oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) (05/03/90)
In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. The VCS was intended for video games, and had only 128 bytes of on-board RAM (yes, that is bytes, not Kbytes.), Yet plug in cartridges enhanced its capabilities. A version of chess was even shipped for it. God bless America, we have the smartest closets in the world. -- -- David Phillip Oster - Note new address. Old one has gone Bye Bye. -- oster@well.sf.ca.us = {backbone}!well!oster
sterling@cbmvax.commodore.com (Rick Sterling) (05/04/90)
In article <17782@well.sf.ca.us> oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: > In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: > >The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? > > Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold > about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ pretty old datum here. > The VCS was intended for video games, and had only 128 bytes of on-board ^^^ ^^^ past tense right? > RAM (yes, that is bytes, not Kbytes.), Yet plug in cartridges enhanced its > capabilities. A version of chess was even shipped for it. > > God bless America, we have the smartest closets in the world. > -- > -- David Phillip Oster - Note new address. Old one has gone Bye Bye. > -- oster@well.sf.ca.us = {backbone}!well!oster Strange as it may seem, the old war horse C64 is still in production having gone through a couple facelifts over the last 8 years. As far as total number sold I have no idea what the numbers are now... The 9 million units mentioned above probably refers to just US Sales. __ __ |__) (__` | \ick ,__)terling ----------------------------------------------- Test Engineering Commodore Technology Group UUCP ...{uunet,allegra,rutgers}!cbmvax!sterling
BARRETT@owl.ecil.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) (05/04/90)
In article <17782@well.sf.ca.us> David Phillip Oster <oster@well.sf.ca.us> writes: <In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com <writes: <<The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? <Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold <about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. If you are going to bring in game machine, the Nintendo beats everything else out by far. The last I heard, over 80 Million Nintendos had been sold world-wide. This is surely conservative by now, as I heard this figure quoted a year ago. -MB-
phaedrus@milton.acs.washington.edu (The Wanderer) (05/04/90)
In article <11307@cbmvax.commodore.com> sterling@cbmvax (Rick Sterling) writes: >In article <17782@well.sf.ca.us> oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: >> In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >> >The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? >> Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold >> about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > pretty old datum here. >> The VCS was intended for video games, and had only 128 bytes of on-board ^^^ ^^^ > past tense right? >> RAM (yes, that is bytes, not Kbytes.), Yet plug in cartridges enhanced its >> capabilities. A version of chess was even shipped for it. >> God bless America, we have the smartest closets in the world. >Strange as it may seem, the old war horse C64 is still in production having gone >through a couple facelifts over the last 8 years. As far as total number sold >I have no idea what the numbers are now... The 9 million units mentioned above >probably refers to just US Sales. Why does it matter whether or not the VCS is out of production? I thought the question asked about "the best-selling computer of all time," not "the best-selling computer of all time that's still being produces right now..." And in any event, to the best of my knowledge, the VCS/2600 is still in production; at least, all the Kay-Bees around here seem to have no problem obtaining them. The base unit these days is much smaller than it used to be (doesn't take many chips to do a VCS these days :) ), and I've seen it for as low as $29... sure, the gameplay isn't as good as a S*ga or N*ntendo, but then again, you can buy the whole VCS for less than the price of a decent cartridge for the others... Let me check my closet... a 2600, a 7800, some old TI-99/4A stuff, a bunch of Apple IIe disks... pretty smart closet, all right. :) f o d d e r-- Internet: phaedrus@u.washington.edu (University of Washington, Seattle) The views expressed here are not those of this station or its management. "If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, consider an exciting career as a guillotine operator!"
rdgrass@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert Dale Grass) (05/04/90)
I don't know about the ALL-TIME best selling computer, but the October 1989 issue of Personal Computing lists the Commodore 64 as the number one best selling computer worldwide. The second runner up was IBM XT which sold about half the units than the C64. As far as computers in the U.S. in the last decade, there were more IBM PC XT's sold than C-64's but not by much. Apple II, IIC, IIE, and IIGS come in third in of the above catagories.
