Jump to content
IGNORED

The Amiga: Why did it fail so hard in the United States?


empsolo

Recommended Posts

Also anyone who wanted to play SMB was limited to buying a NES (unless you lived in Japan and were willing to settle with Hudson's dull versions for the NEC PC-88 and Sharp X1) which effectively meant it was a killer app in the choice of system to buy, no matter if it was included or sold separately. If Nintendo had any say earlier in the 80's, likely none of the Donkey Kong or Mario Bros games would've been ported to other consoles and home computers.

 

But yes, to me the Video Toaster is not a killer app for the Amiga. Frankly I've never seen one in real life, only read about it. It seemed like expensive, specialized hardware. With a built-in MIDI interface, the Amiga could've been as big among musicians as the Atari ST and Macintosh became. Rather, it was the fact I've got friends with Amigas and the ability to copy games that made me move from the C64 to Amiga. A limited video game like the NES never was an option for me, and PC clones both were too dull and way too expensive. I'm surprised if this generation of financially mid-range youngsters 16-25 didn't exist in the US or either went strictly to console gaming after years of 8-bit computer games, or moved directly to MS-DOS and Windows 3.0.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also anyone who wanted to play SMB was limited to buying a NES (unless you lived in Japan and were willing to settle with Hudson's dull versions for the NEC PC-88 and Sharp X1) which effectively meant it was a killer app in the choice of system to buy, no matter if it was included or sold separately. If Nintendo had any say earlier in the 80's, likely none of the Donkey Kong or Mario Bros games would've been ported to other consoles and home computers.

 

But yes, to me the Video Toaster is not a killer app for the Amiga. Frankly I've never seen one in real life, only read about it. It seemed like expensive, specialized hardware. With a built-in MIDI interface, the Amiga could've been as big among musicians as the Atari ST and Macintosh became. Rather, it was the fact I've got friends with Amigas and the ability to copy games that made me move from the C64 to Amiga. A limited video game like the NES never was an option for me, and PC clones both were too dull and way too expensive. I'm surprised if this generation of financially mid-range youngsters 16-25 didn't exist in the US or either went strictly to console gaming after years of 8-bit computer games, or moved directly to MS-DOS and Windows 3.0.

 

In the US at least, the two were never necessarily mutually exclusive. It was perfectly reasonable (and common) to own at least one console, as well as a computer. Neither perfectly replicated what the other offered, which is also true today.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In the US at least, the two were never necessarily mutually exclusive. It was perfectly reasonable (and common) to own at least one console, as well as a computer. Neither perfectly replicated what the other offered, which is also true today.

 

Around 1983-1984 in the US, the thinking was that videogame consoles were dead, and home computers were the future. That lasted until the NES made consoles cool and viable again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Around 1983-1984 in the US, the thinking was that videogame consoles were dead, and home computers were the future. That lasted until the NES made consoles cool and viable again.

 

I agree, although for consumers I'd say it was more 1984 - 1985 (I consider 1983 the year when more of the behind-the-scenes stuff was happening). In any case, yeah, it proved a relatively short detour before both types of products were thriving again in the US. What's also important to remember about the 1983 - 1985 time period, is that many more computer companies (including those that supported them) left the market than videogame companies (there was a smaller variety of consoles), but it wasn't seen in the same light because most of the key players remained. Anyway, the point is, it was devastating to both sides.

 

Also, while I absolutely agree that, in theory, a computer can do everything a console can and more, there's absolutely something to be said for a simplified device at home on a TV versus a more complicated device more at home on a desk with a monitor (and yes, we ran many of our computers on TVs, but when it came to the systems released after the early 1980s, it was all but a requirement for a computer to be connected to a monitor to get a decent picture). That to me is one of many reasons why the NES was able to reinvigorate the moribund console space in the US.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I agree, although for consumers I'd say it was more 1984 - 1985 (I consider 1983 the year when more of the behind-the-scenes stuff was happening). In any case, yeah, it proved a relatively short detour before both types of products were thriving again in the US. What's also important to remember about the 1983 - 1985 time period, is that many more computer companies (including those that supported them) left the market than videogame companies (there was a smaller variety of consoles), but it wasn't seen in the same light because most of the key players remained. Anyway, the point is, it was devastating to both sides.

