
A History of Commodore’s 8-bit Computers - protomyth
http://lowendmac.com/2015/a-history-of-commodores-8-bit-computers/
======
SwellJoe
I think one could build a business course entirely from the history of CBM.
There are so many interesting mistakes and successes.

The C64 is a classic case of a company not falling prey to the innovators'
dilemma. They built the C64 when they already had one of the most successful
computers on the market in the VIC-20. Tramiel had shown an uncanny knack for
spotting evolution in the market on multiple previous occasions and leapt from
one profitable business to another, leveraging the success of the earlier to
fund the latter.

And, then, the faltering began. Instead of once again shooting for a big hairy
audacious goal (64k for $595, in the case of the C64), they cut corners and
delivered less power for more money (C16 and Plus/4, both massive market
failures, because people aren't idiots). The article doesn't cover it, but the
Plus/4 was extremely weak for games, compared to the C64. Despite having
support for more colors, it didn't have hardware sprites and sound was a
regression to the old bleep bloops of lesser computers, compared to C64's
beautiful and powerful (for the time) 3 voice synthesizer chip (designed by
the dude who went on to found Ensoniq, a leading sampler/synth company of the
80s).

The SX64 is less clear cut of a mistake...it was a beautiful machine, built
well, and competitive with other portables of the time. Not sure why it did so
poorly. I guess the business market wasn't into the Commodore brand by that
time, and it was the only market that could afford it. I remember seeing "Name
Brand Computer!" closeout special ads in the various computer mags at the
time, and it was clearly an SX64...I remember wanting one, too, but couldn't
afford it even at the drastically reduced prices. I still don't know how to
interpret it in the history of CBM. Marketing failure? Poor market fit? Just
too expensive?

It took them years to bring out a C64 upgrade in the C128, which was a modest
success. I think part of the reason it wasn't a bigger success was its high
cost (both for CBM to build and consumers to buy). The Z80 chip was a
boondoggle bolted onto the side of the design that nobody used. Again, failure
to achieve any meaningful hold in the business world meant there was no C/PM
usage on C128 to speak of, and it was wasted effort and cost to try to tackle
it.

The dedicated game machines are also a failure blip on the radar, and I think
it's clear why: They reduced the utility of the thing, delivering less value,
at a slightly lower price point; trying to boost margins at the expense of
customers was a mistake they'd make over and over. The cost-cutting instinct
at CBM was strong, but not in the direction it needed to go...people want more
value for less money. They never want less value for less money. I don't know
how to express this truism, and I don't remember where I've read studies about
it, but people don't readily accept downgrades like this, and Commodore
introduced these kinds of downgrades _constantly_ , and it's an explanation
for almost every one of their big failures, and when they went against that
grain (and delivered more value for similar money, they had big hits).

Other later examples...the Amiga 500 was effectively an Amiga 1000 for half
the price. Sure, smaller case, but it was just as capable of a computer. And,
it was the most successful Amiga model, by far. Had CBM _always_ followed this
model of delivering more for less, without pursuing all the stupid side
projects that were clearly bound for failure, they would still be around today
(though Gould may have even been able to kill that successful of a company).

Even as a kid, I could see that the C16 and Plus/4 were bound to fail. They
were utter shit for games, and games were the primary reason families were
choosing C64 over other low cost options. Likewise, one could see that the
C128 was going to struggle because it cost a lot to produce and had features
that weren't going to be used (I never saw any C/PM software for C128, and I
was using a C128 and then C128D until I got an Amiga in 1991...I was a
hardcore user), and yet they kept shipping out that goofy hybrid concept for
all those years (that's why the C64 kept going longer than the C128...it was
simply cheaper to make and cheaper to buy, and still provided pretty similar
value to the 128, because so little software for 128 existed).

Likewise, Amiga got the chopshop treatment on a few occasions, where they
tried to make gaming versions and home entertainment versions. Always too
little value, given competitors of the time, including compared to the Amiga
itself. All trying to goose margins, without delivering more value.

~~~
vidarh
The C128 and C128D were actually surprisingly successful. They sold an
aggregate 4-5 million in 6 years. Comparable to the entire Amiga range, and a
substantial proportion of what the C64 models sold over their 12 year
production period...

Almost shocking consider its deficiencies and being sandwhiched between the
C64 and Amiga for most of its existence.

------
vidarh
One important thing they left out about the C64C was that it was actually a
masterstroke rarely seen from Commodore management after Thomas J. Rattigan
took over.

Tramiel had kept Commodore constantly moving at breakneck speed with very
little room for error by cutting prices so aggressively there was next to no
margin. It was actually one of his price cuts that caused him to get pushed
out, as well as savage Comodores retailer network (they had tons of hardware
in the pipeline, announced a massive cost cut and refused to reimburse or
credit retailers for the difference in recommended retail price, causing lots
of retailers to lose lots of money, many of whom subsequently dropped
Commodore).

But the C64C went the opposite direction: Despite 8-bit machines being past
their prime at the time, the C64C was launched at a _higher_ price point,
often obscured by bundled that included GEOS and/or Quantum Link. At the same
time it was _drastically_ cost reduced. Some of it is obvious - if you open an
early C64 vs a C64C the case seems pretty much empty in the latter; the 8x8KB
RAM chips are replaced by one or two; lots and lots of 74xx series chips are
replaced by a couple of custom asics etc. Some are not so obvious - fewer
different types of screws etc.

The result was that the C64C was a large part of saving Commodore at a very
difficult time (when was Commodore not in crisis?) by dramatically increasing
Commodores margins. Probably the first and only time that Commodore had
margins similar to Apple, though still at a much lower price point.

Of course, shortly after essentially saving the company from one of its worst
crises ever, Rattigan was fired by Irving Gould, and Gould personally took
over as CEO - allegedly because Gould was annoyed that Rattigan got lots of
positive PR. Rattigan later won a $9m lawsuit against Commodore over the
firing... The history of Commodore management is that success was as bad for
your continued employment as failure.

