Re: What happened to the Zip chip?!?!

[spec@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector)]

In article supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer) writes...

>A spokesperson from CMD sent email to me informing me that they
>were in fact "in it for the money" when making hardware for the C64
>and C128.  Why is it that THEY can make money on THOSE "dead"
>computers while A2 vendors can't?

    Well one reason is probably based on the sheer number of
C64 machines Commodore sold throughout the 1980's. It was an
extremely popular machine, not just because of its features,
but due to the fact it had such a low price tag and was so
accessible to the average consumer (you could wake into any
department or toy store and find one). The installed base of
C64 machines was in the tens of millions, probably even more!

    Compare that with the Apple II. While it was very popular
like the Commodore, Apple sold only 6 to 8 million machines
in total (there were clones, though they all disappeared in
a hurry when Apple sued them). Add to the fact a great deal
of those machines were bought by schools who often prefer to
buy new computers than bother upgrading their existing ones.

    Also, while the Apple II market has been dead at least 7
years now (most major companies dropped support in 1990-91)
the C64 was still in production not too long ago -- do you
remember Escom reintroduced the C64 to the European market?
In the end it all comes down to market size. That is why
Origin released Ultima VI for the Commodore but not the
Apple IIGS (needless to say, the C64 port was a bad joke,
but they did it because it would make more money than a
superior IIGS port). As it stands today, I would say there
are probably only several dozen people making up the Apple
IIgs market. For proof of that, look at the number of sales
a program like Spectrum or SuperConvert makes worldwide. Or
look at the total number of subscribers to the two remaining
printed publications available.

Mitchell Spector
spec@vax2.concordia.ca