@OlafS25

Quote:

it was indeed a great product. It is a pity that it was dropped

As I worote many times before: Bill McEwen is like reverted king Midas: everything he touches, turns in to pile of ashes.

@OlafS25

The interesting thing is I have found key people in all "camps" say exactly the same thing.

One has to question why something so agreeable to so many people including the parent company was not revisited.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@Vistaus

Quote:

Vistaus wrote: @Boot_WB Wowow, say to Olaf whatever you want (freedom of speech, after all) but when I wrote the OP I wasn't talking about trademarks. I was more after the normal, general use of the word Amiga for AmigaNG's, not the legal status of it.

Ah, I see - you innocently stepped into a bit of a minefield then.

In terms of its 'general usage' it's often used in two ways: as an adjective ("Is it Amiga?"), and as a noun ("Is it an Amiga?"). The two are often confused, which can be the source of much disagreement.

As an adjective ("Is it Amiga?") Amiga is as inclusive as you want it to be (AmigaOS4.x, AROS, MorphOS, Amithlon, WinUAE), all hardware (Commodore 68K machines, peripherals, accelerators, AmigaOnes, Pegasos, Sams, Macs, PCs running AROS, PCs running UAE, etc).

As a noun ("Is it an Amiga?") Amiga is a trademark, which applies only to Commodore/Amiga Tech 68K machines*.

A Draco is very Amiga, but is not an Amiga.
A CUSA Amiga* would be an Amiga, but would not be very Amiga.

(* Did CUSA actually release an "Amiga"?)

_________________
Troll - n., A disenfranchised former potential customer who remains interested enough to stay informed and express critical opinions.
opp., the vast majority who voted silently with their feet.

@Boot_WB

Quote:

A CUSA Amiga* would be an Amiga, but would not be very Amiga. (* Did CUSA actually release an "Amiga"?)

*cough* Amiga Games Inc. claims it as part of their proud legacy.

You really need to visit the back pages of AW more often. Heh.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

it is a kind of religion and deep believe, I do not know why people insist so on certain points. Amiga always was much more than just a computer but i personally would prefer if we would see each other just as Amigans, whatever and whyever we have chosen a certain platform and accept that everyone defines Amiga different.

@number6

Quote:

number6 wrote: @Boot_WB *cough* Amiga Games Inc. claims it as part of their proud legacy. #6

Oh just Lol! That still leaves me none-the-wiser though as to whether it actually existed though.

(The Wikipedia page suggests the Amiga Mini and possibly Mio were actually available as a product at one time.)

_________________
Troll - n., A disenfranchised former potential customer who remains interested enough to stay informed and express critical opinions.
opp., the vast majority who voted silently with their feet.

@Boot_WB

mkay. go to the back pages and ask.

I'm trying to obey the site rules. heh.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@Boot_WB

Quote:

Oh just Lol! That still leaves me none-the-wiser though as to whether it actually existed though.

Some members of this forum even had one! (not me )

Quote:

(The Wikipedia page suggests the Amiga Mini and possibly Mio were actually available as a product at one time.)

Question of inclusion of Amiga Mini in the "Amiga models and variants" Article on Wikipedia is still open...

@Boot_WB

You're making it way more complicated than it needs to. All I wanted to know was: when we're on forums like these, tech sites, etc. can I call an AmigaNG an Amiga? Just for referencing what I use, not for referencing what it legally is.

It's partly answered by some people now who convinced me to call an NG an Amiga if I want to. But there still seem to be two camps. I know there were camps, but what I mean is: it doesn't seem like an easy-to-answer question.
I do call my AmigaONE 500 an Amiga wherever I tell about it. And given that it seems to be a wash what to really reference to, I just keep on referencing to it as an Amiga then :)

_________________
Proud user of AmigaOS 4.1 on an AmigaONE 500. This is the first Amiga I've ever had so I don't know all the ins and outs of AmigaOS yet, so I'm sorry if I'm asking noob questions and stuff.

@Vistaus,

With the non swaying opinions on the boards it's tough to be safe. There are some who say a Jeep is no longer a Jeep because Chrysler makes them now.

Just call it a Sam with AOS4+ and you'll be safe, lol.

Chris

@Vistaus

I just make it easy on myself by saying "Classic" or NG (AOS4 PPC).

So basically I have a few terms; Classic, NG, Aros and Morphos.

@Vistaus

Quote:

All I wanted to know was: when we're on forums like these, tech sites, etc. can I call an AmigaNG an Amiga? Just for referencing what I use, not for referencing what it legally is.

Oh, then hell yes. Everyone will know what you're talking about, and only someone looking for offense will actually find it.

I thought you were looking for some kind of definitive answer, more in-depth than "yes" or "no". As you recognise, it's not an easy-to-answer question.

I agree that it's way more complicated than it needs to be.

_________________
Troll - n., A disenfranchised former potential customer who remains interested enough to stay informed and express critical opinions.
opp., the vast majority who voted silently with their feet.

