Re: World-wide 8-bit computer sales (all-time)?

[vairxpert@hotmail.com (vairxpert)]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 21:35:58 +0000 (UTC), pausch@saaf.se (Paul
Schlyter) wrote:

>In article <3f002b4d.813040@news.netnitco.net>,
>vairxpert <vairxpert@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 07:28:56 +0000 (UTC), pausch@saaf.se (Paul
>> Schlyter) wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <3eff7fb0.35967984@news.netnitco.net>,
>>> vairxpert <vairxpert@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Have you ever owned a one piece computer system?
>>> 
>>> Only some laptops with LED or LCD screens, where this problem with
>>> magnetic fields doesn't exist.  I always thought 1-piece computers
>>> systems with CRT displays either were too bulky or had a screen
>>> too small.
>> 
>> Full blown laptop computers with LCD screens didn't exist back in the
>> late 70's/early 80's.
> 
>I know..... there was only the Osbourne, with a small CRT display....

And don't forget about the TRS-80 Model 4P.  The P standing for
"portable" since it only weighed about 25 lbs : )

 
>> If you were around and able to use a computer back then you had
>> no choice.
> 
>Sure I had a choice!   My choice was to use only desktop computes... :-)
> 
> 
>>>> Those systems were
>>>> designed to work that way so there is no reason people shouldn't have
>>>> bought one.  Just about every high end serious business computer was
>>>> all one piece with either 5.25" or 8" floppy drives back in the early
>>>> 80's.
>>> 
>>> ...I don't think so.  CP/M machines were the most common micros used
>>> by businesses back, and they usually had a separate terminal.  And
>>> minis and mainframes (which were the most serious computers back
>>> then) _definitely_ had separate terminals !!!!
>> 
>> We're not talking about terminals, mini's and mainframes.
> 
>You were talking about "systems" -- they include mini's and mainframes,
>which back then was dominant among serious computer users, who often
>regarded micros as just toys....

I guess system can mean a bunch of different things...I consider my
Emachine that I'm typing this message on to be a system.  An no wise
cracks about the E...out of the dozens of computers I've owned it's
been the most reliable : )

 
>> I can give you a mile long list of popular systems (most CPM
>> compatible) that were all in one, including every TRS-80 (model II,
>> III, 4, 4P, 12, 16), Kaypro's, Osbornes, macs, ect.
>> 
>> What business systems from 1982
> 
>Was Trash-80 really a _business_ system?

All except the CoCo's.  The model I was more of a ground breaking
hobbiest system.  The III's popped up everywhere from homes, schools
and businesses (I still laugh everytime I watch Airport and see the
III's at the terminal).  The 2, 12, 16 were very expensive heavy duty
office type systems not designed for home use.  They used the big ol'
8" floppies and were available early on with hard drives.  I think a
few of those depending on options hit well over $10 grand.

I owned a very basic 16K cassette based model III.  It was $1,000 plus
the cost of the cassette recorder.  Fully loaded with dual floppies,
48K, RS232 board and Orchestra 90 sound board brought the price up
towards $3,000.00.  I eventually got there but only after all the
parts were heavily discounted.  I know the original price of the Drive
0 kit was $1,000.00 alone.  

> 
>> and earlier do you recall that used a separate CPU, keyboard and
>> monitor?  Something that you would walk into a persons office and
>> see sitting on a desk?
> 
>The Altair, IMSAI 8080 and most S-100 computers, including brands
>advertised specifically as business computers, such as the North Star
>Horizon.  And, of course, the Apple II which got used as a business
>system too........  and the Apple ///....

I'll give ya that...I'll say there's a fair share of both.

 
>Later the VIC-20, Commodore-64, Sinclair ZX-80, ZX-81 and Spectru,
>the Jupiter Ace and many more appeared, which had separate displays.
>But they were not business systems.

Considering when they were released I never understood why the C64 and
Atari 800's never made it as real business machines?  I would say
either one was able to hold it own against the first 4.77 mhz XT's and
they cost a fraction of the price.