How did the Amiga uses compare to uses for other personal computers in 1985? [on hold] The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow could Amiga computers play 14 bit sound?How did the Amiga 500 left-side expansion port work?How do Amiga 600 CPU accelerators work?How did the Amiga 1000 WCS (write controlled store) for Kickstart work?Reason for the Amiga clock speedHow are Amiga libraries structured?How did the Amiga DCTV workAmiga-looking keyboard for PCHow to create fast an icon file for Amiga program in WB drawer?When were other inexpensive computers able to recreate “The Amiga Juggler”?
Multi tool use
Read/write a pipe-delimited file line by line with some simple text manipulation
What happens if you break a law in another country outside of that country?
How can I prove that a state of equilibrium is unstable?
How to show a landlord what we have in savings?
Strange use of "whether ... than ..." in official text
Arity of Primitive Recursive Functions
Planeswalker Ability and Death Timing
Is a distribution that is normal, but highly skewed, considered Gaussian?
Would a grinding machine be a simple and workable propulsion system for an interplanetary spacecraft?
How do I secure a TV wall mount?
How should I connect my cat5 cable to connectors having an orange-green line?
Find the majority element, which appears more than half the time
How can I separate the number from the unit in argument?
What is the difference between 'contrib' and 'non-free' packages repositories?
Does int main() need a declaration on C++?
Why does the freezing point matter when picking cooler ice packs?
My ex-girlfriend uses my Apple ID to login to her iPad, do I have to give her my Apple ID password to reset it?
That's an odd coin - I wonder why
Could a dragon use its wings to swim?
Is it "common practice in Fourier transform spectroscopy to multiply the measured interferogram by an apodizing function"? If so, why?
Early programmable calculators with RS-232
Does Germany produce more waste than the US?
What does this strange code stamp on my passport mean?
How to pronounce fünf in 45
How did the Amiga uses compare to uses for other personal computers in 1985? [on hold]
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow could Amiga computers play 14 bit sound?How did the Amiga 500 left-side expansion port work?How do Amiga 600 CPU accelerators work?How did the Amiga 1000 WCS (write controlled store) for Kickstart work?Reason for the Amiga clock speedHow are Amiga libraries structured?How did the Amiga DCTV workAmiga-looking keyboard for PCHow to create fast an icon file for Amiga program in WB drawer?When were other inexpensive computers able to recreate “The Amiga Juggler”?
The Amiga 1000 came out in July 1985. This was an era in which personal computers were designed by their manufacturers to meet a unique set of bespoke requirements. For example, some computers came with advanced hardware for sound (for the time), while others had very primitive support for a "beeper".
It seems reasonable to conclude that personal computer buyers of this era tended to choose a system that focused on the hardware/software features that they felt were important for their own "use cases". Again, using the example of built-in audio support, a musician would be inclined toward a machine with more advanced audio capabilities. So would a gamer.
My question is what sort of use cases in 1985 led buyers toward purchasing an Amiga, and why would it be a better choice for those particular use cases than the PC, Macintosh, or Atari ST?
amiga
put on hold as too broad by Raffzahn, Bruce Abbott, pipe, Chenmunka♦ yesterday
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
The Amiga 1000 came out in July 1985. This was an era in which personal computers were designed by their manufacturers to meet a unique set of bespoke requirements. For example, some computers came with advanced hardware for sound (for the time), while others had very primitive support for a "beeper".
It seems reasonable to conclude that personal computer buyers of this era tended to choose a system that focused on the hardware/software features that they felt were important for their own "use cases". Again, using the example of built-in audio support, a musician would be inclined toward a machine with more advanced audio capabilities. So would a gamer.
My question is what sort of use cases in 1985 led buyers toward purchasing an Amiga, and why would it be a better choice for those particular use cases than the PC, Macintosh, or Atari ST?
amiga
put on hold as too broad by Raffzahn, Bruce Abbott, pipe, Chenmunka♦ yesterday
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
The Amiga 1000 came out in July 1985. This was an era in which personal computers were designed by their manufacturers to meet a unique set of bespoke requirements. For example, some computers came with advanced hardware for sound (for the time), while others had very primitive support for a "beeper".