~~~
6502nerdface
> it was actually a masterstroke rarely seen from Commodore management after
> Thomas J. Rattigan took over.

The Digital Antiquarian has more fascinating details on Rattigan's role at
Commodore [1]. In this telling, he comes off as not-so-bad, actually pretty
competent, but ultimately foiled by the egos of the executive board.

[1] [http://www.filfre.net/2015/11/the-68000-wars-part-4-rock-
lob...](http://www.filfre.net/2015/11/the-68000-wars-part-4-rock-lobster/)

~~~
vidarh
Being "foiled by the executive board" was pretty much routine at Commodore,
unfortunately. The executive chairs were spinning at high speed.

~~~
digi_owl
Board room meddling is a plague upon the business.

You could see that with how HP was flip flopping around as the board was
brining in new CEOs ever so often because the share value was lagging.

Or now just as Nokia seemed to be coming back around the board brought in
Elop...

------
amyjess
When I was a kid, I somehow ended up with a copy of the 1989 edition of _The
Secret Guide to Computers_ , by Russ Walter. While it was already outdated by
the time I got it (this would be around 1995 or 1996), I found it an
absolutely fascinating resource for a number of reasons. One, it was my
introduction to programming, and the tutorials in the book really opened my
eyes. Two, it was filled with a wealth of information about the home computer
era, which was something that I never really got to experience firsthand: my
family had Macs when I was little (I was born in '84, and my parents got a Mac
Plus in '86, starting my love affair with computers), and we eventually
switched to PCs in the mid 90s. All I knew firsthand about the era was from
the Apple II models at school. Reading this book introduced me to a whole new
history featuring companies I knew next to nothing about, such as Commodore,
Atari, and Tandy.

Anyway, a few stories about Commodore's history were imprinted on me thanks to
this book, and I'm going to repeat them here from memory.

One: The PET's launch was filled with problems. Commodore originally wanted a
guaranteed retail channel, so when they first started developing the PET, they
approached Tandy about a partnership where Commodore would make the computer
and Tandy would sell it. Tandy politely declined Commodore's offer... because
Commodore sold them on the idea making of a home computer so well that Tandy
decided they should both make _and_ sell their own computer, cutting Commodore
out of the loop and resulting in the TRS-80. The PET's development was filled
with delays, and by the time it actually launched, the TRS-80 has beaten it to
market. It was already obsolete by the time it came out, and then IIRC they
had problems introducing the floppy drive as well, with its launch plagued by
delays and mechanical problems. When Commodore began work on the VIC-20, they
weren't so much following up a successful product with a next generation as
they were desperately trying to make up for the PET's problems.

Two: With the VIC, Commodore found out that naming a computer was harder than
it looks, especially when you're trying for an international launch. They
originally wanted to name it the Vixen to promote it as sleek and sexy, but
the name ended up being too sexy for the European market since "Vixen" is
pronounced like _Wichsen_ , which is German for "masturbation". So they
shortened it to Vic. Unfortunately, they discovered that a German would
pronounce it like _Fick_ , which means "fuck". Ultimately, they decided to go
with different names for different markets: they named it VIC-20 in the US and
VC-20 (short for "VolksComputer") in Europe. On a similar note, the medicine
company Vicks had the same problem, so they chose to spell their name as Wicks
in Germany.

------
realo
My first "real" computer was a VIC-20. I used an optical detector hooked up to
the joystick's ADC input to observe that my fluorescent lamps were not
"steady" but instead flickered at some frequency.

