20-Jan-2021 11:10 GMT.
[Rant] How will Eyetech deal with the 'issues' in the A1 against customers?ANN.lu
Posted on 30-Sep-2004 19:43 GMT by Worried A1 owner131 comments
View flat
View list
I have an AmigaOne XE G4. It cost me a lot of money. It's fairly new and covered by warranty. How will Eyetech compensate me for it's 'issues'/design flaws? Will they

a) Offer me a full refund or a new WORKING motherboard as replacement for free? Since it looks like it's a design flaw with the A1 XE motherboard I would GLADLY accept returning my A1 XE and get a motherboard with new design, like Micro A1 with raiser card instead.
b) Give me for free any and all required additional hardware required to get the AmigaOne product fully working, like UDMA IDE on a PCI card? Second best option but I would still know that my expensive hardware is a bit 'crippled' (perhaps a too strong word?) beneath it and I would still worry about more undiscovered issues.
c) Offer me to send in the motherboard for free for them to "patch"? This would not be pleasant since I would be without my AmigaOne for the time this takes
d) Simply sit silent and wait until the warranty expires before acknowledging the problems? NOT acceptable! :-/ I am obviously referring to this thread here on ann:


"IDE UDMA works on VIA and Articia on AmigaOne SE / XE / µA1 MK2 (as I demoed) ...
- ... except when the Ethernet chip goes online and is used."


"'- We have made a driver for a Silicon Image 680 PCI IDE UDMA133 controller chip, this does UDMA 133 nicely, including when Ethernet is used at full speed.'

Or instead of buying PCI UDMA controller one could buy PCI ethernet card instead? If problem is triggered by on-board ethernet buying PCI ethernet card could be cheaper and easier. (Just thought, I don't know details.)"

"No, the problem is the wiring to the VIA controller on the motherboard. We already tried the external ethernet card with no success. We have been able to patch XE rev 1 boards to get working VIA DMA, but I am still waiting for patch instructions for my rev 2 board before I can verify that the lockup problem is gone on that board too."

">Why? Buggy ethernet driver/chip?

No, a simple error in the design that lead to bus collisions between the ethernet chip and the via chip."

This is a serious question for a serius subject. Before I bought it I had read posts online from corporate officials from Eyetech, Hyperion, Amiga Inc etc and a lot of other respectable personalities in this community and they all ensured there were no problems at all with the hardware. I spent a lot of money to buy this motherboard and I am worried about my investment! I am very curious how this will be handled!

List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1Agima30-Sep-2004 17:47 GMT
Comment 2HammerD30-Sep-2004 18:12 GMT
Comment 3Agima30-Sep-2004 18:24 GMT
Comment 4JoannaK30-Sep-2004 18:31 GMT
Comment 5Anonymous30-Sep-2004 18:40 GMT
Comment 6Anonymous30-Sep-2004 18:45 GMT
Comment 7JoannaK30-Sep-2004 19:00 GMT
Comment 8Joe30-Sep-2004 19:09 GMT
Comment 9Elwood30-Sep-2004 19:24 GMT
Comment 10ece30-Sep-2004 19:28 GMT
Comment 11jesus h christ!30-Sep-2004 19:34 GMT
Comment 12Joe Blow30-Sep-2004 19:38 GMT
Comment 13Don CoxRegistered user30-Sep-2004 19:57 GMT
Comment 14Anonymous30-Sep-2004 20:24 GMT
Comment 15Anonymous30-Sep-2004 20:28 GMT
Comment 16Anonymous30-Sep-2004 20:32 GMT
Comment 17Anonymous30-Sep-2004 20:49 GMT
Comment 1860% surcharge for the AmigaOS user's Protection30-Sep-2004 21:23 GMT
How will Eyetech deal with the 'issues' in the A1 against customers? : Comment 19 of 131ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 30-Sep-2004 22:19 GMT
I've got to admit, if I'd been able to afford one of the early-run boards, I'd be pissed, too.

That said:

-The 686B's oddities have been known for a while, and AFAIK, should be much less 'harrowing' than the KT133(A) issues everyone mistook the Articia's problems for. Obviously all the x86 boards using the chip don't have to suffer with PIO IDE, even if they may take some (annoying, but non-fatal*) hit on maximum PCI bandwidth. This *should* be curable with a simple firmware upgrade, or a 'hack' in the driver if the system boots in PIO until the point it's loaded.

-The sound bug is more "damning," in the sense that you'd hope it would've been resolved 3 designs ago, but this could be solved by buying users appropriate soundcards. I'm pretty sure a decent (akin to what would've been onboard) *5.1* design can be had for US$20 or less these days, especially if Eyetech talks to whoever they're contracting the boards from.