jgreco@archimedes.math.uwm.edu (Joe Greco) (05/04/90)
In comp.sys.cbm article <3283@milton.acs.washington.edu>, phaedrus@milton.acs.washington.edu (The Wanderer) wrote: : Why does it matter whether or not the VCS is out of production? I :thought the question asked about "the best-selling computer of all time," not :"the best-selling computer of all time that's still being produces right :now..." It doesn't matter; on the other hand a 2600 doesn't exactly meet my definition of "computer." It contains the basic components of a microcomputer system (RAM/ROM/processor/video/sound/I/O) but isn't generally user programmable, and I don't think I've seen one do anything besides play games, which lands it in my "dedicated microcontroller/microcomputer" category right next to VCR's, microwaves, and digital watches, not to mention my line printer (which has more RAM/ROM and processing power than a 2600 :-) .... I have a difficult time accepting a 2600 as a Real Computer. Anyways, my uninformed guess would be that PC-compatible machines are the dominant machine, although I doubt any single manufacturer has manufactured even half as many of a single model as Commodore has of the 64. It's got too much going for it that people just take for granted.... :-) ... Joe
gehlhaar@uniol.UUCP (Arne Gehlhaar) (05/04/90)
oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: >In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >>The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? >Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold >about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. >The VCS was intended for video games, and had only 128 bytes of on-board >RAM (yes, that is bytes, not Kbytes.), Yet plug in cartridges enhanced its >capabilities. A version of chess was even shipped for it. I doubt though, that the VCS can be counted as a "real" computer, its only device of input being a joystick ! :) I think a computer should at least have a keyboard, but then again, that's a problem of how you define the term computer. Greetings, Arne
neumann@uniol.UUCP (Frank Neumann) (05/04/90)
gehlhaar@uniol.UUCP (Arne Gehlhaar) writes: >oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: >>In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >>>The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? [... about Atari VCS being best selling computer ever...] >I doubt though, that the VCS can be counted as a "real" computer, its only >device of input being a joystick ! :) I think a computer should at least >have a keyboard, but then again, that's a problem of how you define the >term computer. HOWEVER - there was a kind of keypad available for the VCS (I think, the number keys plus "#", "." and one or two more... even better, the old Atari brochures showed a "Basic Programming language Module"...never seen it myself, but I must have existed somewhere... so, the VCS _IS_ the best selling computer ever, no !?! :-) :-) :-) -Frank -- #-#-#-#- This .sig is not for release (pre-version 0.98) #-#-#-#- - Frank Neumann, Hauptstr. 107, 2900 Oldenburg West-Germany # # == UUCP:neumann@uniol.uucp BITNET: 295391 AT DOLUNI1 // - - InHouse:amigo@faramir System at home (what else ?): \X/ # # /Don't try to analyze me - I`m too...complex for that! - Alf/ - -#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-
seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (05/05/90)
In-Reply-To: message from oster@well.sf.ca.us ...9Mil...where the hell'd you get your figures. If I remember right, about TWO YEARS ago, there was an OFFICIAL release that the C=64 had sold over 14,000,000 units...count the zeros. And at that time, C= was still selling more than a million units worldwide. I think everyone quit counting once they passed the 18,000,000 unit mark. C=64, the official aerospace network computer for the Polish Strategic Missle Attack System...hehe //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc | ARPA: !crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc@nosc.mil | " Fanatics have their INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com | dreams, wherewith they | weave a paradise for RealWorld: Sean Cunningham | a sect. " Voice: (512) 994-1602 PLINK: ce3k* | -Keats | Call C.B.A.U.G. BBS (512) 883-8351 w/SkyPix | B^) VISION GRAPHICS B^) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
warren@hpindda.HP.COM (Warren Burnett) (05/05/90)