It seems reasonable to conclude that personal computer buyers of this era tended to choose a system that focused on the hardware/software features that they felt were important for their own "use cases". Again, using the example of built-in audio support, a musician would be inclined toward a machine with more advanced audio capabilities. So would a gamer.
My question is what sort of use cases in 1985 led buyers toward purchasing an Amiga, and why would it be a better choice for those particular use cases than the PC, Macintosh, or Atari ST?
amiga
The Amiga 1000 came out in July 1985. This was an era in which personal computers were designed by their manufacturers to meet a unique set of bespoke requirements. For example, some computers came with advanced hardware for sound (for the time), while others had very primitive support for a "beeper".
It seems reasonable to conclude that personal computer buyers of this era tended to choose a system that focused on the hardware/software features that they felt were important for their own "use cases". Again, using the example of built-in audio support, a musician would be inclined toward a machine with more advanced audio capabilities. So would a gamer.
My question is what sort of use cases in 1985 led buyers toward purchasing an Amiga, and why would it be a better choice for those particular use cases than the PC, Macintosh, or Atari ST?
amiga
amiga
edited yesterday
Brian H
17.4k64148
17.4k64148
asked yesterday
Johannes BittnerJohannes Bittner
343125
343125
put on hold as too broad by Raffzahn, Bruce Abbott, pipe, Chenmunka♦ yesterday
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as too broad by Raffzahn, Bruce Abbott, pipe, Chenmunka♦ yesterday
Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
It was like a cheaper yet color Macintosh with a command line interface available. Stereo sound, better graphics, multi-process -- everything but sustained, intelligent marketing. (Initial marketing was good, but it was like they spent all their marketing money up front and expected momentum to carry them from that point.) I'm writing from an American viewpoint -- other countries weren't stuck in a mindset limited to PC or Mac. I like to say it offered more in 1985 than Windows 95 would a decade later.
The Atari ST won the high end music market with its standard MIDI interface. Unlike the Mac and PC, it could compete with the Amiga on price.
PC and Mac had much better business software support, and other high end programs such as AutoCAD pretty much ignored the Amiga and ST.
Probably the most well-known high-end Amiga software/hardware product was the Video Toaster from NewTek in 1987. It needed an Amiga 2000, which was a PC-looking machine with bus slots. It was a very popular video rendering system, and the graphics for the first couple of seasons of Babylon Five were produced with the Video Toaster and Amiga.
You could play awesome games on it but it crashed a lot. That's what I remember. All the biggest anime nerds back in the day would get the toaster and do their own subtitles. That's the other thing.
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday
@ToddWilcox heh, how did I forget games? 😶 I did not experience the frequent crashes you mention. If anything, it seemed the Amiga was more stable than PC clones at the time. When you consider the large selection of programs using interprocess communication, the programmers had to focus on robustness of their programs for their work to be useful in such a dynamic environment.
– RichF
yesterday
add a comment |
It was the only 16-bit computer with more than simplistic memory-mapped video hardware, with sprites reminiscent of the gaming-oriented 6502 processor color home computers (Atari 2600 and upwards and Commodore 64) but scaled upwards and separate "blitting" processing that could do the equivalent of sprites on bitmaps but with hardware acceleration. It had actual serious multitasking/processing. Compared to the state of technology, it was a very solid move forward from home computers to larger processing power and matching operating systems. "Personal computers", in contrast, highlighted the "business" angle and you'd see them advertised more likely with snapshots of spreadsheets than games.
It's possible that the high pricing of color monitors with reasonable resolution confined affordable reasonably ergonomic "computing" to monochrome displays, leaving color personal computers stuck with the display parameters of color TV sets which they strove to be compatible with.
The Macintosh with its built-in screen kept with monochrome (and CPU-manipulated bitmaps) for a long time, too.
So the Amiga was pretty much square where the technological advances would position the progress of home computers and in a space, for whatever reason, without serious contenders. But for whatever reason, also without serious perspectives. It took some time before acceleration became a thing on PCs, and even then, its "sprite" support never grew beyond a hardware cursor. Instead blitting and later triangle shading and other stuff you'd expect GL to deliver became a thing and eventually got good enough to kill off Silicone Graphics Workstations, at one time the epitome of heavy-duty graphics processing (rather than game-based graphics which had a different focus).
