Conference hydra::amiga_v1

Re: .0

>    It also mentions CONVERT.NEO for IFF to Neochrome conversions
>    and a companion utility which coverts IFF to DEGAS.  Claims they
>    are available on most BBSes.  Anybody have them?  I don't think
>    they made it to the Fish disks yet.

Don't these programs go the wrong way to interest an Amiga owner?
Don't they take IFF and turn in into the unusable ST private formats?

    re: .1
    the article has the "hero of our story" converting a ST slideshow
    disk to an IFF slideshow on the Amiga using those utility programs.
    And then he converts Mac pictures to IFF, IFF to DEGAS or NEO, and
    uses DOS-2-DOS to put them on an ST disk.
    
    That implies that the utilities can convert to/from IFF.  I'd love
    to try it.....
    
    -Dave
    
    p.s. no, i didn't buy an ST - still waiting for the clearance
    sales to start.  That and there are just not enough games
    available for it that i want (great graphics, but it just isn't
    the same without stereo).  For $100-$200 it might make a nice game
    system for those titles that aren't ported to the Amiga.  
    

    
    re: .2
    
    I'm afraid that I called SSI yesterday concerning conversion of
    more of their product line to the Amiga and the answer I got wasn't
    very encouraging. SSI, for those of you who don't know them, produces
    some of the best computer wargames so far. Their advice to me was
    to either purchase an ST or an IBM PC. The Amiga isn't very high
    on their priority list. 
    
    Hopefully the high sales figures for A500s will turn this type of
    thing around. I know my wife won't be too pleased when I tell her
    I need another system!
    
    -Ray
    

    It's kind of ironic; Atari is struggling to overcome the 'game machine'
    syndrome, yet the majority of new ST releases seem to be games.
    
    On the other hand, the Amiga, with sprites, BOBS, stereo sound,
    blitter hardware, and more colors & resolution, has 'ARCADE MACHINE'
    written all over it.  Yet I see most of the game software coming
    out for the ST first, then being ported to the Amiga.  Doesn't make
    any sense.  Maybe the price of a system automatically categorizes
    it.  
    
    By all accounts, the A500 is still selling like hotcakes, while
    ST sales have withered.  (See the September Computer Shopper 'Hacking
    the ST' for an account of weak ST sales).  In anticipation of the
    Megas, a lot of potential Atari buyers are holding off.
    
    As an interesting aside, James Bayless, author of ProWrite for the
    Amiga and several older MAC titles, made some interesting comments
    in conference on Plink Sunday night.  The subject of copy protection
    came up, and I asked Bayless where people got their data on how
    much software was pirated for each brand of computer.  He replied
    that developers receiver some industry newsletter that reveals the
    ratio of software sales to hardware sales.  According to this simple
    yardstick, It seems that the people who actually buy the most software 
    are:
    
    1.  Macintosh  -----------
    2.  Amiga                |
    3.  Atari ST             |--Note that this list is also arranged
    4.  IBM Clones           |  in descending order by price!
    5.  C'64 & Atari 8-bits---
    
    Bayless also revealed that games are the most heavily pirated of all
    titles (surprise!).  Given this, it seems odd that a developer would
    choose to sell the most heavily pirated type of software to a system
    that accounts for more piracy than others, especially the 8-bit
    systems. 
                                                                          
    The weakness in this whole argument, of course, is that some titles
    just don't sell very well, yet the Industry would be led to believe
    that massive piracy has occured.  
           
    Anyway, I believe that the A500 will put the Amiga far ahead of
    Atari in installed base within six months.  Maybe we'll then see
    the juciest games first.
                                                             

    re: .4
    
    interesting... if low price means game system, then the 2000 should
    have no problem selling as a serious business system ;-)
    According to Thom from Compuclub, Atari is going to bundle the Mega
    ST with on-site installation, handholding, etc., $2400 for a 2 Meg
    Mega ST.  Maybe they believe that too.
    
    re: games
    interesting chart, i wonder why Mac owners don't pirate as heavily
    as other folks.  Could it be...support, upgrades, etc?
    I was suprised by the ibm pc rating, i thought business purchases
    would have offset pirating at home.
    
    I suspect the reason for the SSI support for the pc and the st is
    simple.  The pc is a very large customer base that only recently
    has been "discovered" by the game publishers.  The ST has a reasonable
    sized customer base, and isn't as complex an environment to port
    to compared to the Amiga or Mac.
    
