Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

datagubbe.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 122 posts

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#111

Post by vidarh »

spankibalt wrote: post #109
vidarh wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that we forget "inconvenient" genres, but that at the peak of the Amiga popularity, while high end PC's could compete, the vast majority of people did not have those high-end PC's with the requisite graphics and sound cards. We continued to laugh at people with PC's pretty much until Doom, because most of the PC's our friends had were still low end, and lacked expensive graphics- and sound cards, while at th…

> "It's not that we forget "inconvenient" genres, [...]" I beg to differ; in my experience, the Amiga who doesn't forget is an outlier. ;) > "[...] the vast majority of people did not have those high-end PC's with the requisite graphics and sound cards." Once again: The context was the strictly technical , which was brought up by another poster. I am also well aware of the economical, and for specific usecases corres…

> The context was the strictly technical, which was brought up by another poster.

That's fine, but it was not what I took issue with in your response.

> It serves as an example of an arcade game with good production values, and many supported graphics and sound modes ("expandability"), for a PC of the era, i. e. the outgoing 80s.

It serves, to me, as an example of a pretty primitive game given the year the port was released, basic enough to replicate on an 8-bit machine, that likely didn't get a port because it wasn't well known enough in the markets where the Amiga was popular to bother licensing it and too basic to be competitive.

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#112

Post by spankibalt »

vidarh wrote: post #111
spankibalt wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "It's not that we forget "inconvenient" genres, [...]" I beg to differ; in my experience, the Amiga who doesn't forget is an outlier. ;) > "[...] the vast majority of people did not have those high-end PC's with the requisite graphics and sound cards." Once again: The context was the strictly technical , which was brought up by another poster. I am also well aware of the economical, and for specific usecases corres…

> The context was the strictly technical, which was brought up by another poster. That's fine, but it was not what I took issue with in your response. > It serves as an example of an arcade game with good production values, and many supported graphics and sound modes ("expandability"), for a PC of the era, i. e. the outgoing 80s. It serves, to me, as an example of a pretty primitive game given the year the port was r…

> "That's fine, but it was not what I took issue with in your response."

It's what was I was replying to; it's what the argument was about.

> "It serves, to me, as an example of a pretty primitive game given the year the port was released, [...]"

Okay.

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#113

Post by 77pt77 »

gapan wrote: post #82
77pt77 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem was computers built on closed architecture didn't have a future Like Apple/Mac?

> Like Apple/Mac? One could argue that apple is the only exception to the rule. And let's not forget that apple almost went bankrupt in 1997, only to be rescued by Microsoft.

Pretty big exception...

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#114

Post by drewp »

TheAmazingRace wrote: post #71
blakespot wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of my friends were gaming on consoles at the time. I very much preferred the Amiga (I also had Atari STs during this time) to consoles perhaps mainly due to the ability to use RGB monitors with a proper RGB signal. It was at best composite back then on the consoles of the era - in the states anyway (we didn't have SCART as an option). I know I'm odd here, but that was a major factor -- but also the fact that I u…

I heard NASA used their Amiga systems clear up to 2006, which is a rather unusually long lifespan for the application they intended them for. But I suppose commodity PC hardware and the software they needed just wasn't really there at a price point that made sense, plus, I guess as the old adage goes... if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

https://www.modd3d.com/articles/item/waterworld-show-control...

The document is sadly 404 now, but this was an awesome nerdy writeup of the conversion of the Universal Studios Waterworld from Amigas in 2007.

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#115

Post by fulafel »

Someone wrote: post #65
fulafel wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It lasted pretty long, especially considering the rate of evolution in those days. It debuted already in 1985, and there were some incremental improvements along the way (first the A3000 and then AGA A4000/A1200 in 1992). After the biggest lead in graphics started to shrink you still had a big user and software user base, multitasking desktop that was far ahead at least until W95, great CLI environment compared to PC…

> and there were some incremental improvements along the way (first the A3000 and then AGA A4000/A1200 in 1992) About the A3000 Wikipedia says “The machine is reported to have sold 14,380 units in Germany (including Amiga 3000T sales)” , and about the A4000 “The machine is reported to have sold 11,300 units in Germany” . Both were on sale for about 2 years. In comparison, the A2000 sold 124,500 units in Germany, agai…

.. And the 1992 Amiga 600 and 1993 1200 sold 193k/95k. The volume was always in the A500 form factor machines that used a TV as the display half the time.