/ hpindda:comp.sys.amiga / jgreco@archimedes.math.uwm.edu (Joe Greco) / 8:15 pm May 3, 1990 / In comp.sys.cbm article <3283@milton.acs.washington.edu>, phaedrus@milton.acs.washington.edu (The Wanderer) wrote: >>: Why does it matter whether or not the VCS is out of production? I >>:thought the question asked about "the best-selling computer of all time," not >>:"the best-selling computer of all time that's still being produces right >>:now..." >It doesn't matter; on the other hand a 2600 doesn't exactly meet my >definition of "computer." It contains the basic components of a >microcomputer system (RAM/ROM/processor/video/sound/I/O) but isn't generally >user programmable, and ... >... Joe Actually, the 2600 did have a BASIC cartridge and keyboard available for it. I remember seeing ads for it long, long ago. If I remember right, the 2600 was basically a stripped down Atari 400 computer. They did some amazing stuff with that machine. Mine is now in my closet next to my Commodore 1541 disc drive (once described as "the best computer Commodore ever made"). Warren Burnett warren%hpindip@hp-sde.sde.hp.com
6600raft@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Michael Wise) (05/05/90)
In article <2426@uniol.UUCP> gehlhaar@uniol.UUCP (Arne Gehlhaar) writes: >>Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold >>about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. >I doubt though, that the VCS can be counted as a "real" computer, its only >device of input being a joystick ! :) I think a computer should at least >have a keyboard, but then again, that's a problem of how you define the >term computer. I remember an add-on cartridge for BASIC programming with a corresponding keypad, but I would imagine that not many of these were sold. I also remember too that it even played a chess game, but that it would cheat by making illegal moves while the board was "hidden." -- ========================================================================= | Internet: 6600raft@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu | All opinions stated are mine.| | BITNET: 6600raft@UCSBUXA.BITNET | **Save The Earth** | =========================================================================
bgribble@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Bill Gribble) (05/05/90)
I hate to add to the volume of this (already obese) group, but could we move
this c64/VCS discussion elsewhere - like /dev/null?
=============================================================================
===== Bill Gribble Internet: bgribble@jarthur.claremont.edu =====
===== Harvey Mudd College wgribble@hmcvax.claremont.edu =====
===== Claremont, CA 91711 Bitnet: wgribble@hmcvax.bitnet =====
===== (714) 621-8000 x2045 =====
=============================================================================cg108fep@icogsci1.ucsd.edu (Dennis Lou) (05/05/90)
In article <2426@uniol.UUCP> gehlhaar@uniol.UUCP (Arne Gehlhaar) writes: )oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: )>In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: )>>The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? )> )>Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold )>about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. ) )I doubt though, that the VCS can be counted as a "real" computer, its only )device of input being a joystick ! :) I think a computer should at least )have a keyboard, but then again, that's a problem of how you define the )term computer. Yes, I suppose Eniac and Univac weren't computers, as well as the FORTRAN engines using punch cards. Shall we talk about Babbage's machine and whether or not it was a copmuter? Let's not. -- Dennis Lou DISCLAIMER: Disclaimers don't work! pa1568@sdcc13.ucsd.edu or cg108fep@icogsci1.ucsd.edu icogsci1 is flaky; sdcc13 is your best bet
cs223101@umbc5.umbc.edu (CMSC 223/01011) (05/05/90)
Not quibbling with you or anything, bit I've played (yes, that's the word) with the Basic for the Atari 2600 VCS (VGS?). It allowed a whole 1 k of program to be stored, and hadno graphics capabilities at all. Not my idea of a computer... more like a diversified pocket calculator. <pardon any line noise hits... bad lines around here.> [RICH]
mrose@ic.sunysb.edu (Michael Rose) (05/05/90)
In article <2426@uniol.UUCP> gehlhaar@uniol.UUCP (Arne Gehlhaar) writes: >oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: > >>In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >>>The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? > >>Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold >>about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. >>The VCS was intended for video games, and had only 128 bytes of on-board ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^^^^ >>RAM (yes, that is bytes, not Kbytes.), Yet plug in cartridges enhanced its ^^^ I thought the 2600 had 4k of RAM? >>capabilities. A version of chess was even shipped for it. > >I doubt though, that the VCS can be counted as a "real" computer, its only >device of input being a joystick ! :) I think a computer should at least ^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^ ^^^^^^^^ >have a keyboard, but then again, that's a problem of how you define the ^^^^^^^^ >term computer. > >Greetings, Arne But what about those Keypad controllers? They were a type of keyboard. You could even write BASIC programs on the 2600 with Atari's BASIC Programming Cartridge. As I recall, weren't there Keyboards and EPROM Burners available, or at least hacks, for the 2600 to program games in assembly? Take care! Michael R. Rose
