Perhaps this is why the Sinclair computers were crushed by Commodore early in the UK?

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by stevelord

Although possible I'm not sure one must've necessarily outsold the other.

What I meant was that after the ZX Spectrum was discontinued in 1992 the C64 would dominate future sales (for obvious reasons). However at this time the biggest market for the C64 was Eastern Europe. I'm guessing sales in the UK were pretty poor.

I was a Commodore dealer in New Zealand from 1991 to 1994. I didn't stock C64's, though I don't recall whether that was because Commodore NZ wouldn't sell them to me or because I didn't want them (which I didn't). I do remember buying chips from Commodore to repair them though. Those potted power supplies had a nasty habit of breaking soldered connections to the 5V regulator due to thermal expansion, which then over-voltaged the motherboard and blew half the chips.

[Bruce Abbott]

BTW here is what home computers sold for in New Zealand in 1983 (taken from the Nov 1983 issue of Computer Input magazine). Prices in NZ$. Divide by 2 to get GBP.

BBC model B $1995
Commodore 64 $995
C64 disk drive $995
1526 printer $995
Colour Genie $795
48k ZX Spectrum $695
Commodore VIC-20 $595
16k ZX Spectrum $495
Sega SC3000 $399
Panasonic JR100 $299
Sinclair ZX81 $149

[stevelord]

[QUOTE=Bruce Abbott;1615305]What I meant was that after the ZX Spectrum was discontinued in 1992 the C64 would dominate future sales (for obvious reasons).


Ahh sorry my bad, I misinterpreted your comment but get it now, thanks for the correction.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

However at this time the biggest market for the C64 was Eastern Europe. I'm guessing sales in the UK were pretty poor.

I vaguely remember reading (maybe Your Sinclair or Sinclair User) that Amstrad were still making money on the +2A light gun bundle in 1990 but sales of the +3 were flat - I think I would've read this in 1991 but I can't find the article off-hand. I remember the GX4000 and C64GS both flopping horrendously in the UK, and I suspect the second hand spectrum market would've been bigger than new by around 92 but don't have anything to back that up other than memories of the local classifieds section.

[Phantasm]

The ST and Amiga were around 300-400 pounds at that time which means there should have still been a market at the lower price point.

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

BTW here is what home computers sold for in New Zealand in 1983 (taken from the Nov 1983 issue of Computer Input magazine). Prices in NZ$. Divide by 2 to get GBP.

BBC model B $1995
Commodore 64 $995
C64 disk drive $995
1526 printer $995
Colour Genie $795
48k ZX Spectrum $695
Commodore VIC-20 $595
16k ZX Spectrum $495
Sega SC3000 $399
Panasonic JR100 $299
Sinclair ZX81 $149

Was New Zealand a tape or disk market at that time, and how much was the Commodore Datasette compared to a typical computer-usage tape deck? Looks like you guys paid more for computers, but the proportional gap between Spectrum and C64 was much the same as the UK.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Was New Zealand a tape or disk market at that time, and how much was the Commodore Datasette compared to a typical computer-usage tape deck?

Strangely none of the suppliers in that issue had a price for the datasette. The September 1984 issue had an advert from Manukau Computers (where my friend worked) listing it at NZ$129. The C64 was now $895 and a 48k Spectrum was $599.

In another advert the Atari 1010 Program Recorder (which of course only worked on Atari computers) was $199. The Atari 800XL was $895 and the Atari disk drive was $995, same prices as the C64 equivalents.

I found some prices of more generic 'program' recorders in NZ Bits & Bytes magazine. The December 1983 issue had the Dick Smith VZ-200 dataset for $99. A rather posh looking 'Computer Auto Data recorder' for the Apple II was $165.


Some other interesting prices from 1985:-

Olivetti M24 'business computer' - 8MHz 8086, 256k RAM, single 360k floppy disk drive, mono monitor, MSDOS - $6495.
Described as a 'fantastic deal!'. Fantastic for the vendor perhaps...

Tandy 1000 with single 360k floppy drive - $3190.

Nasty Asian PC clone with 8088 CPU, 256k RAM, 2 floppy drives, color monitor, no OS - $3220.

'AT compatible' system unit with 20MB hard drive and 1.2MB floppy $7500.
RGB Color monitor plus 'medium res' graphics card for above system - $1025.

Seagate 20MB hard drive with 8 bit controller card - $2195.

PC paint with mouse - $895.

