Re: The Apple ][ was cool!

[Jeff Thomas <a2forever@usa.net>]

Jason wrote:
>>Jeff Thomas:
> >Firstly in 1990, Atari successfully managed to create a similarly
> >specified Amiga �knock-off� (4,096 colour palette, 8-bit stereo sound,
> >�Blitter� (GFX) chip variant, 1Mb Ram standard, etc), the Atari
> 1040STe.

>That doesn't sound right...  The STE only had the 256 colour palette
>didn't it...?
The Atari STe most certainly had a 4,096 colour palette (check out the
advertisements from Atari Corp in 1990).
Many game reviewers even commented on how the STe versions looked and sounded the
same as the Amiga version.

It was the ST which had only 512 colour palette (not 256).

>> A price war broke-out between the two companies. Eventually, Atari
>> leaves the market and focuses solely on the game console market with
>> the Lynx and Jaguar.

>That certainly isn't right, Atari shifted their focus to the Falcon.
Definitely, a price war broke out!
When the STe (with it�s own bundle) was first launched in 1990, it sold for the
same price as
the �Flight of Fanasty� Amiga bundle � being 399.99 British pounds.
By 1994, the games market crashed in Europe.


>>Commodore wasn�t left �undamaged� the biggest mistake made was the
>> unannounced launch of the Amiga 500Plus in December 1991, which had a
>> newer chip set and operating system (Workbench 2.0). The biggest
>> problem was �software� incompatibility - suddenly more than half the
>>games didn�t work.

>For those interested, games that didn't use the Kernal jump table and
>hit the ROM directly were fecked up 'cos the ROM moved around.  Anything
>that made legitimate calls via the table was fine. =-)
That is only one part of the story. The �exact� reasons for the compatibly
problems are mentioned below (as quoted from Amiga Format in December 1991).
1) Software weren�t developed in accordance to guidelines given by Commodore.
2) Before the Amiga 500Plus, nearly every Amiga came with 512Kb Chip memory
(built-in). Therefore users wanting 1Mb, required a 512Kb memory expansion
(called Fast Memory). The problem here was that this new Amiga had 1Mb Chip
memory and no fast memory. This affected many graphics-related programs looking
for the extra 512Kb fast ram.
3) The ECS (Enhanced Chip Set) found in the Amiga 500Plus, �Denise� and �Agnus�
chips work slightly differently, which could cause programs going direct to
hardware to go wrong.
4) A new disk-handling system used in Workbench 2.0 had trouble with weird disk
formats, most common on disks with games, which are copy protected.
5) Some Software loaded and ran fine but functioned incorrectly.
Some issues were resolved, but I knew of a lot of Amiga owners who were bitter
over these sudden changes by Commodore. Rather than upgrading their computers to
the newer chipsets or buying the newer Amiga and facing the probability of
software incompatibility with �older� software purchased over the years. Most
either switched to the PC (were the massive game smash, �Wolfenstein 3D� was just
taking off [1992]) or still kept using their older Amiga.
This one blunder in itself had contributed to their rapid decline, which peaked
in 1991 and was in
Free fall since (till they folded in 1994).
What Commodore, ought to have done was just �updated� Workbench to 2.0 (with
greater backward �compatibility� and get of the rid new disk-handling system
which might have been faster but caused too many problems) and keep everything
else the same.
>The problem was with more than half of the games, and was somewhat
>alleviated on 2Mb plus machines by using a "degrader", a program that
>mounted a software-based 1.3 ROM.
That took another year, before that was available in the Amiga 1200. It still had
compatibility problems (going back to the Amiga 500Plus, see points 2, 3, 4 & 5,
[as mentioned earlier]).

>> Commodores response to the PC threat? The Amiga 1200 for the home
>> user.  Graphics got a badly needed boost from 32 colours (of 4,096
>> colours) to 256 from a palette of 16.7 million.
>Hot quite right, 64 colours on the stock (EHB mode) and the full 4,096
>in HAM mode and the A1200 could do HAM-8.
I know of �no games� which ran in straight HAM or HAM-8 mode.
Already on the PC, it was possible to get 24-bit (16.7 million colors) graphic
cards - commonly used with graphic programs like CorelDraw 3.0, etc. I remember,
getting one installed in my computer back in 1993. By 1994, the number of games
taking advantage of 24-bit graphics (that's beyond 256-colours) was growing e.g.
7th Guest, Myst, etc. One of the best, was "Star Trek: A Final Unity" complete
with CD-quality music, sound and real speech, dazzling graphics and cinematic
sequences which felt and sounded so real, it made the player believe they were on
the _real_ Enterprise - nothing compared to it, on the Amiga. Even "Return to
Zork" gave us a taste of what to expect from a truly multi-media product
combining cd-quality audio, with video and gameplay.
Personally, I have never seen or heard of an Amiga game using more than
256-colours with the same level of graphic detail as the next generation, 24-bit
graphic PC games and eventually, arrival of 3D.
>> The floppy drive remained the same, single-sided format.
>DS/DD - 880K per disk.
It ought to have been a high-density disk drive.

>> And the sound chip stayed the same, 8-bit 4 channels. Lastly, the
>> processor chip was only 14Mhz.
>But 32bit, a 68020.
It was crippled without a FPU.
The sound chip was by now, hopelessly �out of date� - the same since the first
Amiga 1000 in 1985.
Already in 1987, the Acorn Archimedes had 8-bit sound with 8-channels and
graphics capable of 256 colours out of a palette of 4,096 using 68020 processor.
The PC was already getting better at sound, by 1992/3 16-Bit CD-quality sound
with more channels started appearing.

>> Better technology was available at the time, but Commodore refused to
>> use it citing costs as the reason.
>Slapping a Blizzard or one of the many other boards added the option of
>larger processors, more RAM and an FPU.
Why, of course, it was possible to soup up your Amiga but the average user never
did.


Jeff.