“Amiga was once a top-of-the-line machine—a successor to the Commodore 64.”
As I recall, the Amiga was Atari. The Commodore 64 was not.
The Amiga was Commodore...
In a way your both right... i had an Atari 800 as my first PC my second was Amiga 1000.... so here the deal... the Amiga 1000 was design by the same designer as the Atari 400, 800 and was meant to be their replacement
the Atari 400/800 for famous for their custom graphics chips and the Amiga 1000 was the next generation with the next generation chips but for some reason Atari declined to build it want to do their own in-house a project instead .... so original designer took it to Commodore.
a lot of the original 400-800 Atari guys went to the Amiga including because was really just the next generation of the 400/800.
Commodore really had very little to do with the machine design other than buying it
IIRC, Amiga was independent at first, then it was bought by Commodore.
The Amiga was Commodore, but (if memory serves, and mine is verging on obsolete technology) the project that created the Amiga began at Atari, was dumped after they domped Jack Tramiel, and he nabbed the thing and wound up at Commodore. Atari wound up rushing into their ST system, which like the Amiga and Mac, was 68K processor based.