Lotus 123 - $895.

Amstrad CPC664 with green screen - $1495 (I bought that!)

Sinclair QL - 'only' $1695.

'C128 launched', computer + floppy drive combo - $1795.

Yamaha CX5M MSX computer with YK10 49 key music keyboard - $1995.

BTW in one of those Computer Input magazines I found a description of the ZX Spectrum program I bought which was written in BASIC:-

"PIMANIA (48K Spectrum) $35.95
The longest-running, cult following, best-selling adventure quest ever... If you have not heard its praises then we think you might be new to the computer business."

Oh yeah 'new to the computer business' that was me - and they played me for a sucker. To think I could have had Manic Miner for only $24.95! Taught me a valuable lesson though - don't assume that a high price and glowing review makes it a good product!

[Megalomaniac]

So the C64 Datasette was more than a typical tape deck to plug into other computers in New Zealand, that's the opposite of here.

Even the budget PCs like the Tandy 1000 and the Asian clone you mention (faster processor and more memory, but inferior graphics) are still far more expensive than a C64 or Spectrum, or even the QL or C128 (which both flopped). Out of curiousity, how much did the ST and A1000 launch for in NZ?

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Out of curiousity, how much did the ST and A1000 launch for in NZ?

The 520ST was reviewed in the August 1985 issue of NZ Bits & Bytes magazine. This is the early version with external 360k disk drive. The price is quoted at NZ$2490 with monochrome monitor.

The A1000 was reviewed in the June 1986 issue, at a price of NZ$3995 with 1084 color monitor. However this was the NTSC version which wasn't appropriate for New Zealand. I suspect it was 'grey' imported from the US, which would have attracted high import duties.

AFAIK PAL A1000's weren't officially available in New Zealand until 1987. The invoice for mine is below. The A1000 with 256k RAM and 1084S monitor cost me NZ$2270. I'm glad I kept the invoice because my memory of the price was wrong! However I suspect that I got a discount and the normal price was ~NZ$2700.

The A500 was reviewed in the August 1987 issue of Bits & Bytes, listed at NZ$1495 for the computer alone and $2490 with 1081 monitor. The A501 RAM expansion was $300.

To put these prices in perspective, in the same 1987 issue an EGA card and monitor was priced at $2495, and a 2400 baud MODEM had an rrp of $2790. A BBC Master Compact with 1 floppy drive was $1695. OTOH a very crappy PC clone with 'turbo' 8088, 640k RAM, mono display card and monitor and two 360k floppy disk drives (but no OS) was only $1995.

[ImmortalA1000]

The Amiga 1000 was the most beautiful hardware ever to make it to market, I will forever be grateful I had one in those early days, even before there was bugger all games beyond Defender of the Crown and Marble Madness.

As a complete system it was perfect, hardware and OS together with build quality beyond $5000 rivals. A machine everybody should have fallen in love with IMO.

The doctor who sold me his A1000 was under the illusion the A500 would be more powerful and that's how I got my A1000 for £275 in 1987/88. I was working with UNIX based systems and it was scary how much closer A1000 was to those than the DOS PC compatibles in education I used whilst owning an A1000.

But as an early adopter of the C64 I just never saw the same sort of progress with Amiga games back then, the system was just too complex to leave it up to developers/software houses to crack the secrets of 'arcade perfect' game engines. If the Amiga was sprite based in its power like consoles/C64 then fine but it wasn't, it took some real genius to bypass Kickstart routines and write your own, this was a highly complex architecture.

I doubt Atari would have done any better really though. It's not an Irving 'the financial vampire' vs Tramiel issue here, it's a complexity of design necessary to get midway between SNES and Megadrive performance on a 1984 prototype computer.

[Megalomaniac]

Looks like you paid a bit more in NZ than we did, understandable as you were on the other side of the world from the biggest markets (other than Oz, obv). Am I right in thinking that an A500 with monitor would be about the same as an Asian-made non-major-brand PC with EGA and DOS (but not Windows) in NZ when it launched?

The A1000 was amazing hardware for the time, definitely better for creative or entertainment tasks than any PC, but I can see that in a business setting PCs did have advantages. The A500 (repackaging it as a home computer with similar expandability for barely half the price) was the real breakthrough.