 

Also, while I absolutely agree that, in theory, a computer can do everything a console can and more, there's absolutely something to be said for a simplified device at home on a TV versus a more complicated device more at home on a desk with a monitor (and yes, we ran many of our computers on TVs, but when it came to the systems released after the early 1980s, it was all but a requirement for a computer to be connected to a monitor to get a decent picture). That to me is one of many reasons why the NES was able to reinvigorate the moribund console space in the US.

 

True, although I remember Christmas '83 being the year that the "buy a computer" message was pushed. That's when the Adam was on the market, other consoles were touting their keyboard attachments to turn them into computers, and the 600/800XL came out. The people leaving the computer market was due to Commodore's price war, though, wasn't it?

 

For the 8bit systems, I think they were simple enough to work as game consoles. Especially the Atari XL's you could just play cartridge games all day long and never have to get your hands dirty with actual 'computer' functions. And the C64 was the biggest games machine at the time. There's really a videogame generation here that gets shafted by revisionists who try to lump the Channel F/2600/5200/Colecovision into the same generation. The 5200/8-bit/Coleco/c64 are really the next-gen post 2600 generation.

 

Anyway, when the 16-bit computers came out, computing did become more complex and expensive for them to be simply used as game systems, and I agree that was the opening the NES needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The people leaving the computer market was due to Commodore's price war, though, wasn't it?

 

That was a huge factor, yes, but I was also referring to a shakeout with third party hardware and software providers as well. It was definitely a transitional period for more than videogame consoles.

 

 

 

For the 8bit systems, I think they were simple enough to work as game consoles. Especially the Atari XL's you could just play cartridge games all day long and never have to get your hands dirty with actual 'computer' functions. And the C64 was the biggest games machine at the time. There's really a videogame generation here that gets shafted by revisionists who try to lump the Channel F/2600/5200/Colecovision into the same generation. The 5200/8-bit/Coleco/c64 are really the next-gen post 2600 generation.

 

Absolutely, and I'd argue that most computers of the era were used for game playing as a primary function. However, I'd also argue that some people didn't buy computers - no matter how well-suited they might be for gaming (or, in cases of certain computers, barely good for anything else) - simply because they were computers.

 

 

 

Anyway, when the 16-bit computers came out, computing did become more complex and expensive for them to be simply used as game systems, and I agree that was the opening the NES needed.

 

Indeed and that was my point as well. When that next generation of computers hit, they could not longer be used effectively with a TV, so they required relatively more complex setups, including a monitor. The average price also shot up dramatically over the previous low end systems, where you could get away with buying just the computer and maybe a tape or disk drive, and keep costs below $500. Now, to have a reasonable setup, you were looking at $1000 or more, which took until the next decade to start to change.

 

(And a side note, I know you could use certain Atari ST models on a TV and get an add-on for the Amiga 500 to use on a TV (the Amiga 520 adapter, which I still own), but, for anyone who tried that, it was clear that just because you could, didn't mean you should.)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Indeed and that was my point as well. When that next generation of computers hit, they could not longer be used effectively with a TV, so they required relatively more complex setups, including a monitor. The average price also shot up dramatically over the previous low end systems, where you could get away with buying just the computer and maybe a tape or disk drive, and keep costs below $500. Now, to have a reasonable setup, you were looking at $1000 or more, which took until the next decade to start to change.

 

(And a side note, I know you could use certain Atari ST models on a TV and get an add-on for the Amiga 500 to use on a TV (the Amiga 520 adapter, which I still own), but, for anyone who tried that, it was clear that just because you could, didn't mean you should.)

 

Yes, I recall getting a 600XL for Christmas and I think it was $139. Soon after, I got a 410 tape drive at EB discounted for only $29

 

Then when the ST came out, the introductory model was something like $799, but it was a complete system- Computer + Floppy + Monitor. Amiga was much higher. I could never ask my parents for those for Christmas! It was only after the 520STfm came out, (with TV port), that my brother and I were able to scrape together enough paper route money to get one, without monitor. I remember many of my friends had Atari 8-bits, C64s, even TI-994a's I don't know anyone in that circle of friends who had an ST or Amiga besides me. Then when NES came, they all had them

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I recall getting a 600XL for Christmas and I think it was $139. Soon after, I got a 410 tape drive at EB discounted for only $29

 