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It was like a cheaper yet color Macintosh with a command line interface available. Stereo sound, better graphics, multi-process -- everything but sustained, intelligent marketing. (Initial marketing was good, but it was like they spent all their marketing money up front and expected momentum to carry them from that point.) I'm writing from an American viewpoint -- other countries weren't stuck in a mindset limited to PC or Mac. I like to say it offered more in 1985 than Windows 95 would a decade later.
The Atari ST won the high end music market with its standard MIDI interface. Unlike the Mac and PC, it could compete with the Amiga on price.
PC and Mac had much better business software support, and other high end programs such as AutoCAD pretty much ignored the Amiga and ST.
Probably the most well-known high-end Amiga software/hardware product was the Video Toaster from NewTek in 1987. It needed an Amiga 2000, which was a PC-looking machine with bus slots. It was a very popular video rendering system, and the graphics for the first couple of seasons of Babylon Five were produced with the Video Toaster and Amiga.
You could play awesome games on it but it crashed a lot. That's what I remember. All the biggest anime nerds back in the day would get the toaster and do their own subtitles. That's the other thing.
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday
@ToddWilcox heh, how did I forget games? 😶 I did not experience the frequent crashes you mention. If anything, it seemed the Amiga was more stable than PC clones at the time. When you consider the large selection of programs using interprocess communication, the programmers had to focus on robustness of their programs for their work to be useful in such a dynamic environment.
– RichF
yesterday
add a comment |
It was like a cheaper yet color Macintosh with a command line interface available. Stereo sound, better graphics, multi-process -- everything but sustained, intelligent marketing. (Initial marketing was good, but it was like they spent all their marketing money up front and expected momentum to carry them from that point.) I'm writing from an American viewpoint -- other countries weren't stuck in a mindset limited to PC or Mac. I like to say it offered more in 1985 than Windows 95 would a decade later.
The Atari ST won the high end music market with its standard MIDI interface. Unlike the Mac and PC, it could compete with the Amiga on price.
PC and Mac had much better business software support, and other high end programs such as AutoCAD pretty much ignored the Amiga and ST.
Probably the most well-known high-end Amiga software/hardware product was the Video Toaster from NewTek in 1987. It needed an Amiga 2000, which was a PC-looking machine with bus slots. It was a very popular video rendering system, and the graphics for the first couple of seasons of Babylon Five were produced with the Video Toaster and Amiga.
You could play awesome games on it but it crashed a lot. That's what I remember. All the biggest anime nerds back in the day would get the toaster and do their own subtitles. That's the other thing.
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday
@ToddWilcox heh, how did I forget games? 😶 I did not experience the frequent crashes you mention. If anything, it seemed the Amiga was more stable than PC clones at the time. When you consider the large selection of programs using interprocess communication, the programmers had to focus on robustness of their programs for their work to be useful in such a dynamic environment.
– RichF
yesterday
add a comment |
It was like a cheaper yet color Macintosh with a command line interface available. Stereo sound, better graphics, multi-process -- everything but sustained, intelligent marketing. (Initial marketing was good, but it was like they spent all their marketing money up front and expected momentum to carry them from that point.) I'm writing from an American viewpoint -- other countries weren't stuck in a mindset limited to PC or Mac. I like to say it offered more in 1985 than Windows 95 would a decade later.
The Atari ST won the high end music market with its standard MIDI interface. Unlike the Mac and PC, it could compete with the Amiga on price.
PC and Mac had much better business software support, and other high end programs such as AutoCAD pretty much ignored the Amiga and ST.
Probably the most well-known high-end Amiga software/hardware product was the Video Toaster from NewTek in 1987. It needed an Amiga 2000, which was a PC-looking machine with bus slots. It was a very popular video rendering system, and the graphics for the first couple of seasons of Babylon Five were produced with the Video Toaster and Amiga.
It was like a cheaper yet color Macintosh with a command line interface available. Stereo sound, better graphics, multi-process -- everything but sustained, intelligent marketing. (Initial marketing was good, but it was like they spent all their marketing money up front and expected momentum to carry them from that point.) I'm writing from an American viewpoint -- other countries weren't stuck in a mindset limited to PC or Mac. I like to say it offered more in 1985 than Windows 95 would a decade later.
