OK. The reason I voted A600 over A500+ is that the A500+ was a natural extension of where C= were at the time. ECS and Kickstart 2 had already debuted in the A3000, so banging them into an A500 chassis for a budget machine makes reasonable sense.
I don't really think the A500+ even really warranted a distinction from the original A500. C= did exactly the same stunt with the A2000. Later revisions of that shipped with Kickstart 2 and Super Denise (and maybe 2MB Agnus, unconfirmed)
The A600 was a completely new case and motherboard design with a completely new fabrication method, just to produce a computer that was slightly superior to the A500+. Adding PCMCIA and internal IDE to the A500 would have been far simpler.
The A600 case design could easily have contained a far more advanced system for the era in which it was released.
Oh, and yes, the A3000T is big, heavy, ugly and pointless. A SCSI enclosure under the A3000D would replicate every advantage it ever had and would still have been smaller and lighter.
The CDTV was a fantastic idea, but the world wasn't ready for it. It could have been a tad more powerful and should probably have had ECS, but the innovation was phenomenal.
The CD32 was also somewhat ahead of its time. Remember, Sega were still peddling 68000-based Megadrives at the time. 32X and Saturn didn't come until much later! I think Zetr0 makes a very good point that if C= hadn't died, the CD32 would have been a roaring success.