Re: If you could design a $300 homecomputer today, what would youchoose?

[wbdesnoy@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca (Byron Desnoyers Winmill)]

Bob Retelle (bobr1@provide.net) wrote:
: MY point is that NO ONE WILL BUY ONE if it has half the features and
: runs at one tenth the speed of a comparably priced system ALREADY on
: the market.

Bob, you are missing the point.  The point is to play with an idea.  The
underlying question is: if we could create our own computer, how would be
build it?  The price point is there so that we don't build something, like
a quad processor Pentium IV, or what be it.

It does not matter whether this machine will sell, because it is only an
idea.  Sometimes ideas are good, and sometimes ideas are bad.  There is no
sole judge of quality and, if there were, it certainly wouldn't be on
marketability.  In this day in age, the Apple II, Amstrad, Amiga, and Atari
have very limited markets.  That does not mean that these machines were bad
ideas.  It certainly does not mean that we who use them have bad ideas.

And even if sales were an issue, I'm sick and tired of this damn "you must
own the market to be successful" mentality.  To pick on Commodore and Atari:
these companies were split up, sold off, and bought by other firms.  Does
that mean that the Amiga or Atari ST were unsuccessful.  Apple's marketshare
is nowhere near 10% (let alone the 90% claimed for M$).  Does that mean that
Apple is a failure?  Apple is almost 25 years old.  Is Sun a failure, by the
same logic?  Of course not.  It is absurd.  If I can make a living while
serving a few hundred clients, I would consider myself a success.  If I could
do that with my 68k proposal.  And, as I pointed out, similar machines which
are targeted to a limited market already exist in the sub-$300 price range.

Yes, 68k and Z80 based computers are still made.  A tenth of the power?
Heck, I'll bet that the 68000 is a lot slower than that.  Ditto for the Z80
based machines.

The point is: these machines are not targeted at the same market that
Windows, or MacOS, or any other entertainment/office platform is targeted
at.  The TI-89 is designed as a calculator, and the design is directed
towards portability and the entry of mathematical expressions.  But don't
be fooled, this is a computer as powerful as an Atari ST.  It is routinely
programmed to serve other purposes (assembly, C cross compilers, etc.).

Does TI sell millions of '89s every year?  That is doubtful.  They offer
about a half a dozen different models (again, some are Z80 based and are
just as programmable).  HP is probably their biggest competitor, in a
similarly small market -- and there are others.  Are any of these companies
or product lines a failure as a result.

If you want to by your dime-a-million VCR's and Wintel computers, be my
guest.  If you think that our discussions are illconceived, so be it.  But
if you are more interested in tearing our designs apart than contributing
construtively, I suggest you shut your mouth, add this thread to your kill
file, and forget this little band of crazies exist.

Good night, and thanks for puting me in a foul mood,
Byron.