The Atari ST won the high end music market with its standard MIDI interface. Unlike the Mac and PC, it could compete with the Amiga on price.
PC and Mac had much better business software support, and other high end programs such as AutoCAD pretty much ignored the Amiga and ST.
Probably the most well-known high-end Amiga software/hardware product was the Video Toaster from NewTek in 1987. It needed an Amiga 2000, which was a PC-looking machine with bus slots. It was a very popular video rendering system, and the graphics for the first couple of seasons of Babylon Five were produced with the Video Toaster and Amiga.
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
RichFRichF
4,7511435
4,7511435
You could play awesome games on it but it crashed a lot. That's what I remember. All the biggest anime nerds back in the day would get the toaster and do their own subtitles. That's the other thing.
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday
@ToddWilcox heh, how did I forget games? 😶 I did not experience the frequent crashes you mention. If anything, it seemed the Amiga was more stable than PC clones at the time. When you consider the large selection of programs using interprocess communication, the programmers had to focus on robustness of their programs for their work to be useful in such a dynamic environment.
– RichF
yesterday
add a comment |
You could play awesome games on it but it crashed a lot. That's what I remember. All the biggest anime nerds back in the day would get the toaster and do their own subtitles. That's the other thing.
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday
@ToddWilcox heh, how did I forget games? 😶 I did not experience the frequent crashes you mention. If anything, it seemed the Amiga was more stable than PC clones at the time. When you consider the large selection of programs using interprocess communication, the programmers had to focus on robustness of their programs for their work to be useful in such a dynamic environment.
– RichF
yesterday
You could play awesome games on it but it crashed a lot. That's what I remember. All the biggest anime nerds back in the day would get the toaster and do their own subtitles. That's the other thing.
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday
You could play awesome games on it but it crashed a lot. That's what I remember. All the biggest anime nerds back in the day would get the toaster and do their own subtitles. That's the other thing.
– Todd Wilcox
yesterday
@ToddWilcox heh, how did I forget games? 😶 I did not experience the frequent crashes you mention. If anything, it seemed the Amiga was more stable than PC clones at the time. When you consider the large selection of programs using interprocess communication, the programmers had to focus on robustness of their programs for their work to be useful in such a dynamic environment.
– RichF
yesterday
@ToddWilcox heh, how did I forget games? 😶 I did not experience the frequent crashes you mention. If anything, it seemed the Amiga was more stable than PC clones at the time. When you consider the large selection of programs using interprocess communication, the programmers had to focus on robustness of their programs for their work to be useful in such a dynamic environment.
– RichF
yesterday
add a comment |
It was the only 16-bit computer with more than simplistic memory-mapped video hardware, with sprites reminiscent of the gaming-oriented 6502 processor color home computers (Atari 2600 and upwards and Commodore 64) but scaled upwards and separate "blitting" processing that could do the equivalent of sprites on bitmaps but with hardware acceleration. It had actual serious multitasking/processing. Compared to the state of technology, it was a very solid move forward from home computers to larger processing power and matching operating systems. "Personal computers", in contrast, highlighted the "business" angle and you'd see them advertised more likely with snapshots of spreadsheets than games.
It's possible that the high pricing of color monitors with reasonable resolution confined affordable reasonably ergonomic "computing" to monochrome displays, leaving color personal computers stuck with the display parameters of color TV sets which they strove to be compatible with.
The Macintosh with its built-in screen kept with monochrome (and CPU-manipulated bitmaps) for a long time, too.
So the Amiga was pretty much square where the technological advances would position the progress of home computers and in a space, for whatever reason, without serious contenders. But for whatever reason, also without serious perspectives. It took some time before acceleration became a thing on PCs, and even then, its "sprite" support never grew beyond a hardware cursor. Instead blitting and later triangle shading and other stuff you'd expect GL to deliver became a thing and eventually got good enough to kill off Silicone Graphics Workstations, at one time the epitome of heavy-duty graphics processing (rather than game-based graphics which had a different focus).
add a comment |
It was the only 16-bit computer with more than simplistic memory-mapped video hardware, with sprites reminiscent of the gaming-oriented 6502 processor color home computers (Atari 2600 and upwards and Commodore 64) but scaled upwards and separate "blitting" processing that could do the equivalent of sprites on bitmaps but with hardware acceleration. It had actual serious multitasking/processing. Compared to the state of technology, it was a very solid move forward from home computers to larger processing power and matching operating systems. "Personal computers", in contrast, highlighted the "business" angle and you'd see them advertised more likely with snapshots of spreadsheets than games.
