4 ms·
You forgot the Amstrad GX4000 ;) That and the SAM Coupé were kind of ridiculous, looking back, being so massively outdated at the time. In the UK, both were ob
by tom_ 4y ago
You forgot the Amstrad GX4000 ;)
That and the SAM Coupé were kind of ridiculous, looking back, being so massively outdated at the time. In the UK, both were obviously worse for games than even the Atari ST, which was already starting to get shown up in that respect by the Amiga. (And the writing was on the wall for Amiga games too, thanks to increasingly impressive bitplane-unfriendly ALU-heavy PC games, and the SNES. And Windows 3.1 - which was actually turning out to be useful, no matter how janky - was attacking every other platform on the productivity side.)
The Amstrad and Sinclair markets kept going in the UK until 1991 or so, likewise the C64, as the machines were everywhere and so there was still a market for the games.
8-bit Acorn games dried up in 1990 (after probably last being a proper going concern in 1988 at best), but they kept producing the hardware until the early 90s because of demand for it from schools. (I have a BBC Master as part of my collection of crappy old UK 8-bit computers from the period. Manufacture date: week 47, 1989!)
- lproven 4y ago:-D Yeah, OK, but that was part of the CPC+ series. It was just a CPC+ without a keyboard, IIRC. The SAM Coupé was a great little machine -- I deeply regret selling mine -- but it took way too long to get to market. I think in context with Communist Bloc improved Spectrum clones, it makes more sense. It was of course easier for companies and people over there (well, over here, for me now)_because they didn't need to worry about copyright law and could just copy the ROM. I think there is an argument for high-end 8-bitters, and it's why the Spectrum Next exists. Because they are much easier to understand, and build, and modify, and copy, and program. The industry rushed to 16-bit, because of the new features, but it took programmability out of owners' and users' hands. Modern OSes are vastly, impossibly complex and people accustomed to them do not understand the virtue, indeed vital importance, of simplicity and comprehensibility. This is why, for me, Python fails as a teaching tool for beginners. It embeds all the complexity of files handling, editors, OOPS, C output formats and so on. BASIC eliminated that. Its conceptual model was not of files and things but a much simpler and more accessible one: You type some stuff. No number in front? Computer does it now. Number in front? Keep it for later. That is inspired brilliance, but the Unix weenies want pro tools for all, even for kids.