phorgan@cup.portal.com (Patrick John Horgan) (05/05/90)
Frank Neumann (neumann@uniol.uucp) said... I must have existed somewhere... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ How do you know? <grin> couldn't resist:) Patrick Horgan phorgan@cup.portal.com
umturne4@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Daryl Turner) (05/06/90)
In article <3283@milton.acs.washington.edu> phaedrus@milton.acs.washington.edu (The Wanderer) writes: > Why does it matter whether or not the VCS is out of production? I >thought the question asked about "the best-selling computer of all time," not >"the best-selling computer of all time that's still being produces right >now..." > And in any event, to the best of my knowledge, the VCS/2600 is still in >production; at least, all the Kay-Bees around here seem to have no problem >obtaining them. The base unit these days is much smaller than it used to be >(doesn't take many chips to do a VCS these days :) ), and I've seen it for as >low as $29... sure, the gameplay isn't as good as a S*ga or N*ntendo, but >then again, you can buy the whole VCS for less than the price of a decent >cartridge for the others... > Let me check my closet... a 2600, a 7800, some old TI-99/4A stuff, >a bunch of Apple IIe disks... pretty smart closet, all right. :) But does the Atari VCS qualify as a computer? I don't want to start a flame war, but I don't see a "game machine" qualifying as a full- fledged computer. After all, a computer should be good for more than just games, right? Daryl Turner <umturne4@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
unhd (Jason W Nyberg) (05/06/90)
In article <17782@well.sf.ca.us> oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: >In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >>The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? > >Not only is this hard to believe, it is also wrong. The C64 has only sold >about 9 million units. The Atari VCS has sold over 17 million units. >The VCS was intended for video games, and had only 128 bytes of on-board >RAM (yes, that is bytes, not Kbytes.), Yet plug in cartridges enhanced its >capabilities. A version of chess was even shipped for it. > What the fuck? why don't we just include calculators in the deal? Im sure that some TI calculator has sold more units than an atari f**kin 2600 (I had an atari 2600 GAME MACHINE and a TI calculator but I like my amy SLIGHTLY more) Shit, why not include individual chips, for god's sake. How about the best selling transistor? Best selling battery? (My Heavy Duty Ever-ready is better than your Energizer!) Sorry, just trying to sober up! (just kidding mom?!) >God bless America, we have the smartest closets in the world. Bless this, pal -Jason Nyberg >-- David Phillip Oster - Note new address. Old one has gone Bye Bye. >-- oster@well.sf.ca.us = {backbone}!well!oster
jma@beach.cis.ufl.edu (John 'Vlad' Adams) (05/06/90)
In article <2428@uniol.UUCP> neumann@uniol.UUCP (Frank Neumann) writes: >HOWEVER - >there was a kind of keypad available for the VCS (I think, the number keys >plus "#", "." and one or two more... even better, the old Atari brochures >showed a "Basic Programming language Module"...never seen it myself, but >I must have existed somewhere... so, the VCS _IS_ the best selling >computer ever, no !?! :-) :-) :-) Yes, there was a BASIC cartridge which came with a keypad. I've used it before. Was actually easier to use than the Sinclair/Timex 1000. -- John M. Adams --*-- Professional Student on the six-year plan! /// Internet: jma@beach.cis.ufl.edu -or- vladimir@maple.circa.ufl.edu /// "Houston, we have a negative on that orbit trajectory." Calvin & Hobbs \\V// Cosysop of BBS:42; Amiga BBS FIDOnet 1:3612/42. 904-438-4803 (Florida) \X/
tcrevier@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Tom Crevier) (05/06/90)