So... It's not terribly expensive to resolve. It doesn't necessarily require a full hardware tradeback, which... for some reason, I doubt we'd see from Eyetech, though such a thing *would* be as nice a gesture of good-faith and PR face-saving as we've recently seen elsewhere. ;)

To some extent, this 'new level of clarity' would make any traded-back A1s more viable as a 'discount' product than the "permanently crippled" Pegasos Is... and if it really does apply equally to bPlan's batch of Articias, it makes any remaining stock of bare boards that much more interesting, too. [But there's already been a counterclaim to that in the other thread, true.]


One question does come to mind: If the deal with the S's SDRAM drivers has been known for so long, why did neither OEM install buffers *on the board,* allowing the use of standard DIMMs at 1/3 the cost? (This goes especially for Eyetech, who're bundling the RAM themselves and paying out the nose to Kingston for it.)

*Used a KT133A/686(A? B?) board for years myself, and while I did notice my SCSI throughput seemed to improve 'downgrading' to a 440BX/PIIX4, the Athlon machine was certainly a hell of a lot faster in every way. I hate to say it, but as long as Via's cock-up is 'recognized' properly (as in: not ignored, allowing data corruption to happen, or 'kludged-over,' forcing PIO 24/7 just to use Ethernet), the *average* home user won't notice at all.

