Stuart Brady wrote:
Surely the PC must have already experienced a certain level of success
for Compaq to have considered it worth cloning. Was the original IBM PC
really that popular, or did the availability of MS-DOS on other non-PC
compatible hardware contribute? I would guess that the
hi
things i didnt understand
they said acorn sold 1.5million machines
they said there were around 250,000 unsold acorn electrons
didnt sincalir sell 3million speccy
your argument about unions?
we dont want to subsidise coal production despite in the 80's having
300 years supply
then why are we
so none of the spectrum software was compatible with the z80 tube
processor fro the beeb?
the arc 64 mhz arm processor fro the beeb tube devlopment kit was
simply the processor - not the same as an archimedes - without the
grpahic capability?
the co processors on the beeb were running at the
Stuart Brady wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:13:24PM +0100, Thomas Harte wrote:
Oh, I don't know. Surely Sinclair's model works only if you can
establish yourself as the supplier of a proprietary computer aimed at
the price conscious end of the market? I don't see how that could
compete once
nev young wrote:
Stuart Brady wrote:
It seems to me that Sir Clive would never have been hugely worried
about maintaining a strong position within the market in the long
term... of course, that's not to say that he wouldn't have appreciated
having a 'cash cow' to fund his other project...
Then
to be living in a country where the poor
are pushed around at the whim of large corporations?
To the topic, I caught a bit of Micro Men, and the sight of that red
tracksuit sent me into peals of laughter.
Really though, the UK computer industry had no chance of competing
with machines in which USA-sized
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:45:36 +0200, David Sanders
dsuzukisand...@gmail.com wrote:
That's a bit strong. I think foreign investors were already put off by
our far higher rates of pay in relation to newer manufacturing
opportunities in the far east. To call the workers of the 70s and 80s
workshy
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:13:24PM +0100, Thomas Harte wrote:
Oh, I don't know. Surely Sinclair's model works only if you can
establish yourself as the supplier of a proprietary computer aimed at
the price conscious end of the market? I don't see how that could
compete once a growing body of
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:31:25PM +0100, Ian Collier wrote:
You say open architecture, but it wasn't supposed to be open when
released. Most of the components could be easily copied, however,
and Compaq reverse-engineered the IBM BIOS to produce their own 100%
compatible machine. How would
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:39:54AM +0100, Geoff Winkless wrote:
[snip]
The actions of the unions
_in the 70s and 80s_ was utterly unreasonable. The idea of a union is that
a fair settlement can be reached by having a negotiator who can speak and
act on behalf of a large number of people
[...]
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 07:07:21AM +0100, nev young wrote:
I was thinking more along the lines of the UK having a manufacturing
base.
[...]
I appreciate that there was a problem there, although I do wonder how
long British manufacturing would have remained competitive, in view of
some our
Oh, I don't know. Surely Sinclair's model works only if you can
establish yourself as the supplier of a proprietary computer aimed at
the price conscious end of the market? I don't see how that could
compete once a growing body of manufacturers were transferring to a
PC-style open architecture. At
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:13:24PM +0100, Thomas Harte wrote:
Oh, I don't know. Surely Sinclair's model works only if you can
establish yourself as the supplier of a proprietary computer aimed at
the price conscious end of the market? I don't see how that could
compete once a growing body of
Almost the entire first half hour was set before I was born! I enjoyed
it though, even with the slightly weird ending — we're meant to
believe that Microsoft, Compaq and HP got a major leg up just because
Sir Clive and Chris Curry fell out? And was Sir Clive really that
mean?
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009
Thomas Harte wrote:
Almost the entire first half hour was set before I was born! I enjoyed
it though, even with the slightly weird ending — we're meant to
believe that Microsoft, Compaq and HP got a major leg up just because
Sir Clive and Chris Curry fell out? And was Sir Clive really that
mean?
Dan Dooré wrote:
Stefan Drissen wrote:
Excellent, that was most enjoyable – thanks for the heads up! The old
days eh… J
Just watched it off the DVR - it was great to relive the whole
Sinclair-Acorn thing whilst not being an excited 12 year old :-)
I watched it last night. it was great to
Hello all
Have you seen that a BBC drama about 80's computing is on tonight?
A bit before Sam's time but only just.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00n5b92
Thanks
Dicky
@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: Micro Men
Hello all
Have you seen that a BBC drama about 80's computing is on tonight?
A bit before Sam's time but only just.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00n5b92
Thanks
Dicky
18 matches
Mail list logo