Then when the ST came out, the introductory model was something like $799, but it was a complete system- Computer + Floppy + Monitor. Amiga was much higher. I could never ask my parents for those for Christmas! It was only after the 520STfm came out, (with TV port), that my brother and I were able to scrape together enough paper route money to get one, without monitor. I remember many of my friends had Atari 8-bits, C64s, even TI-994a's I don't know anyone in that circle of friends who had an ST or Amiga besides me. Then when NES came, they all had them

 

That was the monochrome price for the ST. The color monitor version price was $999. I seem to recall though those prices going up a bit after the initial batch, but I could be mis-remembering. The two monitor thing was a cool idea, I guess, but kind of clumsy. I'd rather that they would have just bumped the price up a bit and gone for a better color monitor that could go into a nice monochrome mode.

 

And yeah, I didn't get my Amiga setup until the 500 came out. It would have been too much for my parents at the time otherwise.

 

I also have a similar anecdote about the transition to the 16-bit systems. I could "trade" games all day every day when I had my C-64, and the second most popular computer in my school was the Apple II, followed by a very small handful of Atari 8-bits. I don't think much else registered, although I do recall a few TI-99/4as and miscellaneous CP/M machines to go along with the occasional IBM PC and Compatible.

 

When I made the move to Amiga (still keeping my C-64, and later, newspaper-classified Adam), there was really no one to "trade" with I can think of. I started to get more into public domain stuff, occasional BBS download, and of course magazine cover disks. I didn't really pirate again in any notable way until I got a CD-ROM drive (and later, burner) for my succession of PCs (and I'm glad that I stopped doing that completely after the 90s/early 2000s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think the Amiga's failure had to do with the lack of advertising.

 

I had a vague recollection of the Amiga being released, I think maybe through a magazine article or two, but other than that, the only way I knew about Amiga was word of mouth.

 

They never advertised the damn thing. New Amiga model comes out? "Hey, let's let *other Amiga users* but nobody else know!"

 

I complained about that from day 1 of my Amiga involvement back in early 1993.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think the Amiga's failure had to do with the lack of advertising.

 

I had a vague recollection of the Amiga being released, I think maybe through a magazine article or two, but other than that, the only way I knew about Amiga was word of mouth.

 

They never advertised the damn thing. New Amiga model comes out? "Hey, let's let *other Amiga users* but nobody else know!"

 

I complained about that from day 1 of my Amiga involvement back in early 1993.

 

Like I mentioned earlier, I distinctly remember some high profile magazine ads, as well as several national commercials. Sure, they could have done more, but they did make an effort. I just think the messaging was poorly executed, and certainly they didn't put in (or maybe have) the resources necessary to keep these campaigns running constantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That was the monochrome price for the ST. The color monitor version price was $999. I seem to recall though those prices going up a bit after the initial batch, but I could be mis-remembering. The two monitor thing was a cool idea, I guess, but kind of clumsy. I'd rather that they would have just bumped the price up a bit and gone for a better color monitor that could go into a nice monochrome mode.

 

The 1040ST came out 6 or so months after the 520ST, and Atari made a big deal about how it was the first 1MB computer priced under $1000 (at $999) That might be the price increase you are thinking of? I also recall a RAM shortage in that time period and RAM prices skyrocketed causing prices to rise.

 

 

I also have a similar anecdote about the transition to the 16-bit systems. I could "trade" games all day every day when I had my C-64, and the second most popular computer in my school was the Apple II, followed by a very small handful of Atari 8-bits. I don't think much else registered, although I do recall a few TI-99/4as and miscellaneous CP/M machines to go along with the occasional IBM PC and Compatible.

 

When I made the move to Amiga (still keeping my C-64, and later, newspaper-classified Adam), there was really no one to "trade" with I can think of. I started to get more into public domain stuff, occasional BBS download, and of course magazine cover disks. I didn't really pirate again in any notable way until I got a CD-ROM drive (and later, burner) for my succession of PCs (and I'm glad that I stopped doing that completely after the 90s/early 2000s).

