4 ms·

I'd say any C128 model was a smart buy in 1985, especially considering how much more expensive faster desktops were, and how quickly everything got faster. The

I'd say any C128 model was a smart buy in 1985, especially considering how much more expensive faster desktops were, and how quickly everything got faster. The 386 launched in October 1985. The first PC to use it, blazing at 16MHz, was the Compaq Deskpro 386 released in September 1986 for $6.5K for 1MB of RAM, MS-DOS 3.1, a 1.2 MB floppy drive and a 40 MB hard drive, but cost around $8K after you add a video card and monitor. The Compaq Deskpro 386/25 was released August 1988 for $10.3K, probably close to $12K with video. Knowing that, I don't feel as bad having spent ~$4K in 1989 on a Mac II w/ 5MB RAM, 800K 3.5" floppy drive, 80MB HDD, Apple video card, Apple 12" monochrome monitor and A/UX license, though I wish I had gotten the SE/30 instead. I would have saved a little and had a machine that was twice as fast. I bought a couple in 2005 for $25/pc. I just picked up another about 6 months ago for $277 and recapped it. They're attractive furniture. I wish I had the room for a C128 of any flavor.

TMWNN 4y ago
>I'd say any C128 model was a smart buy in 1985 No, the Amiga 1000 was a much better buy (as tjmc said). More expensive, but far, far more power.
rasz 4y ago
C128 with floppy was the ~same cost as Atari ST. Most people chose 128 thinking it was C64 but twice as awesome, not realizing it was C64 with garbage leftovers from failed projects thrown in to double the price.
jabl 4y ago
Not sure it was that smart? If you were into gaming, the 64 was cheaper and equally good, since very few games took advantage of the 128 mode. For better than 64 gaming, Amiga was a vastly more capable platform although it was a few years until the Amiga 500 brought down the price. If you needed it for work, the PC platform had much more software available. And no, no need to splurge on a 386 in 1985 since it took many years for software to take advantage of the 32 bit mode.

TMWNN 4y ago

>I'd say any C128 model was a smart buy in 1985 No, the Amiga 1000 was a much better buy (as tjmc said). More expensive, but far, far more power.

rasz 4y ago

C128 with floppy was the ~same cost as Atari ST. Most people chose 128 thinking it was C64 but twice as awesome, not realizing it was C64 with garbage leftovers from failed projects thrown in to double the price.

jabl 4y ago

Not sure it was that smart? If you were into gaming, the 64 was cheaper and equally good, since very few games took advantage of the 128 mode. For better than 64 gaming, Amiga was a vastly more capable platform although it was a few years until the Amiga 500 brought down the price. If you needed it for work, the PC platform had much more software available. And no, no need to splurge on a 386 in 1985 since it took many years for software to take advantage of the 32 bit mode.