3 ms·

Because you we're lucky to even get 40 columns (80 with an expansion card)?

• SoftTalker 1y ago
  80 columns would have been borderline unreadable on the NTSC televisions they were using as displays.
  • TMWNN 1y ago
    Context for others: Standalone computer monitors per se did not exist at retail in 1977. The only choices were either televisions, or displays for security-camera systems such as the Sanyo VM-4209 <https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O1461694/sanyo-vm-4209/ https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O1461694/sanyo-vm-4209/>. The latter, because of its high quality and perfect size for stacking on top of the Apple next to disk drives <https://www.reddit.com/r/VintageApple/comments/3snpqd/i_found_a_sanyo_vm4209_the_monitor_used_in_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/VintageApple/comments/3snpqd/i_foun...>, became the iconic Apple II monitor of the early years until purpose-built computer monitors from Amdek and others, as well as Apple's own Monitor III <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Monitor_III https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Monitor_III>, became widely available.
  • flomo 1y ago
    Sure. As a practical matter, 90% of Apple II systems were plugged into a monochrome computer monitor which did 80 column text just fine, and the other ~9% had a fancy color monitor. Nobody* used an Apple II with a TV, except in maybe the very early days. This is why you should ignore the specs, the Apple didn't really compete with Atari/Commodore/etc. It got crushed by the IBM PC.