I have to disagree. The Amiga's design was not the decisive problem. The IBM PC prospers to this day with many traces of its legacy surviving as junk DNA from i

I have to disagree. The Amiga's design was not the decisive problem. The IBM PC prospers to this day with many traces of its legacy surviving as junk DNA from its haphazard evolutionary path. Had the Amiga survived in some form, no doubt the fully evolved platform would bear similar marks of its gaming-centric past, mostly in the hardware interface, not the operating system. You yourself bring up the Mac's leap to OS X. On a technical level that wasn't so much a transition as a hard reboot, only made possible by some truly heroic programming of compatibility systems software. OS X got off to a bumpy start but not enough to kill it. The Mac since went from PowerPC to x86 by another feat of compatibility wizardry in the form of Rosetta. But what would have been easier than looking at the state of the Macintosh in the late 90s and pronouncing it a dead-end, a lost cause? Commodore's problem was first and foremost cultural. I've always found myself in the unusual position of loving the C64 and the Amiga but hating Commodore.