In article <1990May6.064033.16586@uunet!unhd> jwn712@unhd.unh.edu.UUCP (Jason W Nyberg) writes: >In article <17782@well.sf.ca.us> oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: >>In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: [bunch of crap deleted] >> >What the fuck? why don't we just include calculators in the deal? Im sure >that some TI calculator has sold more units than an atari f**kin 2600 >(I had an atari 2600 GAME MACHINE and a TI calculator but I like my amy >SLIGHTLY more) Shit, why not include individual chips, for god's sake. How >about the best selling transistor? Best selling battery? (My Heavy Duty >Ever-ready is better than your Energizer!) Sorry, just trying to sober up! >(just kidding mom?!) > >>God bless America, we have the smartest closets in the world. whatever dude. > >Bless this, pal > > -Jason Nyberg > >>-- David Phillip Oster - Note new address. Old one has gone Bye Bye. >>-- oster@well.sf.ca.us = {backbone}!well!oster Good job. I agree. Why don't you guys take this idiotic conversation somewhere else and stop wasting bandwidth, which I realize that this very message is doing. Oh well. C ya. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- "If you think you got it made, just revel in your selfish praise, 'cause when the world stops turning, so will you!" Bad -----> Tom Crevier <----- _____ / | /\ Internet : tcrevier@hmcvax.claremont.edu / / /___|/__\ tcrevier@jarthur.claremont.edu / / | / | Bitnet : tcrevier@hmcvax.bitnet / / | /| | \ \ / / Amiga \ / | / U.S. Mail: Tom Crevier \ \/ / \__|__/ Harvey Mudd College \/\/ Clareomnt, Ca, 91711 Religion -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
bskendig@edsger.Princeton.EDU (Brian Kendig) (05/07/90)
In article <23118@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> jma@beach.cis.ufl.edu (John 'Vlad' Adams) writes: >In article <2428@uniol.UUCP> neumann@uniol.UUCP (Frank Neumann) writes: >>HOWEVER - >>there was a kind of keypad available for the VCS (I think, the number keys >>plus "#", "." and one or two more... even better, the old Atari brochures >>showed a "Basic Programming language Module"...never seen it myself, but >>I must have existed somewhere... so, the VCS _IS_ the best selling >>computer ever, no !?! :-) :-) :-) > >Yes, there was a BASIC cartridge which came with a keypad. I've used >it before. Was actually easier to use than the Sinclair/Timex 1000. There were actually two sets of keypads made for the Atari VCS. The first was a pair of telephone-like keypads onto which you could fit overlays. It came with the BASIC Programming cartridge, which let you program in a weird dialect of that language (it even let you view the stack and the values of variables as you ran programs, something I've not seen on *any* computer since. It even had windows! (Well, distinct horizontal bands on the screen, each of which was used for different output, but still that's the first time I had ever seen anything like that.) The keypads could be hooked together to make it easier to use them to program with. (I seem to remember two other cartridges coming with the BASIC cart and the keypads -- anyone remember what they were?) The second kind of keypad was shipped with Star Raiders (a game which, IMHO, should not have been ported to the VCS. It was *baad*...). It was incompatible with the earlier keypads, having different wiring. Apparently it was intended to be used with several new games which were never released (among them Combat II, which I read about in an Atari catalog I got with a cart). A third-party company (!) made a machine-language monitor for the VCS. It snapped into the cartridge port and rested on the top of the console; you plugged a cartridge into it and, by flipping switches and pressing buttons on the unit, could (temporarily) modify the program stored in the cartridge. The magazine "Electronic Fun with Computers and Games" once did a review of it where they modified all the sprites in River Raid. Also, getting even more off the subject, another accessory was made to copy cartridges -- you plugged a game into the handheld unit, pressed a button, then removed the game and plugged the unit into your Atari. Voila -- you had a copy of the game until you either erased or overwrote it. And how about the tape-recorder attachment for the Atari? Another company (who was it? Anyone?) made a box which plugged into the Atari and a cassette recorder; you would then load a game off tape. *Much* higher quality than the normal hardware cartridges, if you didn't mind waiting eight minutes for your game to load. The first publically-available software media! Ah, those were the days. The Intellivision II and Coleco both had Atari expansion units available, allowing you to use VCS carts on those systems. Now, why can't someone make one for the Mac? << Brian >> | Brian S. Kendig \ Macintosh | Engineering, | bskendig | | Computer Engineering |\ Thought | USS Enterprise | @phoenix.Princeton.EDU | Princeton University |_\ Police | -= NCC-1701-D =- | @PUCC.BITNET | .. s l o w l y, s l o w l y, w i t h t h e v e l o c i t y o f l o v e.
