NetNews Offline 2/NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso/news/comp/sys/amiga/misc-part1/7157

Internet Message Format | 1996-08-05 | 5.9 KB

Path: dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!hchworth.demon.co.uk
From: Paul Chan <paul>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: New slot box Amiga
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 1996 13:47:22 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4hict2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hchworth.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: hchworth.demon.co.uk
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; SunOS 5.4 sun4m)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-URL: news:[e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

[e-mail] ("Jolyon Ralph") wrote:
>> As of March 5th on the Amiga Tech Web Page it was announced that a
>> prototype unit will be on display at CeBit 96 this month.
>
>These guys are totally crazy. Don't they realise that as soon as news of
>this new machine spreads around (it will be in the magazines next month),
>no-one is going to buy AT1200's any more (especially at their current
>high price, and because a large % of AT1200 buyers are existing Amiga
>owners upgrading) and they will all wait for the new machine. So... very
>poor sales of AT1200 and surfer pack over the next few months. All that
>needs to happen is a delay or problem with the new machine (when do you
>think developers will get a chance to test their software works with it?
>The week it goes on sale, no doubt.) and AT are in serious trouble,
>especially as they're running on an almost zero budget (because of parent
>ESCOM's financial troubles).

Well Jolyon, I have to say you are right here. The so-called March Amiga *must*
have contributed to the low sales of the A1200 of late. Loads of people on the
lit (me included) have said that they`ll see what the A1200Plus/whatever was
all about before making any decision.

On the side of AT (for once ;), I believe that the original press release was
forced by the rumour of AT making only A1200`s (and then dropping the Amiga)
that was doing the rounds last year. Now what they are saying now is that a new
Amiga will not be ready for several months, suggesting that you buy an A1200
now because there`ll be no "March Amiga" on sale in March.

This, they hope, will make a lot of people buy the A1200 now rather than wait
for what will now be months for a new model.

The flaw with their argument, as ever, is that the A1200 is doubly undesirable.
Poor spec and high price. Couple that with limited and expensive expansion
options, and now the prospect of being obsolete in mere months due to the
possibility of the new model having better gfx and sfx capabilties - and you do
have a potential disaster.
>
>I thought everyone in the industry understood this problem. It's called
>the Osborne syndrome (after the pioneers of portable computers Osborne
>who collapsed because they announced a new model before it was ready to
>ship - everyone stopped buying the old one, their cashflow stopped and
>they went out of business before they were able to launch the new model).
>Obviously, AT aren't in exactly the same position, they have a powerful
>parent company. But if that parent company aren't prepared to inject
>massive finance to protect AT (which it appears they are not), then they
>might as well be a small independent company with all the risks
>asssociated.

Well, I remember C= used to be tight-lipped over their policies, good practice,
but sometimes it hurt customers: A500/A500+/A600 fiasco anyone?

>
>They have absolutely no concept of developer support, and it appears
>their business skills are lacking too. No wonder the A1200 did so badly
>before christmas.

Developer support is not something I can comment on, but I agree that their
business practice was very poor. They have little cash to work on, and I`m sure
it would break my heart if I was told that the A1200 MUST be priced like it is.

>
>If the Amiga survives over the next year it will be due to the loyalty of
>the Amiga users, and despite of Amiga Technologies.

Quite true. I must admit that I`ll not be buying the A1200 in any way shape or
form at current prices. The Surfer pack is looking increasingly expensive,
(Lite versions of software? I`d rather pick and choose, pay the shareware fee,
and set the thing up myself)

>
>No doubt lots of you will flame me for taking such a negative view of the
>market. Yes, I think it's good that new machines are being developed (and
>I think the specifications of the new box sound good, although I'd have
>prefered an MMU-030). Yes, I look forward to PowerPC Amigas (if AT
>survive long enough to launch one, and if any software developers are
>left to port their software to it).

Agreed. They appear to have set a price structure already and have no intent of
dropping their prices. The Amiga "Slot-box" would cost upwards of 1000 UK
pounds if this carries on.

>
>And if anyone from Amiga Technologies is listening and wonders why one of
>their developers has decided to be so vocal about this, then I suggest
>you ask yourselves what you are doing to talk to developers. We have
>heard nothing, not a sausage. My email enquries to Dr. Peter Kittell have
>been fobbed off with pathetic responses. Other developers I have talked
>to have said the same. Several ex-developers have cited the total lack of
>communication from Amiga Technologies as a major contribution to them
>being ex-developers. I am under pressure myself to be an ex-developer,
>and the attitude of Amiga Technologies is not helping me at all.

This is very bad karma indeed. I must admit, what I have seen from Dr. P.K.
hasn`t been overly descriptive, but I haven`t been worried (except for the
prices they charge).

>
>I want to continue to develop for the Amiga. Why will Amiga Technologies
>not help us? My email address is: [e-mail] - I await
>response from anyone in Amiga Tech...   please?

You`d have been a lot better off cc`ing this message to Dr P.K. too. I haven`t
seen any posts from AT staff for some time.