Talk:AA+ Chipset

Why is this in future tense?

Because I'm editing from the past. Jokes, I think it's from a magazine or something. 82.42.35.60 (talk) 14:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Consider Renaming?
Rename this page from "Commodore AA+ Chipset" to "Amiga A++ Chip Set". Most of the other Amiga chipset pages are titled as "Amiga ..." which conveniently groups them together on the Category:Graphics chips listing. "Amiga" is more specific than "Commodore", and I don't think there were any plans to put this chipset in anything other than an Amiga model. Anyhow, most people who know the name Commodore are probably thinking C64, instead of Amiga. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.184.5.252 (talk) 14:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Citations?
Come on guys, how about adding some sources? This is Wikipedia, not Amigapedia. The Amiga community may well be aware of what is discussed here, but the article will eventually get scrubbed without citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.148.134.58 (talk) 17:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

this is false
"Commodore did not add chunky pixels to AGA at the time because RTG required at least 68020 (not 68EC020 as in A1200) with 4 MB memory at least, while the standard A1200 had only 2 MB and 68EC020 CPU.:

I don't know what the source is for this, but I was the co-developer of the AGA OS support at commodore, and the designer of the RTG system. This has sentence has no connection to anything real.