 

Yes, I relied on BBSes and user groups to meet other users and get software. I didn't know anyone in High School with the 16-bit systems, but by the time I got my ST, I was almost out of high school. When I got to college one of the kids on my dorm floor had a Mega ST, and another had an Amiga 500. It was the first time I got to use an Amiga, and the kid with the ST had a large box full of pirated games, many of which I had no idea even existed for ST! I do remember we "networked" my ST and his Amiga 500 via serial cable, and played "Stunt Car Racer" head to head, and it actually worked! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Amiga seems to be regarded as the best beloved computer from the late eighties and early nineties by those who used it. Especially for being a powerhouse in graphics. And yet this computer and it's Pseudo-Sister in the Atari ST failed to crack 6% of the market share in the US combined against it's rivals in IBM and Apple. So what went wrong for Commodore in the USA? Why did this computer or the ST for that matter fail so spectacularly here in the US. Was there a single thing that Atari and Commodore did or was it more of a compendium of unforced errors on either company's part?

 

This is my opinion. Where I grew up, two family friends owned Amiga's, one relative (whom we got all the hand-me-down PC parts from) had a PC, thus everyone in the family had a PC-compatible at some point. Nobody owned an Apple II, but the schools had them from 1989 to 1992, and IBM XT's from 1990 to 1998, even when they replaced two computer labs in the high school with 486's and Pentium's respectively. However the only computers in the schools with multimedia capability were... the two Amiga's (one A2000 with the Video Toaster, one A500 that ran the TV announcement system.) The high school also had an Atari Falcon, a DX7 and a MT32 and nobody knew how to use it.

 

Ultimately the lack of any standardization, even at school, resulted in a lot of "who could get the best deal", and the school's wound up with XT's, which were later replaced with 386's in 1992, 486's in 1994, or Pentium's in 1996, but the XT lab stuck around the longest.

 

The Amiga was just too expensive, and it was seen mainly as a video-editing hardware. I would have loved to have had an Amiga, but instead had a Tandy 1000. The Tandy was good for other things (color video and three channel sound, therefor putting it at NES-level capability.) But the Amiga 500 was better than the Sega Genesis and was comparable to the SNES, and when you look at computer that costs several hundred dollars, and see a $200 console blow it out of the water, you kinda reconsider investing in that.

 

And that IMO is what tended turned people away from everything that wasn't a console in the end.

 

So, the Atari ST, and Falcon - MIDI machines. Amiga - Video Toasters, Mac - Graphics workstations, PC - Word Processors.

 

Ultimately I think the Amiga got stuck in a position between competing with the Mac and the PC after Atari withdrew from making computers, and Commodore's incompetence in the US, and Apple's incompetence under John Sculley sent the home computer market into highly-specialized over-priced devices.

 

So the PC wound up "winning" that because it didn't have it's uses dictated by a single manufacturer. However a few things became death-knells for the Amiga. The Amiga and the pre-PPC mac were in competition for the same CPU's. When Apple switched to PPC, that left Amiga's with no upgrade path so they decided to go PPC in 1995 too, and well the rest is history.

 

So if a few different things happened in the Amiga's history, we might have had AmigaOS ported to PPC and x86/x86-64 and ARM by now and the OS would have survived even if the unique hardware ultimately fell by the wayside (interesting how computers now have separate CPU, GPU and Sound chips, much like how the Amiga had right at the beginning.)

Edited by Kismet
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CGA PC's were getting to be uncommon even by the time of the Amiga's initial release, though. Through most of the Amiga's lifespan, the PC had equivalent or better graphics. EGA was launched in 1984, VGA in 1987 and SVGA in 1989, and graphics accelerators were being improved all the time to take advantage of these standards. So you could still buy a CGA PC in 1985 or 1986, but it would have been considered old, basically obsolete tech. I'm sure a lot of people did still buy them if all they wanted to do was run spreadsheets or database apps. But I don't think you can indict the entire PC culture as a result of that; even back then, there were just a lot of choices in terms of PC's.

 

PC's designed for graphics kept pace with and eventually surpassed Amiga graphics. By 1993 or so, when I got my first PC, you could get better graphics than an Amiga even in a low-end PC (that's what I had, some cheap Packard Bell).

