As someone mentioned somewhere, I too think the model names should be prefixed with X, rather than A. So "AmigaOne X3041, X5020 X5040" etc seems like the best scheme to me. It also distinguishes the brand away from the classic line. Just my tuppence :) Simon

I think is better X5000/20 than X5020; then it distinguishes from the classic line but at the same time it have a reminiscence of the classics naming scheme (you know: is A4000/040 not A4040 )

A5040, A5020, A3041. Thats it, we have the oportunity to bring the old association out. Throw X/Q/AX away...and A.inc cant stop us

I want an A5000 machine and I wanted one for many years now. It is about time it arrived.

The machine runs the one and only genuine AmigaOS. Why do we want to distance ourselves from that amazing heritage?

I also believe that if somebody like takemehomegrandma thinks the 'A' series is a terrible idea that absolutely confirms it is a very, very good idea.

But weren't C=USA (rip?) already using the Xnnn naming scheme?

Absolutely Steven Absolutely!

> I too think the model names should be prefixed with X, rather than A.
> So "AmigaOne X3041, X5020 X5040" etc seems like the best scheme to me. It also
> distinguishes the brand away from the classic line.

correct, would either vote for above, or to keep the numbering scheme from Classicline:

X3000 - X5000/20 - X5000/40

What comes after X? I have a X1000, how does that sound, if I will upgrade to e.g. A5000? Has that anything to do with X1000??? Sounds a bit like X1000 was a failure, we carry on with another naming scheme...

> I want an A5000 machine and I wanted one for many years now. It is about time it arrived.
Fair enough, an A5000 - A6000 - .... numbering scheme isn't bad either, I can understand SSolies arguments there. It carries on, with what Commodore left us after A4000? But how do we deal with Cyrus 3041 Version?

A-Eon started with the X1000 and it only makes sense that they stick to that theme much like our classics did. As I recall it wasn't A1000, B500, X600, G1200 ??? so why start now with our NG miggies

I say most reasonable and recognizable evolution would be X2000, X3000 etc etc. if you want to keep the CPU speeds options like our classics then X3000/2.1 etc

anyhow this is a really good problem to have today and not the nightmare of waiting for new hardware for our favourite OS pre 2007.

Quote:

then why start now with the A5000 when it was ACube that brought us out of the dark with new hardware with their Sam boards

Seems to me A-Eon would be slighting ACubes massive contribution to our community by naming the succesor to the successful X1000, A5000, A6000 etc.

Quote:
If ACube has any issues with the naming scheme they can email/Skype A-EON right now and work it out. That seems more like political correctness run amok to me. No need for guessing or intrigue or anything else. Call them right now.

If we want our community to grow then we have to stop playing political games like this. Think outside the box and look for new customers. When somebody types "Amiga A5000" in a search engine I want it to return results for the Cyrus Plus-based systems. When they search for "Amiga A3000" I want it to return the Classic Amiga 3000 links. The two should go hand in hand and display a unified front to the world.

Ok. X1000 was the first ever machine from A-EON, fair enough. But I think it's time to call them with the "A" prefix. So A3000, A5000/020, A5000/040 would be better. We have to merge the classical range with the NG range now I guess, so that people will see that Amiga is still going on by visiting the classic A3000 and the next-gen A3000 too.

@ ssolie

to me this is not 'political correctness' but proper business ethics.


btw, I thought A-Eon/ACube only have rights to the AmigaONE branding and not Amiga per say so Amiga 3000 and AmigaONE A3000 shows anything but a 'unfied front' to old amigans searching the net for new Amiga machines

of course, my 2 cents, as a returning amigan who joined the AmigaOS4.x ranks when I read we finally got new hardware from ACube and bought my first NG miggy (Samflex@800), sold that to buy my X1000 so I fully agree that ACube and A-Eon should get their naming unified now that we are moving strongly in the right direction.

@ssolie

> When somebody types "Amiga A5000" in a search engine I want it
> to return results for the Cyrus Plus-based systems.

That's a good point. But... wouldn't they rather type Amiga 5000? What comes up then? As far as I understand search engines, if there isn't an Amiga 5000 (as it is called AmigaOne... and not Amiga) it won't find it anyway. It then rather depends how websites/other users call the beast. Therefor the more people call it Amiga 5000 (instead of AmigaOne 5000) the better, right? Concluding: If we would call that beast just AmigaOne 5000, then there is a high possibility that people refer to it as "Amiga 5000", right? Correct me if I am wrong on my theory?

