| Poster | Thread |
 Kronos
|  |
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 19-Mar-2023 10:09:52
| | [ #881 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member
 |
Joined: 8-Mar-2003
Posts: 2344
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @dipsomania
Quote:
dipsomania wrote:
maybe 386 PCs + VGA gfx card but at the price of A4000s (the latter was much more elegant than any grey PCs anyway).
|
Funny thing when the A4000 case was just a slightly changed version of the one C= used for their PCs at that time (which didn't really stand out from the grey box masses)._________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
kolla
| |
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 19-Mar-2023 19:56:11
| | [ #882 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member
|
Joined: 21-Aug-2003
Posts: 2613
From: Trondheim, Norway | | |
|
| |
| Status: Offline |
|
|
Kronos
| |
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 19-Mar-2023 20:24:31
| | [ #883 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member
|
Joined: 8-Mar-2003
Posts: 2344
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @kolla
The A1000 was an oddball design with it's kbd-garage
The A2000 shared it's design with never released C9000
The A3000 was only one that got a proper "design" design
3000T was just butt ugly and for the A4000t they didn't even bother with adapting the case and went the other way round instead. _________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
kolla
| |
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 19-Mar-2023 22:08:10
| | [ #884 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member
|
Joined: 21-Aug-2003
Posts: 2613
From: Trondheim, Norway | | |
|
| @Kronos
Yes, which I figured out just a tad too late, riddened myself with an old AT tower just months before I realized that the A4000T motherboard + various I/O boards I had packed away were in fact AT compatible - I had just presumed all along that they were custom as well. Sigh! :) Last edited by kolla on 19-Mar-2023 at 10:08 PM.
_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
bhabbott
| |
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 23-Mar-2023 8:16:35
| | [ #885 ] |
|
|
 |
Regular Member
 |
Joined: 6-Jun-2018
Posts: 266
From: Aotearoa | | |
|
| @kolla
I don't care which came first, the white front with clean lines and silver name badge looks very classy IMO, compared to typical PC clones. This same theme was carried over to the A600 and A1200, so it wasn't just about copying their 'big box' PCs. Kudos to whoever it was in Commodore who thought of it.
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
bhabbott
| |
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 23-Mar-2023 8:26:54
| | [ #886 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member
|
Joined: 6-Jun-2018
Posts: 266
From: Aotearoa | | |
|
| @Kronos
Quote:
Kronos wrote:
The A1000 was an oddball design with it's kbd-garage
The A2000 shared it's design with never released C9000
The A3000 was only one that got a proper "design" design
3000T was just butt ugly and for the A4000t they didn't even bother with adapting the case and went the other way round instead. |
The A1000 was great.
The A3000 was a bad design. Compact, but very heavy. The power supply fan was annoyingly loud. There was no space for a 5.25" drive. The sloping disk eject button was not ergonomic.
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
22 crawler(s) on-line.
13 guest(s) on-line.
0 member(s) on-line.