Commodore's focus on low cost stuff (in their own way) while PC clones managed to push the HDD+SVGA setup price down was a critical factor for how things turned out I think. In the high end there was also Apple, Macintosh had launched a year before the Amiga and made the professional GUI market harder to enter.

But the fateful focus also let the masses have access to a great hacker's computer growing up, without the vibe satirized by "Office Space" that marked the Microsoft platforms.

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#116

Post by zozbot234 »

spankibalt wrote: post #110
zozbot234 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High-end PC's were also extremely costly prior to the mid-1990s or so (the "Multimedia PC" era). You could've bought an Acorn Archimedes home computer that would have run rings around the Amiga on a pure CPU compute basis and given you the same emerging multimedia (graphics+sound) capabilities, for less than the cost of a high-end IBM-compatible PC.

> High-end PC's were also extremely costly prior to the mid-1990s or so (the "Multimedia PC" era). I saw the first PCs starting to appear in East German households in 1990. Typically a VGA-capable 286 machine, 16 MHz, 1 MB RAM, two HD FDDs (one 1.44 MB 3.5", one 1.2 MB 5.25"), one 20 to 40 MB hard disk. No sound card. Without monitor, in early 1991, such a machine cost new about 1,500 DM. At the same time, a new Amig…

A 286 machine with no sound card and needing a costly external monitor, while the Amiga could just be hooked up to a household TV (it's not like you could tell the difference in quality at VGA 320x200 resolution). That's hard to describe as a high-end or multimedia-capable PC. It seems that you're proving the point I made.

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#117

Post by spankibalt »

zozbot234 wrote: post #116
spankibalt wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> High-end PC's were also extremely costly prior to the mid-1990s or so (the "Multimedia PC" era). I saw the first PCs starting to appear in East German households in 1990. Typically a VGA-capable 286 machine, 16 MHz, 1 MB RAM, two HD FDDs (one 1.44 MB 3.5", one 1.2 MB 5.25"), one 20 to 40 MB hard disk. No sound card. Without monitor, in early 1991, such a machine cost new about 1,500 DM. At the same time, a new Amig…

A 286 machine with no sound card and needing a costly external monitor, while the Amiga could just be hooked up to a household TV (it's not like you could tell the difference in quality at VGA 320x200 resolution). That's hard to describe as a high-end or multimedia-capable PC. It seems that you're proving the point I made.

> A 286 machine with no sound card and needing a costly external monitor, while the Amiga could just be hooked up to a household TV [...].

1. Yes, my example pits a typical PC against a typical A500 as the purchasing choice to make early 1991. In my area, both machines cost roughly the same, but PCs and corresponding architectures were much more widespread and familiar (the GDR worked on its own IBM-compatible clones after all). The point was to illustrate what people here who had the money could choose from shortly after the watershed that is the German reunification. And prices and capability only skewed more in favor of the PC as time went on...

2. A small (14" or 15") monitor was not that expensive (600+ DM; the venerable 1024 x 768-capable, MPR-II-certified Highscreen "LE 1024" cost about 1,000 DM in early 1991); A500 users of the time could go for a new 1084S, at a cost of just about 600 DM. And AdLib and SoundBlaster clones of good value were also not expensive (think around 150 DM, sometimes with one or two games thrown-in). Something one would buy "the month after" if money was a bit tight.

3. If I can't tell the difference between 320 x 200 on a typical CRT or a typical TV in a 1991 kidlet's room I'd be off to an ophthalmologist. The TV-capability was definitely an advantage, though; lotsa cheap CRTs of the era sucked because they made one's fuckin' eyes burn. I remember most small TVs being easier on the eyeballs. I exchanged the 14" monitor my PC came with (was a gift) for a much better 15" CRT about four months later.