Further more, do you think there are more people buying the beast, if a search engine will present Cyrus base System when you enter Amiga 5000?
Wasn't the "What is X" campaign a great campaign, wich is still insides peoples* head? It even reached people, who where not familiar with Amiga (*o.k. I guess most of them are at least familiar with retro computing). Why not carry on with that -> "Keep the X party going".

So, I might think of just naming it AmigaOne 5000, AmigaOne 6000,...
Still the question, what the nummber should be for 3041 base Cyrus system?

A new Idea: just kick the CPU name out of it! -> AmigaOne 5000 = 3031 -> AmigaOne 6000 = 50xx based Systems?

Interesting discussion, however!

regards Gero

Hi All, Numbering should make some sense IMHO. So like this, 1St digit = number of cores, 2nd digit = Altivec, 0 for no,1 for yes . 3rd and 4th digit = clock. So for example my A1XE 1Ghz would have been an X1110, 1=core ,altivec 1=yes, 10=1Ghz. The X1000 would have been X2118. You know what's inside as soon as you see it. Chris

I'm for the X3000, X5000/20, X5000/40 scheme. It's much more a series of successors to the X1000 than a parallel to the classic series. And the amount of parallel there is would be adequately hinted at with the numbers seemingly following the classic range (even though that never got a 5000 model).

To me it makes sense that the machines from A-EON/Varisys, and sporting the XENA/XORRO thingie should have an X as a common mark.

Edit: Then again, when push comes to shove, you can call the machines anything you want, as long as you don't call them off ...

Best regards,

Niels

Quote:

so very true my friend

@gerograph
Quote:
I just tried it and this is the first hit with Google:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_A5000

Type in "Amiga 6000" and this pops up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_models_and_variants

Search engines are also not as literate as you might think. Once something becomes popular the built-in spell checkers will start making suggestions as well. Only if you add special characters like quotation marks and plus signs do search engines take you absolutely literally.

Quote:
Absolutely yes.

Could this be confusing? Is this inconsistent? Yeah but nobody cares. The only people who do care are the hard core Amiga guys. The hard core Amiga guys have made up their minds already so there is no point in pandering to them. We need to think outside this microcosm. After reading "Commodore: A Company on the Edge" recently I'm quite sure Jack Tramiel wouldn't think twice about using the A5000 label because his focus was always on selling more units which is the primary objective here as well.

@nbache
Quote:
I say consistency be damned as long as we are selling more units to new users.

Agreed, just like what happened when I choose my first Amiga back in the day. It wasnt so much that it was revolutionary as much as it was just different.

@ssolie

So, if top aim is (and it should be in business) to attract more customers, especially outside existing Amiga Communities, then there is only one way to go:

AmigaOne 5000 (for QorIQ 3041)and AmigaOne 6000 (for QorIQ 50xx). However that isn't an option in the "poll". So closest to that would be option (3) = AmigaOne A3000 and AmigaOne A5000. So, there is an option missing, right? However google gives similar results on "AmigaOne A5000" and "AmigaOne 5000". I still donno't like AmigaOne A3000, as we already had an A3000. Saleswise higher number are far better. And it seems (expect Linux) most of the business is reverting back to numbers rather then years or letters (Win XP -> Win 8.1).

So I vote for (3)... Convinced me Steven

X...Pensive! ;-) /me run

I'm easy with the Axxxx or Xxxxx numbers, no argument. On the other hand, I'm not keen on using qualifiers like /020, /040, etc. I would rather see the number end in "20" or "40", eg "A5020", "A5040", "A5041". Leave the first two digits as "50" to allow for the case of a re-release in a "51" form down the track. I realise that "A5041" drops part of the "3041" CPU type, but it's still unique.

More important than the X/A choice, it's the numbering that should stay logical: a machine called "5000" should be more powerful than one called "4000".

But weren't C=USA (rip?) already using the Xnnn naming scheme?

You mean X64? that was just the case and it was 64X.
Amiga series was supposed to be Commodore Amiga 1000,2000,3000 ...
and community was against it (there was a petition about it)
but instead they went for Commodore Amiga Mini that only one
user have confirmed, and failed ... as they tried to make
way to much money on way to little innovation.

@ssolie

>I say consistency be damned as long as we are selling more units to new users.

Good. When can we expect Efika, PS3 and MacPPC version of AmigaOS 4?

Also, if X is lost, What is X?

@vox
Quote:
Those projects were all cancelled for whatever reasons. They were also well before my time.

So I'd rather focus on actual products like the ones A-EON are building now. To that end, I still believe the "A" prefix is the way to go and I voted as such.

would be cool if trevor could buy the rights to amiga name. then it could be amiga 5000 and beyond. And cooperate with acube.