Paladin of the Pegasos
Posts: 1178 from 2003/3/13
From: Pinto, Madrid ...
Quote:
Andreas_Wolf wrote:
I consider the performance of my 1.5 GHz G4 the absolute minimum for my needs in terms of desktop computing
Understandable. But also, one can't choose the amount of bloat in the information received everyday. For example, many times I'd settle with a slower computer, but some bloated document gets in, or some inefficient process has to be done, and I need more power than neccesary, if things were better done.
Think about that guy stuck on an error message, and instead of copying and pasting the text, sends you an e-mail that contains a two megabytes file that contains a Word document that contains an uncompressed screen capture that contains the error.
That's why the phrase "I need a faster computer" has always made me smile. With nostalgia.
Back on topic...
Quote:
Varisys has past experience with PA6T and MPC86xx, which bplan may not have.
Sure. In fact, I was trying to point out that the chosen CPU is a mistake. Powerful (for what?), but very expensive, hard to get, and already at its end of life: I forgot something that, thankfully, you mentioned:
Quote:
P.A.Semi was purchased by Apple. In July 2008 it became known that Apple would supply the PA6T for at least 3 years (and upto 5 years) and explore selling the design to a third party after that time.
Where is this CPU used in volume? I thought it was kept because of some contracts with US army, that have systems that use it, and thus the manufacturer is forced to keep the part in stock.
Quote:
In September 2008, Apple started volume production of the chip again.
Sure? Would love sources about this.
Quote:
Let's imagine for a moment that they'd get the PA6T part for free. Then the board would still be barely below the 1000 EUR mark.
Indeed, there's something very wrong about this. It's almost impossible not qualifying the X-1000 as a cash-in trap.
Quote:
According to Trevor Dickinson at the VCF in June, Hermans got the very rough idea for an own hardware
WHAT? That would be a computer designed by a lawyer!? Just joking, I've seen that "very rough idea" words. But couldn't resist... Now, really, that would explain why the specs can't be the ones chosen by a sensible engineer.
Quote:Quote:
bPlan's experience might have been the only sane part of the project.
Why do you think so? AFAIK, bplan don't have any past experience with the PA6T.
That's my way to insist in taking that fantaaaaastic CPU out of the picture.
Quote:
Thendic began financing bplan, who had announced the Pegasos one year before, in November 2001, presumably after them visiting the AMIGA 2001 show in Cologne where bplan were publically showing their non-prototype Pegasos board for the first time (and running MorphOS).
That's why I mentioned Thendic/Genesi in my previous post. That was a way to do things:
1.- Realistic specs.
2.- Proven Amiga experience.
3.- Both hardware and software running.
Not to mention something still more important: It was TEN years ago.