 

What the Amiga always outdid the PC at was multitasking. That was always the impressive thing about it, and the thing no other machine of its time could really do, or at least not that well. The Mac had only cooperative multitasking and Windows was being run on top of DOS in those days and had all sorts of problems as a result. The Amiga was designed from the ground up for preemptive multitasking and I think everyone was jealous of that. In practice, though, most people just didn't see the need for running 4 or 5 programs at once. It was ahead of its time. Nowadays people often run *hundreds* of little programs at once without even realizing it (check your task manager), and I personally am almost never below five or six full-blown user-invoked apps running on my desktop, plus about 50 Chrome and Firefox tabs! But in the early days of multitasking, people just didn't really see the point.

cga computers like turbo xt were the main pcs up unit late 88 Amiga was release in 86, I owned a retail store that sold it all, (not apple though). St was the biggest seller for us in 86 87 then pc's crept up, amiga took off when a500 was readily available 88/89 (an St was hard to get from Atari due to the ram shortage and focus on Europe). by 1990 it was mostly pc's with the advent of adlib sound and basic vga graphics. Still was a crappy game system but people struggled through it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember a few more points:

 

1- The Amiga may have had good multi-tasking, but coming from the 8-bit world I didn't have much of a need to use it. Not that there were any pressing needs (at the time) to do so.

 

2- The few commercials I saw depicted whiz-bang graphics and all kinds of video. So I went out and got the Amiga. A stock Amiga. And I'm like, "what next?". Where's the whiz-bang super-ultra graphics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember a few more points:

 

1- The Amiga may have had good multi-tasking, but coming from the 8-bit world I didn't have much of a need to use it. Not that there were any pressing needs (at the time) to do so.

 

2- The few commercials I saw depicted whiz-bang graphics and all kinds of video. So I went out and got the Amiga. A stock Amiga. And I'm like, "what next?". Where's the whiz-bang super-ultra graphics?

 

1) I honestly have little use for multitasking today other than lazyness, my mail client runs, I might have a couple spread sheets open and a file explorer, but I am not actually using it all ... stuff just sits to the side until I click on it, it could be dead not doing a single thing for all I care until I go back to it, and that's at work, at home, shit lets see what programs I have running, oh web browser and some update clients that need to fk off but I haven't turned them off yet.... there's a difference tween multitasking and being able to recall programs shoved to ram not doing anything

 

2) Agreed, whizbang! at like 8fps, really go look at youtube video's of stuff running on stock 16bit toy's r us era machines, they can be quite choppy, I have rarely been impressed by the 16 bit commie's and atari's in games (demo's can do a lot, but demo's have a lot of luxuries)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1) I honestly have little use for multitasking today other than lazyness, my mail client runs, I might have a couple spread sheets open and a file explorer, but I am not actually using it all ... stuff just sits to the side until I click on it, it could be dead not doing a single thing for all I care until I go back to it, and that's at work, at home, shit lets see what programs I have running, oh web browser and some update clients that need to fk off but I haven't turned them off yet.... there's a difference tween multitasking and being able to recall programs shoved to ram not doing anything

 

2) Agreed, whizbang! at like 8fps, really go look at youtube video's of stuff running on stock 16bit toy's r us era machines, they can be quite choppy, I have rarely been impressed by the 16 bit commie's and atari's in games (demo's can do a lot, but demo's have a lot of luxuries)

 

I actually did make use of multitasking on my Amiga (especially the Amiga 4000/030). I recall having 55 files downloading at the same time while decompressing the data that had already been downloaded (in a shell), while formatting diskettes (two at a time) to put the data onto, while playing Mod music. This was a pretty regular occurrence at my place from around 1992 to 1996.

 

As for the graphics.... I really was impressed when I purchased Blood Money as soon as it came out. Once I popped the disk into the drive and powered the machine on, I was like "Holy sh*t!" That would have been 1989.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There wasn't a time when I didn't multitask on my Amiga. I got involved with the Amiga just to program on it.
Editing code while compiling the last revision was sooooo nice on the stock 68000 and floppy drives.
Compile times were 15+ minutes on floppies and work didn't stop while I waited.
After upgrading to a 2000, 2MB RAM, and an 80MB Hard Drive things worked a lot better..
By the time I moved to a 68040 based 3000, I was downloading, editing, compiling... all at once.

 

popcli was probably the most used utility on my machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I actually did make use of multitasking on my Amiga (especially the Amiga 4000/030). I recall having 55 files downloading at the same time while decompressing the data that had already been downloaded (in a shell),

 

What did you have for a connection? I can't imagine 55 files downloading over dial-up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, for those of us who did real computing tasks, the multitasking was essential.

 

I would keep copies of Deluxe Paint, SAS/C, and multiple cli windows open at all times. I often also had Multiplayer running to listen to music, or Protracker running to write music.