I became an embedded computing guy later on... :)

------
mariuolo
If you want to know more about other obscure products and prototypes see the
secret weapons of Commodore:
[http://www.floodgap.com/retrobits/ckb/secret/](http://www.floodgap.com/retrobits/ckb/secret/)

------
franze
trip down the memory lane: i coded apps (programs we called them, like a small
joystick drawing tool or a little program that put out a boilerplate BASIC
code) and games (rpg, asteroid like mini-shooter, ...) on the C64 (basically
via "forking" and combining programms available in printed magazines) - but
nobody "grown up" saw value in them. i was told not to waste that much time on
the computer - and after the energy-supply-thingie went up into flames, i was
sent back to watch TV...

gladly -as i found out in the first dotcom bubble - that not much has changed.
ok, everything has changed, but "writing programs" was still "writing
programs" and it wasn't that much of a jump from BASIC to "that stupid subset
of PERL that the template engine of that long gone agency used".

we should bring back that "printed code" magazines. i mean really just a
magazine where there is pure code and only a short discussion about it. not
that patronizing how-to shit thats currently available.

~~~
DougWebb
My family always described what I was doing with my C64 as "playing with the
computer". Sure, I played games on it, but I also spent a lot of time typing
in those programs from the magazines. Younger developers today are shocked and
amazed when I describe the hex dumps with line-by-line checksums they used to
print, and that your first challenge was to type in the code-entry program
mistake free, without relying on the checksums to get every character correct.

To this day, even though I touch-type most of the time, I can still type
quickly with one hand, while the other hand is used to keep my place on a
printed document I'm transcribing. (Not that I do that much anymore.)

------
equalarrow
If you love Commodore computers, then Brian Bagnall wrote a really good book
on the history of Commodore's 8-bit machines.

[http://www.amazon.com/Commodore-Company-Edge-Brian-
Bagnall/d...](http://www.amazon.com/Commodore-Company-Edge-Brian-
Bagnall/dp/0973864966)

~~~
pervycreeper
It covers the history of Commodore, including the 16 bit era. Very good book.
Many present commentators tend to ignore Commodore's impact in favor of
Apple's, this history is an antidote to that.

~~~
pinewurst
Actually it doesn't cover the Amiga era. There's been a new book by the same
author in the works that does, but it's not yet out.

~~~
pervycreeper
Just checked, you're right. Not sure why I had that impression.

~~~
vidarh
The first edition did cover everything in one volume, that's probably why.

The second edition is substantially extended and has been split in two and
only the first volume has been released yet (the second volume is finaly close
to finished, thanks to a Kickstarter).

~~~
pervycreeper
Thank god I'm not crazy!

------
emcrazyone
I have to imagine that the movie War Games starring Matthew Broderick helped
spur sales. After seeing that movie, I had to have a commodore computer ;)
That movie, alone, changed me. I was an eletronics geek and after seeing that
movie, I knew the future (for me) was computers.

~~~
vidarh
War Games didn't feature a Commodore machine, it featured an IMSAI. It might
have helped boost mainstream interest in computers, but by then Commodore was
already a big, well established company and - I believe - hadn't yet
thoroughly burned their reseller network.

~~~
Luc
Well it was the C64's time. If you got enthused about computers by the movie,
in 1983, chances were you'd get a C64.

Wasn't Broderick's character using an IMSAI to show he didn't have the money
for new hardware, and had to make do with 2nd hand stuff?

'War Games' isn't a half bad game on the C64, either!

------
microtherion
On similar topics, but with even more detail, there is "The Digital
Antiquarian" (Ostensibly mostly about the history of adventure games, but with
some amazing articles about the home computer revolution thrown in):
[http://www.filfre.net](http://www.filfre.net)

------
michaelpinto
While it wasn't hardware I wish they had mentioned GEOS: If you had enough
money for a disk drive this would give you a Mac OS feel to your C64:
[http://toastytech.com/guis/c64g.html](http://toastytech.com/guis/c64g.html)

~~~
soylentcola
I was always bummed when Loadstar started including GEOS programs I couldn't
run because we didn't have the machine for it.

------
rogerbinns
The Digital Antiquarian has a lot of really good posts about that era,
extensively covering the hardware and software. Start from
[http://www.filfre.net/sitemap/](http://www.filfre.net/sitemap/)

------
bitwize
I still have memories of burning out two VIC-20s by POKE-ing where I
shouldn't. (I was five; the memory map wouldn't mean much to me until much
later.)

------
o_nate
A VIC-20 was my first computer. I still have fond memories of writing random-
sentence generators in BASIC on that thing.

------
ZenoArrow
amyjess, if you read this, your comment is showing as dead, don't know why,
sometimes the moderation on HN catches out people that don't deserve it.
Thanks for passing on the stories.

~~~
dang
There's a much better solution than posting off-topic comments like this:
click on the comment's timestamp to go to its page, then click 'vouch'. This
indicates that the comment shouldn't be dead. When enough users vouch for a
comment, the software restores it. (There's a small karma threshold, currently
30, before a user sees 'vouch' links.)

In addition, moderators review the vouched-for comments and in many cases have
unbanned accounts that didn't need to stay banned.

amyjess's comment was killed by a spam filter. Users vouched for it, so it was
unkilled by the time we saw it.

~~~
ZenoArrow
Thank you for letting me know about the timestamp trick dang, that's useful.
Are there plans to make the vouch link available for dead comments without
needing to click on the timestamp? I believe it'd help.

~~~
dang
Vouching works the way flagging works. Flagging comments has always required
an extra click, presumably as a high-pass filter to cut down on impulsive
flagging. That design seems to have worked well, so we probably won't change
it. It does leave a discovery problem though.

