What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sun Apr 11 10:14:30 1999

Once again, I've concluded it's more efficient to embed my comments in your
quoted message.

Have a look below, please.

Dick

-----Original Message-----
From: Allison J Parent <allisonp_at_world.std.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 7:25 AM
Subject: Re: What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism


><You've got two tracks mixed up, I think. True, the Apple II was quite
><plentiful in 80, but not in businesses the way it was in 82-83. I even ha
><several of them with people to man them as well. I hated the Apple but
><loved the 6502. In the meantime, I noted that the RS Model 1 was a piece
o
><junk, and, in fact, so much of one that I never bought one, even for
><experimentation, and I had nearly every other sort of box around the shop.
>
>OK, maybe where you were that was true. However despite the TRS80s
>shortfalls (most corrected with mods or outside hardware) I knew of
>businesses using them, and I may add same for the apple II.
>
><The model 1 was quite common, but the model 1 was in too many pieces to be
><of much interest to most folks. What's more, it was pretty weak-kneed.
Th
><model 3 held out hope, though that was later dashed when the model 3 turne
><out to be not much better.
>
>My slant was the M1 was close but people wanted something more "one box".
>The M3 was never more than a blip on the screen because when it hit the
>streets there were plenty more choices and all of them deemed (if only
>subjectively) better.


The principal complaint I heard about the M1 was the principal complaint
about the M3. It was a paper tiger until you opened the box and added a
bunch of stuff/mods. The same, to lesser extent, perhaps, could be said for
the Apple. The Apple was made easy-to-open. The RS boxes were not.

>In the business worlds in NY and eastern PA S100 crates were the rule as
>most were seen as the business strength machines and the apple/trs80
>as toys. This was by people that didn't care what cpu only that it ran!
>
><The initial impact of the PC was to get people to stop buying non-PC's for
><their businesses. They were extremely costly at first, and didn't have a
><few serious problems worked out. People had to mortgage their houses to
bu
><one (a basic PC on the gray-market cost nearly $2k).
>
>Not really. If you were invested in apple then PC was a non-player as
>nothing was compatable and you lost your investement going over. For the
>z80 crowd (TRS and S100 crates) that was slightly less a concern but
>PCs needed to get up to speed with applications first. Keep in mind when
>the PC was introduced the only 8086 stuff out there was ISIS based
>and mostly as development tools. It was the spread sheets and graphic
>programs that caused the great sucking sound of people going PC but, that
>would take more time than your indicating.

When I saw my first PC in a commercial environment, it was running CP/M-86
because that had the software the business owner was using previously on his
Z-80. I often wondered what motivated him to switch. I also saw a couple
of people's Apple-II running CP/M-86, and was awed by the fact they'd run an
OS that was slower than the previous and better-endowed (with software)
CP/M-80 in the same basic environment.

>Yes, I remember getting a bonus check becuase of the PC in 82. IT wasn't
>for implementing as a useful system it was for FIXing the design. Seems
>one of the design bugs was it would only run intel chipsets.


IBM really performed only one major service to the microcomputer world:
They lent it its own trade name, which was its legitimacy. Having done
that, the behemoth was overrun by smaller, more adept innovators.

>As to the cost of a PC... equipped as a useful machine that could run
>production it was far from $2k!
>
>Allison
>
Received on Sun Apr 11 1999 - 10:14:30 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:31:41 BST