Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!metahawk
From: metahawk@itsgw.rpi.edu (Wayne G Rigby)
Subject: Re: Revised Amiga line
Message-ID: <!dwg!c+@rpi.edu>
Sender: Wayne Rigby
Nntp-Posting-Host: jec414.its.rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
References: <4702@orbit.cts.com>
Date: 26 Apr 91 17:35:54 GMT
Lines: 76

In article <4702@orbit.cts.com> chucks@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Erik Funkenbusch) writes:
>Well, i was doing some thinking (a not so common occurance nowadays :)  and i
>came up with some new ideas (or maybe not so new).   These are my suggestions
>for a new improved amiga line:
>
>1) An EXTREMELY low cost 500.  this would be a totally re-designed 500
>motherboard with ECS, NO Zorro expansion, built-in scsi, and a Pizza box

Sounds very similar to the A500 (except for the SCSI), since the expansion
really isn't a Zorro expansion per se.  I'd really like to see the A500
in a small box with separate keyboard though.

>(slab) design.  my reasons for this are severalfold.  MOST people who buy a
>500 over a 2000 do so because "I don't want to expand, so why should i pay for
>all those slots".  This should be marketed as a no-expansion machine as a
>feature, i.e. your not paying for something your not going to use.  this is my
>largest qualm with the Mac LC, the no-slot, no-expansion is downplayed to such
>an extent that many people don't know that they can't expand it when they buy
>it.  but i drift, this machine could make heavy use of VLSI to reduce cost. 
>although the scsi controller would add to the cost, there being no expansion
>would reduce cost more i would think making it a net cheaper cost to produce.

The cost of setting up the new VLSI chips wouldn't be very cheap, though.

>2) A redesigned 2000.  this would look more like a 3000, i.e. snazzier case
>design, backplane expansion.  however i think it could be designed such all of
>the costly parts of having an expandible architecture could be placed on the
>backplane (i.e. busmaster, buffers, etc..) so that the machine could be sold
>without the backplane at a substantially less cost, then people could purchase
>the backplane when they were ready to expand.
>
>3) A trade-up offer for 500 slab machines to higher machines. so that
>purchasing a low end machine doesn't mean you lose your investment.  the
>traded up machines could be re-furbished and leased out, sold at a lower cost,
>or given to schools as a tax-break.  
>
>If anyone has an address (email or USMail) of someone at commodore that might
>be interested in these and more comments i would appreciate it if they could
>send it to me.   otherwise, i'd like to know what people think of these
>concepts.
>
>.--------------------------------------------------------------------------.
>| UUCP: {amdahl!tcnet, crash}!orbit!pnet51!chucks | "I know he's come back |
>| ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!chucks@nosc.mil        | from the dead, but do  |
>| INET: chucks@pnet51.orb.mn.org                  | you really think he's  |
>|-------------------------------------------------| moved back in?"        |
>| Amiga programmer at large, employment options   | Lou Diamond Philips in |
>| welcome, inquire within.                        | "The First Power".     |
>`--------------------------------------------------------------------------'

I think Commodore has already developed its new lowend machine:  the
A3000-16.  The startup cost for any design is rather expensive, and 
starting up a line for a low end machine just really isn't worth it.
Especially when there is a line that already exists that pretty much
serves that area already.  Commodore might repackage the A500 in a
different case, kind of like C-64 -> C-64C.  I don't really know how
much this would cost, though.

So starting up a lowend machine isn't really worth the effort, but starting
up a line that's intermediate in level and has 90% or so (?) of the same
parts as a higher end machine would be worth the effort.  This machine
would be more fairly expensive for a while but would drop tremendously
over a period of 3-5 years.  This is basically what happened with the
A500 and A2000 series.  I could see the A3000-16 cutting into A500 sales
eventually (of course it'd be a very long time before the A500 is shelved).
Also, nowadays, the A2000 really isn't very expensive.  I wonder if
Commodore is going to offer A3000's without hard drives so those who 
can't really afford the drive right off can still get the computer, and so
some people can provide their own mass storage solutions without having
to sell off the internal HD if they want a big internal drive.

                                   Wayne Rigby
                                   Computer and Systems Engineer (in training)
                                   Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
                                   metahawk@rpi.edu

