3 ms·

At the time compatibility was not considered as important as you might think today. # Radio Shack Model I Model II (not compatible) Model III (weakly compat

At the time compatibility was not considered as important as you might think today. # Radio Shack Model I Model II (not compatible) Model III (weakly compatible with Model I) Color Computer (not compatible) # Commodore PET VIC (not compatible) 64 (not compatible) Amiga (not compatible) # Atari 400 800 (mostly compatible) ST (??). # IBM PC PC jr (weakly compatible with Model I) PS/2(mostly compatible) Doing this from memory. Sure I got some this wrong but it illustrates the point that compatibility had not been show to be so important

protomyth 6y ago
Well, it was really important for Apple because the II had all the software, and what came with the III was junk. They did have an emulator but it didn't do 80 column at first. The Atari 400/800, had a sort of compatible successor in the 1200XL which wasn't compatible enough so didn't sell well. Succeeded by the 600XL * 800XL that were actually compatible. Those were followed by the 65XE/130XE/XEGS. The ST was a parallel different line. The IBM PC jr was just IBM being idiots with their product differentiation. Notice, it didn't do well because it sucked at compatibility. Amiga was bought. Compatibility was actually important when it the predecessor system was popular. Some companies didn't do it well.
adrianmonk 6y ago
Also, Texas Instruments released its Professional Computer, a TI PC going up against IBM PC. It ran MS-DOS and used an 8088 CPU, but it was not a clone and wasn't totally compatible. (Different graphics, different expansion bus, slightly different MS-DOS, slightly different MS-BASIC, etc.) Byte Magazine's review (https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1983-12/page/n287/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1983-12/page/n287/...) described it as "daring to be somewhat different".
- protomyth 6y ago
  You'll notice it and the DEC Rainbow didn't last long. Compatibility was important. The PC AT showed compatibility plus was important. After all it was the whole point of the turbo switch.
  - adrianmonk 6y ago
    It's interesting to ask why people didn't understand the importance of compatibility at first. One reason could be the tendency to disregard the cost of software, which is a mistake people still make today. But there was also another factor back then: computer hardware was very expensive. It is understandable to think that, if you're going to spend a gigantic pile of money on computer equipment, then it needs to be the absolute best computer equipment you can get. I think wanting to squeeze the most value out of your investment could explain why buyers and manufacturers were willing to sacrifice compatibility.

protomyth 6y ago

Well, it was really important for Apple because the II had all the software, and what came with the III was junk. They did have an emulator but it didn't do 80 column at first. The Atari 400/800, had a sort of compatible successor in the 1200XL which wasn't compatible enough so didn't sell well. Succeeded by the 600XL * 800XL that were actually compatible. Those were followed by the 65XE/130XE/XEGS. The ST was a parallel different line. The IBM PC jr was just IBM being idiots with their product differentiation. Notice, it didn't do well because it sucked at compatibility. Amiga was bought. Compatibility was actually important when it the predecessor system was popular. Some companies didn't do it well.

adrianmonk 6y ago

Also, Texas Instruments released its Professional Computer, a TI PC going up against IBM PC. It ran MS-DOS and used an 8088 CPU, but it was not a clone and wasn't totally compatible. (Different graphics, different expansion bus, slightly different MS-DOS, slightly different MS-BASIC, etc.) Byte Magazine's review (https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1983-12/page/n287/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1983-12/page/n287/...) described it as "daring to be somewhat different".

protomyth 6y ago
You'll notice it and the DEC Rainbow didn't last long. Compatibility was important. The PC AT showed compatibility plus was important. After all it was the whole point of the turbo switch.
- adrianmonk 6y ago
  It's interesting to ask why people didn't understand the importance of compatibility at first. One reason could be the tendency to disregard the cost of software, which is a mistake people still make today. But there was also another factor back then: computer hardware was very expensive. It is understandable to think that, if you're going to spend a gigantic pile of money on computer equipment, then it needs to be the absolute best computer equipment you can get. I think wanting to squeeze the most value out of your investment could explain why buyers and manufacturers were willing to sacrifice compatibility.