It's possible that the high pricing of color monitors with reasonable resolution confined affordable reasonably ergonomic "computing" to monochrome displays, leaving color personal computers stuck with the display parameters of color TV sets which they strove to be compatible with.
The Macintosh with its built-in screen kept with monochrome (and CPU-manipulated bitmaps) for a long time, too.
So the Amiga was pretty much square where the technological advances would position the progress of home computers and in a space, for whatever reason, without serious contenders. But for whatever reason, also without serious perspectives. It took some time before acceleration became a thing on PCs, and even then, its "sprite" support never grew beyond a hardware cursor. Instead blitting and later triangle shading and other stuff you'd expect GL to deliver became a thing and eventually got good enough to kill off Silicone Graphics Workstations, at one time the epitome of heavy-duty graphics processing (rather than game-based graphics which had a different focus).
add a comment |
It was the only 16-bit computer with more than simplistic memory-mapped video hardware, with sprites reminiscent of the gaming-oriented 6502 processor color home computers (Atari 2600 and upwards and Commodore 64) but scaled upwards and separate "blitting" processing that could do the equivalent of sprites on bitmaps but with hardware acceleration. It had actual serious multitasking/processing. Compared to the state of technology, it was a very solid move forward from home computers to larger processing power and matching operating systems. "Personal computers", in contrast, highlighted the "business" angle and you'd see them advertised more likely with snapshots of spreadsheets than games.
It's possible that the high pricing of color monitors with reasonable resolution confined affordable reasonably ergonomic "computing" to monochrome displays, leaving color personal computers stuck with the display parameters of color TV sets which they strove to be compatible with.
The Macintosh with its built-in screen kept with monochrome (and CPU-manipulated bitmaps) for a long time, too.
So the Amiga was pretty much square where the technological advances would position the progress of home computers and in a space, for whatever reason, without serious contenders. But for whatever reason, also without serious perspectives. It took some time before acceleration became a thing on PCs, and even then, its "sprite" support never grew beyond a hardware cursor. Instead blitting and later triangle shading and other stuff you'd expect GL to deliver became a thing and eventually got good enough to kill off Silicone Graphics Workstations, at one time the epitome of heavy-duty graphics processing (rather than game-based graphics which had a different focus).
It was the only 16-bit computer with more than simplistic memory-mapped video hardware, with sprites reminiscent of the gaming-oriented 6502 processor color home computers (Atari 2600 and upwards and Commodore 64) but scaled upwards and separate "blitting" processing that could do the equivalent of sprites on bitmaps but with hardware acceleration. It had actual serious multitasking/processing. Compared to the state of technology, it was a very solid move forward from home computers to larger processing power and matching operating systems. "Personal computers", in contrast, highlighted the "business" angle and you'd see them advertised more likely with snapshots of spreadsheets than games.
It's possible that the high pricing of color monitors with reasonable resolution confined affordable reasonably ergonomic "computing" to monochrome displays, leaving color personal computers stuck with the display parameters of color TV sets which they strove to be compatible with.
The Macintosh with its built-in screen kept with monochrome (and CPU-manipulated bitmaps) for a long time, too.
So the Amiga was pretty much square where the technological advances would position the progress of home computers and in a space, for whatever reason, without serious contenders. But for whatever reason, also without serious perspectives. It took some time before acceleration became a thing on PCs, and even then, its "sprite" support never grew beyond a hardware cursor. Instead blitting and later triangle shading and other stuff you'd expect GL to deliver became a thing and eventually got good enough to kill off Silicone Graphics Workstations, at one time the epitome of heavy-duty graphics processing (rather than game-based graphics which had a different focus).
answered yesterday
user12177
add a comment |
add a comment |
g8Irigwbzj iXfs9C12ypM,NKVCrAs hTtjJdG 67odbqT,lcaQ5se B6Vcu 6uyu9wA2MslPyjdwJcB68rr8YO,I4WmJ2 Gu