GWO110%URIACC.BITNET@brownvm.brown.edu (F. Michael Theilig) (05/07/90)
Definition of a micro-computer: A microprossor based, all purpose
computing tool.
Atari 2600 does not fit this discription. Now what exactly defines
a different machine? Could we count all of IBMs machines as one, or
divide them by the models. If we divide, then we would also have to
divide the C64 from the sporty model Commodore came out with. That
would also mean we would have to divide the Amiga up a lot. And the
Mac.
If we don't divide, could we call the C128 a "C64 compatible machine"?
I assume we would seperate the Messy-DOS machines made by IBM from the
clones. If we count up all the IBM/XT/AT/PS2 machines that IBM made,
it's quite possible they out number a C64s.
Does anyone have any recent and reliable numbers?
----
F. Michael Theilig - The University of Rhode Island at Little Rest
GWO110 at URIACC.Bitnet
"If there is a part of a chicken's anatomy that can be acurately
described as McNuggets, do you want to eat them?"swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (05/07/90)
In article <2428@uniol.UUCP> neumann@uniol.UUCP (Frank Neumann) writes: >gehlhaar@uniol.UUCP (Arne Gehlhaar) writes: > >>oster@well.sf.ca.us (David Phillip Oster) writes: > >>>In article <29462@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >>>>The Commodore 64 is the correct answer by far! Hard to believe, huh? > >[... about Atari VCS being best selling computer ever...] >>I doubt though, that the VCS can be counted as a "real" computer, its only >>device of input being a joystick ! :) I think a computer should at least >>have a keyboard, but then again, that's a problem of how you define the >>term computer. > >HOWEVER - >there was a kind of keypad available for the VCS (I think, the number keys >plus "#", "." and one or two more... even better, the old Atari brochures >showed a "Basic Programming language Module"...never seen it myself, but >I must have existed somewhere... so, the VCS _IS_ the best selling >computer ever, no !?! :-) :-) :-) Come on, we've got to draw a line *somewhere*. By this criteria I would hazard a guess that Nintendo is the world's best-selling personal computer. Here are the eligability rules: ;^) o If it never had a keyboard then it wasn't a Real Personal Computer (TM). Any individual unit that was outfitted with a keyboard may be counted, however. o If it never had a Real Storage Device (paper/cassette tape, floppy, etc., "not=cartridge") then it wasn't a Real Personal Computer. Any individual unit that was outfitted with a Real Storage Device may be counted, however. So all those Cromemcos with the keyboard and tape units were RPCs, but the units that were never expanded beyond the video game stage don't count. Neither do Altairs with only switches for inputs and LEDs for outputs. Those are Real Hobbyist Computers (TM) ;^). Make sense? -- --Steve DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own (I don't speak for Convex) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM
FelineGrace@cup.portal.com (Dana B Bourgeois) (05/09/90)
I propose that the term "personal computer" be defined before any more opinions are placed in this thread. Until an agreed upon definition exists this subject is going to be one of the all-time net-bandwidth- wasters. Who's first? Dana Bourgeois @ cup.portal.com
edgar@shape.mps.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar) (05/09/90)
In article <29747@cup.portal.com> FelineGrace@cup.portal.com (Dana B Bourgeois) writes: >I propose that the term "personal computer" be defined before any >more opinions are placed in this thread. I recall some advertising by IBM several years ago, claming some large proportion of the "personal computer" sales. When challenged on it, since the Commodore-64 clearly beat them at that time, they said that they were talking about "personal computers" (like the IBM PC), not "home computers" (like the Commodore-64). -- Gerald A. Edgar Department of Mathematics Bitnet: EDGAR@OHSTPY The Ohio State University Internet: edgar@mps.ohio-state.edu Columbus, OH 43210 ...!{att,pyramid}!osu-cis!shape.mps.ohio-state.edu!edgar
karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer) (05/09/90)
In article <29747@cup.portal.com> FelineGrace@cup.portal.com (Dana B Bourgeois) writes: >I propose that the term "personal computer" be defined before any >more opinions are placed in this thread. Until an agreed upon definition >exists this subject is going to be one of the all-time net-bandwidth- >wasters. >Who's first? OK, it has to have a typewriter-style keyboard, a CRT display capability and a mass storage device. (Hmm, that would include the Sinclair ZX-81, which is pretty marginal.) Really I think a floppy drive is also required. I think random access mass storage, even of only a hundred kilobytes, really made the difference in whether PC's were usable or not for anything other than games, and almost certainly for development. My first PC was a 48K Apple ][ with a floppy, for this reason. I decided this was a requirement while panting over the PC's of the time (IMSAI 8800, Heath H8, etc), and I actually had the maturity to wait -- after using a mini in high school and minis and mainframes in college, audiocassettes were just too gross. -- -- uunet!sugar!karl -- Usenet access: (713) 438-5018
roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (05/10/90)
karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer) writes: > it has to have a typewriter-style keyboard, a CRT display capability and a > mass storage device. Just to be picky, I think you probably mean "electronic bitmap display" or something like that instead of CRT. Mac Portables don't have CRTs, neither do most portables/laptops; they all have some sort of LCD, electroluminescent, etc, display. Do you consider something like a HP-48sx to be a personal computer? Depending on how far you want to stretch "typewriter-like keyboard", it might just qualify; it's not terribly convenient, but you can generate the whole ASCII alphabet, plus greek and math symbols. It has a bitmap LCD display, albeit a small one, and the self-powered ram cards could arguably be called floppy disks since they can be used as removable mass storage. The programming power is certainly greater than many conventional personal computers (VIC-20, PET, etc). -- Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy "Arcane? Did you say arcane? It wouldn't be Unix if it wasn't arcane!"
perley@hobbes (Donald P Perley) (05/10/90)
In article <1990May9.182201.13624@phri.nyu.edu>, roy@phri (Roy Smith) writes: >karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer) writes: (regarding the definition of a "computer" ) >> it has to have a typewriter-style keyboard, a CRT display capability and a >> mass storage device. > > Just to be picky, I think you probably mean "electronic bitmap >display" or something like that instead of CRT. Bitmap? I think alphanumeric should be sufficient. Not necessarily built in. The ability to drive a TTY or other terminal counts for me. Most CPM computers I have used required the user to supply his own terminal. Don't forget all those old IBM's where the user interface was cards and printout. Not exactly personal, they should still qualify to at least *enter* the best seller contest. And hey!... how about those Turing machines? Always popular, not many sold. -don perley perley@trub.crd.ge.com
kassover@jupiter.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) (05/10/90)
In article <1990May9.182201.13624@phri.nyu.edu> roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) writes: ... | Do you consider something like a HP-48sx to be a personal computer? |Depending on how far you want to stretch "typewriter-like keyboard", it |might just qualify; it's not terribly convenient, but you can generate the |whole ASCII alphabet, plus greek and math symbols. A friend of mine wrote a sophisticated image processing program for his HP41. Used the magcard reader as a paging device. Also needed a 6V lantern battery as power supply, or paging ran the normal N cells down before program completed. Personal? Certainly, it would fit in one's pocket. Don't sit down too hard 8-) -- David Kassover "Proper technique helps protect you against kassover@ra.crd.ge.com sharp weapons and dull judges." kassover@crd.ge.com F. Collins