[net.micro.cbm] incompetent executives

grr@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (George Robbins) (06/02/86)

In article <8605310929.AA01097@pavepaws> dillon@PAVEPAWS.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
>
>	Ha.  Commodore's list of mistakes is rather huge... and all are
>directly resultant from an attempt to cut-costs and a lack of competent
>management of programmers.

[of course you wouldn't have made any mistakes? 8-]

>                             I would like to reiterate my request: Of all
>the things you do to the Amiga, DO NOT REPLACE KICKSTART WITH ROMS!.  Don't
>be an idiot.  The MAC went along the wrong road.  IBM went along the
>right road (well, to a point).  There are obviously going to be great
>improvments ... no, wait a minute, you just fired ...  well, ok then...
>perhaps there won't be any great future improvments.
>
>	But at least we'll all still be around.  Right guys!  guys? hello
>hello?...
>
>					-Matt "sorrowful" Dillon

Matt - be assured that the ROM/Kickstart issue is getting plenty of discussion,
but remember that the ROM emulation costs much more than the ROMs would.  In
the real world, a product that costs more to make sells for a higher price, at
least in a competitive market.  The Amiga user community, not to mention
Commodore, loses everytime someone looks at the Amiga and then chokes on the
pricetag.

[non-amiga discussion follows...]

>A short list of software mistakes:
>	The drive OS for all their disk drives
>
>	Every piece of support software that Commodore ever developed for
>	the C-64, and most of the stuff they developed for the PET.

Yeah, it's nothing special, but like the C64, it works and it's cheap.  The
software for the TI99/4A was much better, especially the OS, but in the end
that didn't amount to a flower on their grave...  

>A short list of hardware mistakes:
>	Using non-standard IEEE 

A cost issue - real IEEE controller chips were expensive.

>	Running a disk port via a serial line and completely in
>	software (effective baud rate = 1000)  (C-64), (so it wouldn't
>	compete with they business models???)

This wasn't intentional - the VIC20 I/O chip had hardware support for the
serial bus, but it it was broken and couldn't be fixed in time for production.
Once the bit bashing code made it into the drives, the CPU was stuck with the
slow transfer rates.  Compatability can be a very expensive issue.

>	Flubbing the C-64 RS-232 B-A-D-L-Y.  (software again)

If RS232 had cost money, it wouldn't have been included.  A couple of I/O
lines and some bit-bashing code was cheap.  True the code isn't quite
right, but I guess it tested out ok at 300 baud...

>	Drilling holes through the PC board in an attempt to force
>	users to not upgrade the computer themselves (PETs 20xx 40xx)?!?!?

These people are now bringing you the Atari 520ST and 1040ST.

There's not much room for elegance in a entry level consumer machine.  It
either adds cost or takes development time.  The C64 and thence Commodore
survived/won the home computer wars because they could deliver the cheapest
product that did what was needed.
-- 
George Robbins - now working with,	uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|caip}!cbmvax!grr
but no way officially representing	arpa: cbmvax!grr@seismo.css.GOV
Commodore, Engineering Department	fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)