[lmimmfn]

Originally Posted by ImmortalA1000

But as an early adopter of the C64 I just never saw the same sort of progress with Amiga games back then, the system was just too complex to leave it up to developers/software houses to crack the secrets of 'arcade perfect' game engines. If the Amiga was sprite based in its power like consoles/C64 then fine but it wasn't, it took some real genius to bypass Kickstart routines and write your own, this was a highly complex architecture.

I dont think the issue was around the complexity/documentation regarding arcade perfect, it was around what's considered good enough(and publishers had strict schedules), hence lots of ST ports because at the time no user had enough info to know if the Amiga hardware was being used fully or not vs the ST(unless you owned both back then to compare games). Magazines covering the dual formats wouldnt really complain about the Amiga being underutilized and would comment that the music/audio is better on the Amiga version and maybe slightly more colourful.

The C64 was different in that you had to use the hardware to get anything on screen(character maps, sprites etc. ).

Its more akin to Amstrad CPC getting direct Speccy ports even emulating the Speccy display but with only 4 colours.

I didnt get an Amiga until 1990 but i had considered getting an ST(as it was cheaper and the games bundle was great) in late 88/early 89. I knew the Amiga was more powerful but i wanted to move on from 8 bits, im glad i saw sense in the end.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Am I right in thinking that an A500 with monitor would be about the same as an Asian-made non-major-brand PC with EGA and DOS (but not Windows) in NZ when it launched?

Yes, but those Asian clones were the cheapest nastiest things you can imagine, only good for basic business use and nothing else. I did warranty repairs for a local company that was selling XT clones with CGA and EGA. You wouldn't believe how crappy they were. I had a box full of EHT transformers to replace the ones that popped in the monitors. Suckers were paying NZ$2500-3000 for these pieces of shit that would be thrown in the trash in a few years.

The A1000 was amazing hardware for the time, definitely better for creative or entertainment tasks than any PC, but I can see that in a business setting PCs did have advantages. The A500 (repackaging it as a home computer with similar expandability for barely half the price) was the real breakthrough.

I agree that the A1000 was an amazing machine - I will always cherish my memories of it. I still hold out hope that one day it will be returned to me (was stolen in 1991).

However it wasn't perfect. The cursor keys were a bit cramped (the A500's keyboard with inverted T was nicer), and the side expansion slot was in an awkward place. I had a 2MB RAM expansion and hard drive interface attached to mine, which was OK. But any more would have been quite unwieldy. Doing internal upgrades was tricky too because there wasn't much room inside it, and the large DIP Agnus and Denise chips couldn't be upgraded. Also for some reason the gender on the serial and parallel ports was swapped around. It was certainly an exceptional first effort from Commodore, but the A500 was technically better.

I bought the A1000 rather than an A500 because I liked it's styling. Although I later wondered whether the A500 might have been a better choice, I didn't regret it.

In the mid 90's I acquired an old NTSC A1000 with a faulty motherboard. I replaced it with an A600 motherboard and installed a CDROM drive in place of the front RAM expansion, with a 3.5" IDE hard drive inside too. The A600 had a 25MHz 68020 accelerator card with 4MB on it. Imagine if Commodore had produced a machine like this! It didn't even need AGA to be awesome.

I am thinking of designing a similar looking case for my spare A500 or A1200 motherboard. Perhaps one day we will see something like the A1000 being manufactured again.

[grond]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

In the mid 90's I acquired an old NTSC A1000 with a faulty motherboard. I replaced it with an A600 motherboard and installed a CDROM drive in place of the front RAM expansion, with a 3.5" IDE hard drive inside too. The A600 had a 25MHz 68020 accelerator card with 4MB on it. Imagine if Commodore had produced a machine like this!

But, but, but... It would have been far too expensive and they should never have offered anything that had more than a 7 MHz 68000 in it!

[TCD]

Originally Posted by grond

But, but, but... It would have been far too expensive and they should never have offered anything that had more than a 7 MHz 68000 in it!

Check mate

[TCD]

Originally Posted by grond

But, but, but... It would have been far too expensive and they should never have offered anything that had more than a 7 MHz 68000 in it!

Checkmate

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by lmimmfn

I dont think the issue was around the complexity/documentation regarding arcade perfect, it was around what's considered good enough(and publishers had strict schedules), hence lots of ST ports because at the time no user had enough info to know if the Amiga hardware was being used fully or not vs the ST(unless you owned both back then to compare games). Magazines covering the dual formats wouldnt really complain about the Amiga being underutilized and would comment that the music/audio is better on the Amiga version and maybe slightly more colourful.

