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.