@hazydave
First of all thank you for taking the time to provide very detailed replies (where some new interesting details are to be found), and let me apologize if my post gave the impression you were personally responsible for the delays (as a matter of fact, you might have been "involved" in those projects, the reasons for the delays are a different thing however and might be too complex to be detailed in a simple forum post I presume).

Being an Hardware engineer, I am under the impression that you somehow consider as "Amiga", only the game-console like HW made initially or whenever (all in all, the original Amiga is more similar to a console or a Jamma arcade video game board), while many consider it a computer platform (that evolved over time) which they call Amiga regardless.

The OCS while good for low res 2D games, soon became a chore for everyone who was trying to work at high-resolutions or needed true-color graphics, so people like me bought some sort of frame-buffer or RTG card before AGA came out or soon after (for hi-res 24-Bit resolutions).
In the end, the 68040 or even worst, the 68060 of late wasn't 100% compatible with the original 68000, the GFX system was different, yet we called it Amiga just the same.

Let's imagine Commodore kept releasing Amiga after AMiga using custom chipsets that would be obsolete the day they came out (due to delays caused by their mismanagements), wouldn't we had seen the same situation over and over again? People using alternative GFX solutions although a chipset (AAA/Hombre or whatever) was present in the machine? And if that custom GFX acceleration solution (chipset) was to be made modular eventually, wouldn't we see also Amigas using third party solutions there, instead of what Commodore did put there originally?
Bottom line, What if the lack of chipset "usage" (by end owners) is only dictated by the fact that at any given moment a more powerful add on (than what's on board) is readily avaialble?

Can Amiga be defined just by the presence/usage of a chipset, while the lack of it makes it something else?

Many just don't think so.

When I commented about Nvidia and ATI, it was with a "what if" final scenario in mind: consider how many GFX chips vendors existed back then (even before ATi and NVida), and the pace they were delivering commercial products, considering that in 1995 AAA was already scrapped, and Hombre (aside from the only hypothetical Amiga connection) was in its early stages still, Isn't it probable that by the time it would have been finished, it would have been surpassed by the competition in terms of both performance and cost effectiveness?
I imagine an A5000 that while having some sort of chipset built in (modular), would not only allow the installation of third parties -more powerful- solutions (like its predecessors), but the possibility (being a modular design) of extracting the board containing Commodore's solution and replace it with a third party one.
Yet everyone would keep calling it Amiga just the same.

Thus It's not that hard to imagine a new "Amiga" today featuring a PPC cpu and GFX acceleration provided by a third party.

I'm completely with you on the price/performance allegations you make, but as you know, given the right numbers, you could build a powerfull PPC system and sell it at competitive prices, what's missing is an investor with deep pockets.
I assume the idea here is to first provide a machine to grow AmigaOS funcionalities (add SMP, modern 3D and so on) and then who knows, when you have a modernized platform you might even find an extra investor or 2.
Might be a bad idea mind you, I'm not advocating any rosey situation of course.

Last edited by DAX on 16-Apr-2011 at 12:09 PM.

_________________
SamFlex Complete 800Mhz System + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4
Amiga 2000 DKB 2MB ChipRam GVP G-Force040 Picasso 2 OS3.9 BB2
AmigaCD 32