3 ms·

Let's use 1985-1986 because that's when I was active at the store. There were about 8M computers sold, and assuming Byte continued to sell at around 400K copie

Let's use 1985-1986 because that's when I was active at the store. There were about 8M computers sold, and assuming Byte continued to sell at around 400K copies, this mean that there were 5% subscribers to every PC bought, or 1 out of 20. My guess is that sounds approximately correct for my hit rate. There were more pubs, but I bet that there were a lot of overlap for magazine subscriptions. If you subscribed to Byte, you probably had a good hit rate for also being a subscriber to PC Mag, so the spread probably wasn't a ton wider. What I do remember was that Consumer Reports came out with a recommended PC. They loved the Leading Edge. Consumer Reports was a bit of cult back then and I bet their subscription base was in the millions (where does one find the subscribers for magazines in 1985?). When Consumer Reports suggested something, the word got around. I remember people coming in asking for LE, but Ballard Computer had the franchise and was back ordered like 3 months. Now that was power to influence the end buyer.

justin66 8y ago
> There were about 8M computers sold, and assuming Byte continued to sell at around 400K copies, this mean that there were 5% subscribers to every PC bought, or 1 out of 20. Well, that's deceptive. How many of those computers were purchased by a buyer for a business? (again, a population of buyers you might have had little or no exposure to) The ratio of subscribers to PCs purchased would certainly be higher. It's not like there's anything hugely wrong with anything you're saying, but I was a kid who read Byte magazine and discussed benchmarking with adults, and I don't think we were all total freaks of nature or something. (that said, a benchmark measuring the execution time of a specific operation definitely represents the far side of wonkiness)
- theologic 8y ago
  1. The market for PCs were virtually 100% business buyers in 1985. The non-business buyer would buy Apple IIs, which I didn't sell. I had a lot of small business and/or individual businesses. Large businesses like Boeing would obviously go through central procurement unless desperate for a PC , which absolutely would happen from time to time. 2. By the way, my 5% estimate on Byte saturation for my buyers is probably is too high. Refresh cycles were about 3 years back then, and there were roughly 11M PC bought in 1983 and 1984. There was around 8M PCs bought in 1985. So around 19M users of which 8M were buyers in 1985, which is where Byte was selling around 400K subscriptions. Therefore, the saturation rate of Byte magazine to PC users was roughly 400K/19M = 2.1%. 3. I loved your line "but I was a kid who read Byte magazine and discussed benchmarking with adults, and I don't think we were all total freaks of nature or something." Actually a young kid reading Byte magazine to discuss benchmarks with adults was a freak at the time. I should know because I was one, probably the same as you.

justin66 8y ago

> There were about 8M computers sold, and assuming Byte continued to sell at around 400K copies, this mean that there were 5% subscribers to every PC bought, or 1 out of 20. Well, that's deceptive. How many of those computers were purchased by a buyer for a business? (again, a population of buyers you might have had little or no exposure to) The ratio of subscribers to PCs purchased would certainly be higher. It's not like there's anything hugely wrong with anything you're saying, but I was a kid who read Byte magazine and discussed benchmarking with adults, and I don't think we were all total freaks of nature or something. (that said, a benchmark measuring the execution time of a specific operation definitely represents the far side of wonkiness)

theologic 8y ago
1. The market for PCs were virtually 100% business buyers in 1985. The non-business buyer would buy Apple IIs, which I didn't sell. I had a lot of small business and/or individual businesses. Large businesses like Boeing would obviously go through central procurement unless desperate for a PC , which absolutely would happen from time to time. 2. By the way, my 5% estimate on Byte saturation for my buyers is probably is too high. Refresh cycles were about 3 years back then, and there were roughly 11M PC bought in 1983 and 1984. There was around 8M PCs bought in 1985. So around 19M users of which 8M were buyers in 1985, which is where Byte was selling around 400K subscriptions. Therefore, the saturation rate of Byte magazine to PC users was roughly 400K/19M = 2.1%. 3. I loved your line "but I was a kid who read Byte magazine and discussed benchmarking with adults, and I don't think we were all total freaks of nature or something." Actually a young kid reading Byte magazine to discuss benchmarks with adults was a freak at the time. I should know because I was one, probably the same as you.