4. You talked about "Multimedia-PCs"... which in the mid-90s delivered even better bang-for-bucks. By then, the Amigas were already buried anyways. Unless you were a fan, financially much less mobile, had a need for the luggability (and other pros) only a keyboard-case computer could deliver at competitive prices, or got scammed or somesuch.

5. People here who were too cash-strapped and just wanted to play games usually went for game consoles (Atari 2600 jr. as well as the NES being the most popular choices... 'till the SEGA Mega Drive and especially the SNES took over).

The early ('89 to '91) home computer for the value-oriented customer? The Commodore 64 of course. Saw many. A lot of them second-hand machines bought from Westerners who cleaned house to make room for whatever came next.

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#118

Post by rbanffy »

The Amiga is a very interesting case. It started out extremely capable, with a complex architecture with multiple coprocessors tightly coupled to memory and the CPU.

As time passed, that complexity made it more difficult to build newer, better Amigas that were compatible with the software already written for it. All its unique features - graphics, 2D acceleration, audio - made it complicated to improve the machine. The PC, on the other hand, was very easy - you could throw out your CGA card and get an EGA or VGA, the same way you could plug in a generic sound card and get MIDI and PCM audio, along with an IDE port for a CD-ROM.

If the value proposition held, it could have survived longer, but this business of getting a new computer in order to get better video output gets expensive very quickly. I had EGA on my 10MHz XT-compatible and it was great.

Commodore was stuck in the 8-bit home computer model - mostly non-upgradable machines. This was the 1000 (it had a little upgradability), the 500, the 600, and the 1200. The 2000, 3000, and 4000 were seen as their professional counterparts, but they were all saddled by being compatible with games written for their built-in video and audio hardware that was quickly becoming inadequate compared to PCs.

Sadly, Atari didn't have as much custom hardware it would need to evolve, but still never quite made the leap from their self-contained machines to more modular ones that'd make it easier to compete with PCs. When they did, they opted for the VME bus instead of something simpler (such as a 16-bit ISA bus).

Impressively, near their deaths, both made PCs, but the PCs didn't share anything with their proprietary jewels. Both companies should know much better.

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#119

Post by bregma »

TheAmazingRace wrote: post #73
bregma wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MiNT and a 16 GB hard drive with all the GNU tools installed. It was just like the Unix at work. Linux came later after also going through AIX, HP/UX, A/UX, AT&T SVr4, SunOS, Solaris, OSF/1, ISC, ...

I presume you mean MB and not GB? On native Atari hardware at least, you could only address up to 1 GB partitions on the very last TOS 4.04 based systems like the Falcon.

Yes. nobody had GB drives in those days. The drive I had on my ST was a 16 MB SCSI drive and the CPU ran at 8 MHz. The IBM XTs that were so popular at the time only had 10 MB hard drives and ran at 4.77 MHz.

Re: Doom Didn't Kill the Amiga (2024)

#120

Post by badc0ffee »

zozbot234 wrote: post #116
spankibalt wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> High-end PC's were also extremely costly prior to the mid-1990s or so (the "Multimedia PC" era). I saw the first PCs starting to appear in East German households in 1990. Typically a VGA-capable 286 machine, 16 MHz, 1 MB RAM, two HD FDDs (one 1.44 MB 3.5", one 1.2 MB 5.25"), one 20 to 40 MB hard disk. No sound card. Without monitor, in early 1991, such a machine cost new about 1,500 DM. At the same time, a new Amig…

A 286 machine with no sound card and needing a costly external monitor, while the Amiga could just be hooked up to a household TV (it's not like you could tell the difference in quality at VGA 320x200 resolution). That's hard to describe as a high-end or multimedia-capable PC. It seems that you're proving the point I made.

Did you get colour out of a TV on the A500? I know the original A1000 had amazing colour composite output, but I don't think the other models did.
Post reply on HN