Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!oliveb!sun!pepper!cmcmanis From: cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: upgrading graphics on only the HIGH END machines Message-ID: <58810@sun.uucp> Date: 3 Jul 88 02:50:36 GMT References: <3174@louie.udel.EDU> <58591@sun.uucp> <150@quintus.UUCP> Sender: news@sun.uucp Reply-To: cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View Lines: 68 In article <150@quintus.UUCP> pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: > The problem with having different capabilities on different machines is > software. [Peter goes with the "but everyone won't have it argument so it will fragment the market argument] As reasonable as that argument sounds Peter, in reality it is not only untrue but using it as a premise can be financially fatal. If you talk to a zillion Amiga developers (I talked to many at the Developers Conference in DC but not a zillion) you will find two common themes that really depress them. Theme #1: In the USA, Commodore is percieved as a maker of moderately powerful *home* computers that play killer games. Theme #2: The original Amiga market (A1000 owners) was primarily older professional people with a good supply of disposable income, these new A500 buyers are primarily college and high school kids who have no money and pirate software. Now both of these are perceptions and not necessarily true, but like Wall Street, it aint what is, it's what you Believe. So Commodore comes out with a new machine that has more colors and more resolution than their current machines and leave the A500 alone. What happens ? Well hopefully they have provided a way for programs to tell what machine they are on or to get the maximum graphics capabilities, but what really happens is they create a truely "more powerful" machine that costs more. This has two advantages, one it is financially out of reach for the A500 audience so when software developers write programs that depend on the new features *They target the original, professional users*. This is important because they know these people will pay 200 - 300 dollars for a program to get the job done. They are assured that if Commodore can sell these machines (see point #2) then their product will sell. Additionally, these more mature users are less likely to pirate software. This is *very* good for the development community because they themselves don't want to be percieved as writing programs for "home" computers. Point 2 is that Commodore *positions* the product. Now thats marketing speak for separating the two products into categories. This new more powerful Amiga is *upward* compatible with the A500/2000 but many program may run on it that *cannot* run on the A500. Commodore sells this as the "business" machine, that complements their "home" business. The best example I have of how to do this right is Apple, they made sure that the Macintosh was separate and distinct from the Apple II line. Commodore on the other hand seems to promote the 500 as a souped up C64. Now when a business man looks at a product he should say "Commodore, isn't that the company that makes home computers?" To which a salesman will reply, "Yes it is, they also have this very powerful *business* computereee that runs all this great software, while retaining compatibility with their "home" line." In this way the Amiga is the same and yet different there is another Amiga to point at and say "That is the home version" "this is the business version". And simple packaging like the 2000 just doesn't cut it as a distinction (expansion slots almost do but not quite). If Commodore had a group dedicated to Product Marketing this would be clear to them. I can only hope it gets passed along to those who can act on it. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.