatah]

Getting there..

[emkay]

Everything Commodore released from about 1989 on was too little too late.

Yawn.... ofcourse it was. , But the Amiga 500 was there in 1987.... the 1000 in 1985... a suitable 486/33MHz around 1992, using ISA Bus for communications and Datatransfer to the Soundcard and the VGA.... You had to overclock the ISA Bus, if you wanted to have a "fluid" animated Video in WC2. With the change to VLB graphics one had something like "speed" on the PC. A 386 was in now way able to show Wolf3d fluidly playable. You had to use a very small windows for that!

AMIGA was able to do multitasking for real, and you don't need several CPUs of the same kind, to have multiprocessing, btw. ... and there were no bottlenecks like ISA Bus, or memory limitations as on the PC.

 

So my question again: How would you name what Amiga did in advance to - particular - the Atari ST.

 

One hint: The Copper is inbetween a DSP and a CPU. in both cases, the "P" stands for "Process...." ...

 

Printing a document, writing a document, and a demo is running in a window.... fluently... the same experience of an ECS Amiga, you got after the Appearance of Windows 2000 ...

[Bill Loguidice]

Yawn.... ofcourse it was. , But the Amiga 500 was there in 1987.... the 1000 in 1985... a suitable 486/33MHz around 1992, using ISA Bus for communications and Datatransfer to the Soundcard and the VGA.... You had to overclock the ISA Bus, if you wanted to have a "fluid" animated Video in WC2. With the change to VLB graphics one had something like "speed" on the PC. A 386 was in now way able to show Wolf3d fluidly playable. You had to use a very small windows for that!

AMIGA was able to do multitasking for real, and you don't need several CPUs of the same kind, to have multiprocessing, btw. ... and there were no bottlenecks like ISA Bus, or memory limitations as on the PC.

 

So my question again: How would you name what Amiga did in advance to - particular - the Atari ST.

 

One hint: The Copper is inbetween a DSP and a CPU. in both cases, the "P" stands for "Process...." ...

 

Printing a document, writing a document, and a demo is running in a window.... fluently... the same experience of an ECS Amiga, you got after the Appearance of Windows 2000 ...

 

The fact of the matter is, the special capabilities of the Amiga were too far ahead of their time to be appreciated by the masses. The Amiga was the original multimedia machine, but in a time before ubiquitous CD-ROMs or the Internet, it just couldn't have the same type of utility or impact that it otherwise should have without the other limitations imposed by the era's technology.

 

As much as we deride clone PCs of the time, with their EGA graphics and beeper sound, that was more than good enough for productivity work (which the PC had software-wise in abundance and that the Amiga, ST, or Mac could never match) and even gaming. It's almost never the best technology that wins anything, it's almost always the technology that's just good enough, priced competitively enough, and has the best support. With each passing year, that was more and more the PC.

 

Once it was clear the PC was going to dominate, period, arguably the best strategy for both Commodore and Atari would have been to double down on their PC clones and become the best damned PC clone maker out there, going the Dell or Gateway route (and even then it would be a tough row to hoe for their respective brands to become accepted in the business world). Otherwise, their respective niches (video for the Amiga, music for the ST) just weren't going to be sustainable (the Macintosh had the best of the bunch with desktop publishing), particularly without the types of margins that Apple enjoyed (and even they were a Microsoft cash assist away from going away at one point).

[high voltage]

I remember in 93, Return to Zork came out, that was a killer app to get a CD Rom (which I did just for that game) for your PC.

[Bill Loguidice]

I remember in 93, Return to Zork came out, that was a killer app to get a CD Rom (which I did just for that game) for your PC.

 

I loved Return to Zork and have fond memories of beating it with my girlfriend at the time, but I'd hardly call it a killer app. Myst and The 7th Guest were the real killer apps.

[Nebulon]

Well, a modern demo sure doesn't help sell computers in the late 80s or early 90s so it's a moot point.

 

What are you, the thread master?

The copper is a dedicated part of the graphics architecture.

While it can perform operations at the same time as the CPU, it's far from being a general purpose CPU.

It isn't going to speed up raytracing, image processing, compressing/decompressing video, etc... things that make the Amiga competitive against faster and faster PCs.

 

In the early 90s you had 50MHz 486s, True Color graphics cards with hardware acceleration, multi-speed CD-ROMs for software that actually shipped on CD, Windows 3, and much more software support. What exactly is superior about the Amiga at that point with what was available?

 

Everything Commodore released from about 1989 on was too little too late.

I think maybe you're playing up the early 90s PCs a bit too much. Keep in mind that the hardware acceleration at the time was inefficient and barely supported, the UARTs were slow, the bus interface was slow, plug-and-play was years away from actually working properly, memory management was awful, and the first SoundBlaster cards were 8-bit monophonic with horrible DACs. Having said that, I will give the Intel chips of the time credit for handling polygons well.

[emkay]

The fact of the matter is, the special capabilities of the Amiga were too far ahead of their time to be appreciated by the masses. The Amiga was the original multimedia machine, but in a time before ubiquitous CD-ROMs or the Internet, it just couldn't have the same type of utility or impact that it otherwise should have without the other limitations imposed by the era's technology.

Well, the Amiga really was far ahead of it's time, but it lacked in certain ranges. I wonder, what stopped them to add slight enhancementes, making the Amiga more useful for Offices? It was all there, just some "finetuning" was missed, and they did it even worse, putting the AGA Chipset out that lost some compatibility to the OCS/ECS and at the same time powered the useless features .... such as interlace for hires modes... Really, the Amiga HAD to be 100% downward compatible AND usable on actual VGA monitors instead ... some addons for better sound and native higher clocking for workstations. Really, back in that time the DIE size shrinked to the half every year, but they weren't able to add new features and leave the old features untouched. The base hardware had been a great insurance of a selling point just into the mid 2000s, adjusting the needed parts by the years... they would had have enough reserves, but acted like blind chickens... Remember: Amiga 1000's OS was already able to adress 4GB RAM. To exceed that, you'd need a 64Bit OS.

And, btw. : Have you realized that XBOX one and PS 4 use "Amiga" features?

[JamesD]

I think maybe you're playing up the early 90s PCs a bit too much. Keep in mind that the hardware acceleration at the time was inefficient and barely supported, the UARTs were slow, the bus interface was slow, plug-and-play was years away from actually working properly, memory management was awful, and the first SoundBlaster cards were 8-bit monophonic with horrible DACs. Having said that, I will give the Intel chips of the time credit for handling polygons well.

I looked up the date all those things were introduced, feel free to do the same.