Answering to initial question is impossible unless you ask first a better question:

"What does or did Amiga mean for you?"

With few exceptions, we're all here (on this forum, but also on other Amiga-related fora) because in our youth Amiga has not been just a computer, but a real philosophic choice. A instrument to show our talent, a friend to play games with, a brush to let our expressivity free, a field to measure our skills. We irrationally loved this platform at the point we're still here arguing about what of the current 'camps' is the best one, somehow loosing the focus on the real miracle: that all these camps exist!

So, when you ask if Amiga NG platforms are Amiga as well, there are always two possible answers.

The pragmatic and technically correct "NO", and the bloody-hearted, enthusiast philosophic and historically correct "YES". These answers are not in contradiction for the same reasons people already explained, they lay on completely different universes.

AmigaNG platforms AREN'T Amiga products because the original Amiga platform relied on some specific and original concepts which had been true from the first Amiga 1000 released by Commodore-Amiga in 1985 to the last Amiga 4000T model released - IIRC - by Escom. Nothing of these concepts has been kept with Amiga NG platforms, there's really nothing in common between a SAM and a A1200. They are different products with different naming and brands. They are AmigaONEs.

AmigaNG ARE "Amiga" (with commas), in a wider, more generalized use of the term, because all of them try to keep the platform alive somehow, each one with their strengths and problems. If you'd ask me, I would tell you that my Icaros based Acer AspireOne A150 netbook is my current Amiga. It somehow looks like an Amiga, it acts like an Amiga, it can even run Amiga games and applications in a integrated fashion so, from my personal point of view, this is my Amiga and noone will make me change my mind, whatever he/she will say. I could even argue why I think it would be even more Amiga than other official solutions, but that's not my goal and, best of all, it would just be my opinion.

@Vistaus

I think it's a lag of a chipset which PC users can't have.

_________________
Rock lobster bit me. My Workbench has always preferences. X1000 + AmigaOS4.1 FE
"Anyone can build a fast CPU. The trick is to build a fast system." -Seymour Cray

@Vistaus

Sometimes the best answer to a question is another question:

A modern MAC: Mac or not?


A modern MAC have not in common neither the OS nor the hardware of the original MAC (and neither is based on the original source code nor is binary compatible) and i do not see people saying that modern MACS are not MACS

Last edited by Fransexy on 17-Jun-2014 at 11:28 PM.

_________________
No PowerPC, No Fun
Make Amiga Great Again

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: I can remember in the old days that the debate was "Amiga versus PC" and not "AmigaOS versus MSDOS".

That's because back in the 80's the computers and the OS were indivisible; formed as a only whole. In those times you could not think in the OS without the hardware and with the hardware without the OS.When PC was able to run (or at least was popularized) other operating systems (mainly Windows) and also Amiga (commodore unix and later linux) was when the debate separates to hardaware vs hardware and OS vs OS

Last edited by Fransexy on 18-Jun-2014 at 12:09 AM.

_________________
No PowerPC, No Fun
Make Amiga Great Again

@Fransexy

Quote:

A modern MAC have not in common neither the OS nor the hardware of the original MAC (and neither is based on the original source code nor is binary compatible) and i do not see people saying that modern MACS are not MACS

Well Mac (Not MAC which is a Media Access Control address) hardware is still made by the original company and has a very straight forward continual evolutional timeline that changed bit-by-bit into the machines they are today. A dedicated all-in-one platform of hardware and software developed by Apple and branded as a Macintosh, same as it has been for over 30 years, there's no ambiguity or question there.

That's a very different situation with the Amiga though whose parent company vanished 20 years ago and whose assets, hardware/software has been split between dozens of companies, re-built, re-designed, reverse engineered, cloned etc into the various operating systems we have running on hardware made by yet another handful of companies.

Last edited by danwood on 18-Jun-2014 at 12:18 AM.

@Fransexy

Quote:

Fransexy wrote: @OlafS25 Quote: OlafS25 wrote: I can remember in the old days that the debate was "Amiga versus PC" and not "AmigaOS versus MSDOS". That's because back in the 80's the computers and the OS were indivisible; formed as a only whole. In those times you could not think in the OS without the hardware and with the hardware without the OS.When PC was able to run (or at least was popularized) other operating systems (mainly Windows) and also Amiga (commodore unix and later linux) was when the debate separates to hardaware vs hardware and OS vs OS

And and in connection with this: firstly the debate was Amiga vs Atari; PC were not considered a challenger. While Amiga and Atari were fighting each other the PC grew without being seen as a threat until it was too late

_________________
No PowerPC, No Fun
Make Amiga Great Again

@danwood

Quote:

Well Mac (Not MAC which is a Media Access Control address)....

Yup, I pass with the capitals

Last edited by Fransexy on 18-Jun-2014 at 12:30 AM.
Last edited by Fransexy on 18-Jun-2014 at 12:29 AM.

_________________
No PowerPC, No Fun
Make Amiga Great Again

@Fransexy

What @danwood said.

Eddie

_________________
All the way, with 68k