Re: Your first A2.

["Tom Zuchowski" <tzuchow@attglobal.net>]

The Apple /// certainly seems to have had a few quirks, but I always
understood that its failure in the marketplace was due mainly to the 100%
failure rate of the early production resulting from Apple's use of cheap
chip sockets (a problem they solved very neatly in the //e by doing away
with most of them.) I know that one "repair" method for the /// was to drop
it six inches onto a hard surface to jar the chip seating. By the time Apple
saw the duboius wisdom of saving a few bucks in sockets, the word was out
that the /// was a dog.

To my way of thinking, the /// was a FAR superior business machine to the
II+/e, was absolutely better than the first PC, and was light years ahead of
the first Macs (which were practically useless except as toys.) The ///
could have been a serious contender against the PC if not for this
disastrous public-relations fiasco. First impressions count for a lot!

Tom Z



"Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote in message
20010701132605.06501.00002893@ng-ch1.aol.com">news:20010701132605.06501.00002893@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> Consider what Apple was offering at the time of the PC intro
> in 1981--the Apple ///, for God's sake!  This was a machine
> with plenty of "personality"--most of it capricious.  And with
> terrible software availablilty, except in Apple // emulation mode!
> (This is 1981, remember.)
>
>
> Commercial success is at least as much understanding your
> market as it is having a great product.  (Remember Beta!)  Although
> Apple products were clever, innovative, and (after the ///) well-designed,
> they _never_ understood how to market to the people with money to
> spend.  Even Jobs appeals primarily to the Mac faithful, not the
> uncommitted pragmatist with work to do.
>
> "Being standard is better than being better."
>
> "But that's just my opinion...I could be wrong."
>
> </rant>
>
> -michael
>
>  Email:  mjmahon@aol.com
>  Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/