The C64 was different in that you had to use the hardware to get anything on screen(character maps, sprites etc. ).

Its more akin to Amstrad CPC getting direct Speccy ports even emulating the Speccy display but with only 4 colours.

I didnt get an Amiga until 1990 but i had considered getting an ST(as it was cheaper and the games bundle was great) in late 88/early 89. I knew the Amiga was more powerful but i wanted to move on from 8 bits, im glad i saw sense in the end.

In truth (speaking as someone who started with a Spectrum), Amstrad users got the same raw deal as Amiga users, but by a greater extent, and for longer. You still get people who seem to judge the CPC's potential based on those Spectrum ports, whereas even people who had STs back in the day can see that the Amiga's potential for 2D arcade games went far beyond the ST's.

Ultimately the Amiga did overhaul the ST in most of the world, meaning that ST ports largely died out by about 1990, and the (pre-AGA) Amiga had another 3-4 good years after that, whereas the CPC never really got close to the Spectrum (France being an exception in both, for whatever reasons) so you still saw Spectrum ports on the Amstrad quite late. A pity really.

[TEG]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Ultimately the Amiga did overhaul the ST in most of the world, meaning that ST ports largely died out by about 1990, and the (pre-AGA) Amiga had another 3-4 good years after that, whereas the CPC never really got close to the Spectrum (France being an exception in both, for whatever reasons) so you still saw Spectrum ports on the Amstrad quite late. A pity really.

Amstrad France had a CEO who was said to be very good at marketing any product, Marion Vannier:



Amstrad adverts were running on a loop at the French TV and were catchy and funny.

[Dunny]

iirc it was a tax dodge by Sugar - by sending all his stock overseas to france he could ... claim some cash or summats, the details are hazy.

So with most of his inventory of CPCs on the continent it was available to be shifted ASAP and the marketer in-situ did a great job. Hence, the CPC flourished in France.

Or so I was told.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by grond

But, but, but... It would have been far too expensive and they should never have offered anything that had more than a 7 MHz 68000 in it!

Actually they did design a machine that wasn't too far off my setup in specs - the 'A1000+'.

The A1000+ was a super-low-cost 2-slot AGA-based Amiga. Goal was to have this thing list at $999 including hard drive, 2 or 4 megs of RAM depending on RAM prices, keyboard, etc. It would have been about the size of the A1000 but without the keyboard storage area (no room for it) Really nice system. (And it was going to be either 14MHz or 28Mhz 68020 or 68EC030 system)...

Dave Haynie has also commented on Usenet the A1000+ was to be a mid-range follow up to the A3000+ that used its own cost effective system architecture. On the processor speed, Dave differs from Mike Sinz, indicating it was an $800 25MHz AGA system, in a low-profile "near pizza box" case.

The A1000+ was cancelled soon after, along with the A3000+ and Commodore released the A600. It was then decided to use some of the work done on the A1000+ and build a lower spec machine. The engineering team referred to this as the A1000jr. The machine was based upon the A1000+ design but dropped the AGA chipset in favour of ECS. Development on this system was then cancelled by marketing, who turned the A1000Jr design into the A3200.

Seems that different people were pushing in different directions. IMO a pizza box sized machine was too small. It needed to have space for a CDROM drive. However something smaller than the A4000 would have been nice. Reproducing the A1000 styling could have had nostalgia and brand recognition value too, but apparently nobody thought of that.

If I was in charge I would have upgraded the A1000 to match or surpass the A500 in 1987 instead of dropping it. The case design was already done so it wouldn't have been expensive - just a new front expansion cover and a few tweaks to the inside. Then I would have developed the A2000 for the high end and avoided the A3000.

With a CDROM drive and AGA (which wouldn't happen until 1990) the 'A1000+' would be the ultimate multimedia computer which is what the CDTV should have been. No wasted R&D, no failed products, exponential sales and huge profits for Commodore! Only downside is you probably wouldn't get the A600 and A1200, which are great designs that I wouldn't have thought of.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Ultimately the Amiga did overhaul the ST in most of the world, meaning that ST ports largely died out by about 1990, and the (pre-AGA) Amiga had another 3-4 good years after that...

I was really surprised when I found out that Gods (which was released in 1991) was made on the ST and then ported to the Amiga. It always had that 'Amiga' feeling for me. But you are right that around 1990/91 the focus shifted from ST first, Amiga second to the other way around.