    The A500 has "under $1000, color ARCADE MACHINE" written all over
    it.  That combination should spark some interest.  If SSI isn't
    interested, some other companies will fill the void.  Maybe even
    take advantage of the multitasking, color, and digitized sound,
    to do "killer" wargames :-)
    
    -dave

    Re: .5
    
    Are you serious?  $2400 for a 2 meg Mega ST with no additional features
    other than an additional $100 worth of ram chips and a maybe/maybe
    not blitter chip, and roms that should have been upgraded 18 months
    ago??
    
    If this is true, which I find hard to believe, then I think Atari
    is going to be in for a big surprise.

    re: .6
    
    yes, i am serious.  The Mega also has a detachable keyboard, and
    an expansion slot.  And the blitter chip is "on the way", should
    only be a small delay before the Megas have them :-)
    
    The rest of your description is right, this is the Atari ST equivalent
    of the Amiga 2000.  They chose to go with one slot and more memory,
    CBM chose lots of slots.  Not new or revolutionary technology.
    The rumor is that the  blitter is needed to help GEM scroll text at a
    reasonable rate.  I suspect CBM made the right choice, memory boards
    are cheaper as add-ons than buying an external slot box.
    
    The $2400 is to keep dealers happy providing the handholding service
    that Atari believes is needed to break into the business market.
    Haven't heard anything about CBM trying the same thing.  Maybe they
    are leaving that up to the dealers.  Isn't that the CBM Europe way
    of doing business?
    
    -dave
    

    Gee, Dave, you were right about the MegaST-2 price... I stopped
    by the Sudbury Bit Bucket on Saturday and they confirmed the price
    of $2400.  They too felt it was on the high side.
     
    I really think the Megas are more A1000-like than A2000-like.  I
    mean, they even resemble the A1000.  I also doubt that they have a
    200 watt supply.
    
    For the price of the MegaST-2, one could buy an A1000, a 20 meg
    drive, 2 megs of RAM, and a 68020/68881 board.  Something doesn't
    sound right here...
                                                        
    Getting back to the title of this note, did you notice that the
    cover of Computer Shopper did not have an Apple IIgs pictured? 
    In the same issue, there is an article lamenting the lackluster
    showing of the IIgs.  Claims there are only a few dozen titles
    available for the native mode.  Sales have been poor, and most of
    the major announcements have become vapor.
    
    Not to be vindictive or anything, but I remember how arrogant Apple
    was a year ago in claiming the the IIgs was an Amiga-killer.  I
    even remember one learned analyst quoting that it would be "...
    the final nail in the AMIGA coffin."
    
    We certainly live in interesting times.
    
    

    re: .8
    
    well... $2000 for an Amiga 2000 is also on the high side.  Both
    computers are overpriced to keep dealers happy - also to help
    legitimize them as traditional overpriced "business" systems.
    
    I agree, the Megas resemble the A1000 more.  The comment about the
    A2000 was more directed to the fact that both CBM and Atari shipped
    a high-end computer that was simply repackaged version of their
    current computer.
    
    I read the articles about the IIGS, i even went to Computer Mart
    in Nashua for the "the great event".  Apple had all the right
    pieces in place for a successful launch, except for one - the
    computer was not available in volume until much later.  Guess
    this will be a good test of the commitment to "Apple II forever".
    
    To put it in the proper context, remember how much commitment
    CBM and Atari has shown to their 8-bit customers.  They are
    both trying to keep the 8-bit line alive, but reality is
    rapidly intruding as the 520ST and Amiga 500 system prices
    start dropping.  The IIGS is caught in the middle, a system
    with lots of potential that won't be used until there is
    a large user base, and a company that doesn't like to drop
    prices to stay competive.
    
    -dave

    Apple screwed up once again.
    
    The only thing keeping the Mac alive is the fact that it was out
    there first, and consequently got the jump on the others in software.
    The fact remains that it is overpriced, and way underpowered. The
    main thing that Apple has done repeatedly is to implement the "Woz
    machine" filled with wild hacks to lose a chip. Today, when you
    can build all kinds of functionality into a single custom guy, there
    is no excuse for this kind of stinginess. Apple wasted untold effort
    making the IIgs "fairly" compatible with the IIe, even though it
    meant phenominal complexity. What they did not invest in was the
    same kind of distributed design (ie blitter, copper, etc) Once again,
    Apple expects the processor to do all the work. Well, that approach
    is frankly pitiful. What's worse is they even had the example of
    the Amiga, and still did the same old thing.
    
    Apple will eventually fall by the wayside because they are not big
    enough to be able to afford to ignore quality, like IBM. If Commodore
    dies, at least it won't be because their designs were poor.

    re: -1
    
    Ah, but remember, while at DECWORLD, Ken Olson indicated some interest 
    in working with Apple in the future.
    
    Who knows?
    
    
    
    Randy