3 ms·
> oh, and if not for C= incredibly horrific management Thanks to that horrific management, the future of the Amiga was dead the moment it was released. No sign
by tralarpa 4y ago
> oh, and if not for C= incredibly horrific management
Thanks to that horrific management, the future of the Amiga was dead the moment it was released. No significant update of the OS for five years (KS1.0 in 1985 to KS2.0 in 1990). No significant update of the hardware for seven years (Amiga 1000 in 1985 to Amiga 4000 in 1992). And that was while the IBM-compatible PCs and Windows were going through those years that established their dominance for the next decades.
- icedchai 4y agoI remember upgrading to an A3000 from an A500. 1.3 and 2.0 were like night-and-day. The 3000 was a pretty big hardware leap in terms of integration, but you are right, it was still incremental. The chipset, which is what made the Amiga an "Amiga", barely changed. The 1200/4000 AGA machines were too little, too late. By that time, everyone was getting 386's with SVGA and Soundblasters.
- snvzz 4y agoWhen the original Amiga team left Commodore, the next generation chipset, Ranger, was finished and ready. But CBM management decided to discard it. But that wasn't, by far, the only time they went directly against the architects' judgement. Like how they later forbid the A3000 team from using a DSP, or the fate of AA+/AAA.