[Blah blah blah -- What I think is going on here is that they're looking to bring PCI throughput and the overall bus state back to spec by jamming it into PIO, which is of course easier, since it doesn't require a greater consideration of what the SNAFU actually is... But the normal schmo will have his 100mbit ethernet plugged into a 1mbit 'broadband' link, while going on and on about the benchmarks and boot time he gets from his UDMA266, 32MB-read-ahead-buffer drive, so it makes more sense to rob Paul (maximum throughput achievable on the bus) to pay Peter ('crippled' bus spec required to please the 686B). This is blindingly obvious, considering it's what 'every other' 686B-using platform has done, so I assume someone's already aware of and working on it, and I'll just be feeding the flames by bringing it up. :P]
#27 Don Cox
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 20Joe "Floid" Kanowitz30-Sep-2004 22:24 GMT
Comment 21JoannaK30-Sep-2004 22:36 GMT
Comment 22Kolbjørn Barmen30-Sep-2004 22:48 GMT
Comment 23Joe "Floid" Kanowitz01-Oct-2004 01:02 GMT
Comment 24Lando01-Oct-2004 02:48 GMT
Comment 25JoannaK01-Oct-2004 05:39 GMT
Comment 26JoannaK01-Oct-2004 05:45 GMT
Comment 27Don CoxRegistered user01-Oct-2004 05:58 GMT
Comment 28JoannaK01-Oct-2004 06:06 GMT
Comment 29takemehomegrandmaRegistered user01-Oct-2004 06:54 GMT
Comment 30takemehomegrandmaRegistered user01-Oct-2004 07:19 GMT
Comment 31Anonymous01-Oct-2004 07:39 GMT
Comment 32Don CoxRegistered user01-Oct-2004 07:40 GMT
Comment 33takemehomegrandmaRegistered user01-Oct-2004 07:49 GMT
Comment 34JoannaK01-Oct-2004 08:09 GMT
Comment 35Anonymous01-Oct-2004 08:14 GMT
Comment 36Mikey C01-Oct-2004 08:34 GMT
Comment 37Johan Rönnblom01-Oct-2004 08:47 GMT
Comment 38JoannaK01-Oct-2004 08:47 GMT
Comment 39itix01-Oct-2004 08:49 GMT
Comment 40Anonymous01-Oct-2004 09:04 GMT
Comment 41takemehomegrandmaRegistered user01-Oct-2004 09:15 GMT
Comment 42takemehomegrandmaRegistered user01-Oct-2004 09:18 GMT
Comment 43hooligan/dcsRegistered user01-Oct-2004 09:26 GMT
Comment 44hooligan/dcsRegistered user01-Oct-2004 09:28 GMT
Comment 45takemehomegrandmaRegistered user01-Oct-2004 09:42 GMT
Comment 46Mikey C01-Oct-2004 10:01 GMT
Comment 47Damien01-Oct-2004 10:24 GMT
Comment 48takemehomegrandmaRegistered user01-Oct-2004 10:32 GMT
Comment 49Cosmo01-Oct-2004 10:50 GMT
Comment 50takemehomegrandmaRegistered user01-Oct-2004 11:07 GMT
Comment 51hooligan/dcsRegistered user01-Oct-2004 11:21 GMT
Comment 52MarkTime01-Oct-2004 12:10 GMT
Comment 53priest01-Oct-2004 13:18 GMT
Comment 54Christophe DecaniniRegistered user01-Oct-2004 13:20 GMT
Comment 55Anonymous01-Oct-2004 13:29 GMT
Comment 56Christophe DecaniniRegistered user01-Oct-2004 13:36 GMT
Comment 57Christophe DecaniniRegistered user01-Oct-2004 13:37 GMT
Comment 58Johan Rönnblom01-Oct-2004 14:39 GMT
Comment 59JoannaK01-Oct-2004 16:01 GMT
Comment 60Seehund01-Oct-2004 16:08 GMT
Comment 61smithy01-Oct-2004 16:30 GMT
Comment 62Olegil01-Oct-2004 17:08 GMT
Comment 63Anonymous Orc01-Oct-2004 17:44 GMT
Comment 64Seehund01-Oct-2004 18:01 GMT
Comment 65Seehund01-Oct-2004 18:06 GMT
Comment 66Joe01-Oct-2004 18:26 GMT
Comment 67Olegil01-Oct-2004 19:44 GMT
Comment 68Gregg01-Oct-2004 20:37 GMT
Comment 69Anonymous01-Oct-2004 22:08 GMT
Comment 70Troels01-Oct-2004 22:31 GMT
Comment 71itix01-Oct-2004 22:35 GMT
Comment 72Sammy Nordström02-Oct-2004 07:06 GMT
Comment 73Anonymous02-Oct-2004 09:53 GMT
Comment 74Anonymous02-Oct-2004 10:22 GMT
Comment 75Johan Rönnblom02-Oct-2004 11:42 GMT
Comment 76Sammy Nordström02-Oct-2004 12:10 GMT
Comment 77Sammy Nordström02-Oct-2004 12:13 GMT
Comment 78Sammy Nordström02-Oct-2004 12:27 GMT
Comment 79hooligan/dcsRegistered user02-Oct-2004 12:47 GMT
Comment 80Anonymous02-Oct-2004 17:28 GMT
Comment 81Anonymous03-Oct-2004 01:16 GMT
Comment 82Eva03-Oct-2004 05:32 GMT
Comment 83Eva03-Oct-2004 05:35 GMT
Comment 84Eva03-Oct-2004 05:39 GMT
Comment 85Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 08:55 GMT
Comment 86Johan Rönnblom03-Oct-2004 10:16 GMT
Comment 87Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 10:46 GMT
Comment 88Seehund03-Oct-2004 12:15 GMT
Comment 89Andrea Maniero03-Oct-2004 12:39 GMT
Comment 90Anonymous03-Oct-2004 15:06 GMT
Comment 91Anonymous03-Oct-2004 15:39 GMT
Comment 92Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 15:44 GMT
Comment 93Anonymous03-Oct-2004 15:50 GMT
Comment 94Johan Rönnblom03-Oct-2004 15:55 GMT
Comment 95Anonymous03-Oct-2004 16:03 GMT
Comment 96Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 16:18 GMT
Comment 97Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 16:19 GMT
Comment 98Johan Rönnblom03-Oct-2004 16:20 GMT
Comment 99Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 16:26 GMT
Comment 100Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 16:28 GMT
Comment 101Anonymous03-Oct-2004 16:28 GMT
Comment 102Anonymous03-Oct-2004 16:32 GMT
Comment 103Anonymous03-Oct-2004 16:55 GMT
Comment 104JoannaK03-Oct-2004 17:59 GMT
Comment 105Johan Rönnblom03-Oct-2004 18:38 GMT
Comment 106Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 20:17 GMT
Comment 107Sammy Nordström03-Oct-2004 20:20 GMT
Comment 108Seehund03-Oct-2004 21:20 GMT
Comment 109Seehund03-Oct-2004 21:39 GMT
Comment 110Janne04-Oct-2004 04:06 GMT
Comment 111Eva04-Oct-2004 05:08 GMT
Comment 112Eva04-Oct-2004 05:11 GMT
Comment 113Don CoxRegistered user04-Oct-2004 08:05 GMT
Comment 114Anonymous04-Oct-2004 08:52 GMT
Comment 115takemehomegrandmaRegistered user04-Oct-2004 09:12 GMT
Comment 116takemehomegrandmaRegistered user04-Oct-2004 09:20 GMT
Comment 117Anonymous04-Oct-2004 09:24 GMT
Comment 118Don CoxRegistered user04-Oct-2004 13:01 GMT
Comment 119Anonymous04-Oct-2004 14:22 GMT
Comment 120Sammy Nordström04-Oct-2004 18:55 GMT
Comment 121Janne05-Oct-2004 03:41 GMT
Comment 122Don CoxRegistered user05-Oct-2004 05:11 GMT
Comment 123Don CoxRegistered user05-Oct-2004 05:16 GMT
Comment 124Janne05-Oct-2004 06:39 GMT
Comment 125Anonymous05-Oct-2004 06:40 GMT
Comment 126Andrea Maniero05-Oct-2004 07:35 GMT
Comment 127Anonymous05-Oct-2004 08:26 GMT
Comment 128Don CoxRegistered user05-Oct-2004 09:12 GMT
Comment 129Don CoxRegistered user05-Oct-2004 09:19 GMT
Comment 130Sammy Nordström07-Oct-2004 06:16 GMT
Comment 131Sammy Nordström07-Oct-2004 06:53 GMT
Back to Top