4 ms·
Are you saying the Amigas weren't personal computers?
by unicornporn 8y ago
Are you saying the Amigas weren't personal computers?
- detaro 8y ago"PC" was a very clear label for "(mostly) IBM PC compatible" systems. They're all various forms of personal computers, but not meant when people say "PC".
- ekianjo 8y agoYou are missing the context completely. At the time (late 80s, early 90s) Amigas were one of the main alternative against "PCs", so nobody would have said "Amiga PC". Just like you dont say "Mac PC".
- orionblastar 8y agoAmiga had the IBM PC Bridgecard to run DOS and Windows on it. (I think it even ran OS/2 and others). The only PC that Commodore made was the Colt series. It was a PC compatible that Commodore botched in marketing by saying "It is not a PC Clone, it is a Commodore!" of course it was a PC Clone that is what people wanted.
- mattl 8y agoAfter the ESCOM buyout they produced a bunch of PCs for the UK market (maybe others) branded as Commodore. Edit: Mine came with dual boot OS/2 Warp and Windows 95.
- orionblastar 8y agoI don't live in the UK so I didn't know about the PC clones by Commodore in the UK. I was talking about Commodore before they got bought out by Escom ect. I almost bought a PC Colt but got a generic 386DX PC a friend of mine sold me used that was cheaper.
- hestefisk 8y agoThat is untrue. They had the Commodore PC-10 and -20 series, at least in Europe. I still remember the start up beep of my PC-20 —— it sported a 8088 Intel cpu at 4.75MHz.
- unicornporn 8y agoI owned an A500 and it's true I never called it a PC. However, the context appeared to me being a Hacker News thread — a place where I would not expect anybody to deny the Amigas were personal computers. I have no problem calling Macs personal computers — because they are. The whole Mac vs. PC debacle was a misnomer if anything.