 

I was forever grateful to the baud bandit and v34 serial devices, as they allowed me to use my modem at full speed, without having to knock Terminus down to 8 color mode (serial.device was VERY sensitive to that extra bitplane DMA fetch for 4 bitplanes at 640x400).

 

I managed to get an A2024 monitor (which were rarer than unicorn teeth), and had a glorious 1024x800 display, which looked FANTASTIC under 2.0 and beyond. It allowed for great use of CLI and code windows, and for those times I needed to open up a CAD drawing, gave a very nice display.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Amiga had a marginal retail presence in the US, at least where I lived. Despite being a die-hard Commodore fan and seriously lusting after the A1000 during the run up to and after it's launch, I *never* saw an Amiga in the wild - never. Same for the Atari ST. I had one friend with an Apple IIGS, but that was it.

 

I briefly worked in a mom and pop computer sales/repair shop in 1990 - we didn't sell or service those platforms. I don't think I ever saw one come in for repair either. Everyone seemed to hang on to their 8-bit computers until replacing them with PCs or Macs in the early 90s.

 

Whereas during the 8-bit era you could buy home computers virtually everywhere - C64s in K-Mart, Atari 800XLs in Sears, Tandy CoCos in Radio Shack, etc. While I recall seeing software for the 16-bit platforms here and there, the actual hardware seemed to be virtually nonexistent.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I *never* saw an Amiga in the wild - never. Same for the Atari ST. I had one friend with an Apple IIGS, but that was it.

 

 

I saw them in Toys R US, (along with the XEGS) but I was in there buying genesis games

 

otherwise I never knew anyone with one, they either had 8 bitter's or Tandy's

Edited by Osgeld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes. Dial-up. A 56K external modem.

 

It's actually not as bad as it sounds considering that file sizes back then weren't nearly as huge as today.

 

I thought 56k Modems didn't arrive until 1998, IIRC so maybe it was 28.8k- 33.6k?

 

That fact aside, my experience with the Amiga in the USA was similar to yours and I didn't see it as a failure as it sold in decent numbers in those days. Of course in hindsight it nowhere came near to the success of the C64 or the IBM but failure, I don't think so.

 

I too sold PCs and helped out selling Amiga's back in the late 80's and early 90's and as you said it was far superior to PC until certain software titles started hitting the VGA PC market with 256 color graphics and amazing hand drawn art. Games like Kings Quest V, Might and Magic III and an EA Sherlock Holmes game that were often featured on monitors in our local Babbage's, and Computer stores. People were amazed at the graphics in those games, although they were not as smooth as Amiga games at the time.

 

But I do recall the site where I was living in a mall with a city of about 60k had no less then 4 places to buy Amiga hardware and software within 5 miles. And the A500 bundles sold really well in that time frame. You couldn't miss those long boxes, lol. At some times people were on waiting lists as that particular store could not keep enough in stock.

 

So maybe it is a lot of what you perceived back then but I didn't see the Amiga as a failure and everyone in my area knew about it especially after the A500 and A2000 were released. I had plenty of people in my neighborhood to swap software with. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I thought 56k Modems didn't arrive until 1998, IIRC so maybe it was 28.8k- 33.6k?

 

That fact aside, my experience with the Amiga in the USA was similar to yours and I didn't see it as a failure as it sold in decent numbers in those days. Of course in hindsight it nowhere came near to the success of the C64 or the IBM but failure, I don't think so.

 

I too sold PCs and helped out selling Amiga's back in the late 80's and early 90's and as you said it was far superior to PC until certain software titles started hitting the VGA PC market with 256 color graphics and amazing hand drawn art. Games like Kings Quest V, Might and Magic III and an EA Sherlock Holmes game that were often featured on monitors in our local Babbage's, and Computer stores. People were amazed at the graphics in those games, although they were not as smooth as Amiga games at the time.

 

But I do recall the site where I was living in a mall with a city of about 60k had no less then 4 places to buy Amiga hardware and software within 5 miles. And the A500 bundles sold really well in that time frame. You couldn't miss those long boxes, lol. At some times people were on waiting lists as that particular store could not keep enough in stock.

 

So maybe it is a lot of what you perceived back then but I didn't see the Amiga as a failure and everyone in my area knew about it especially after the A500 and A2000 were released. I had plenty of people in my neighborhood to swap software with. :-)

Don't forget MYST.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...