From Altair to Atari to Apple Ipad - a history of computers

[Stormtrooper of Death]

I got these link from a fellow TRs-80 MC-10 fan. (yep i program Atari 8bit, but also rare MC-10 machines ... hihi)

 

http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/08/from-altair-to-ipad-35-years-of-personal-computer-market-share/

[Stormtrooper of Death]

And here is a link, with an analysis of the market share of computers... for a period of 30-35 years.

 

http://jeremyreimer.com/m-item.lsp?i=137

 

including a nice MS Excell spreadsheet for your pleasures.

 

Thanks to Jeremy Reimer for taking the time to create this information.

[+slx]

Interesting reading. Never realized how quickly the 64 wildly surpassed the Ataris in sales numbers once it was on the market and how small the Atari market share was for most of the time. I had always felt that the total 64 over Atari dominance in the marketplace was a mostly European phenomenon. It's also interesting how late Commodore managed to sell huge numbers of 64s. (OTOH, VW sells more units than BMW...)

[Foebane]

Interesting reading. Never realized how quickly the 64 wildly surpassed the Ataris in sales numbers once it was on the market and how small the Atari market share was for most of the time. I had always felt that the total 64 over Atari dominance in the marketplace was a mostly European phenomenon. It's also interesting how late Commodore managed to sell huge numbers of 64s. (OTOH, VW sells more units than BMW...)

 

It was simply great aggressive marketing by Commodore that put the C64 where it was.

 

Frankly, I find the C64 specification rather pathetic, with a backward step in graphics and a soundchip that only an Ultravox fan could like.

 

ATARI FTW!

[+slx]

I read the Bagnall book on Commodore history (well, the extended German translation "Volkscomputer") and it wasn't just marketing but also marketing tactics. During an Interview on the Retrobits podcast Chuck Peddle said that they designed the computer in a way that would allow for an extremely low POS price at the cost of practically no return for Commodore and that they made money on peripherals (which wildly exceeded sales expectations). I am eager to read the corresponding chapters in the upcoming second and third part of the Atari history book. The late Jack Tramiel - despite any faults he undoubtedly had - must have been quite a sales genius.

 

And after some point sales are self-accelerating. When Computers are new you're bound to rather buy the unit you saw at your friend's place rather than something with great specs that are mostly meaningless to first-time buyers (plus with kids wishing for computers the availability of software from friends must have been quite a factor, too).

[Subby]

I'm not sure "genius" is the term I'd use, but never mind.

 

And your point is valid SLX, in the very early days most computers were purchased by adult men who bought rather expensive machines on specifications as there wasn't anything else for us to "measure" with.

A couple years later the prices had dropped considerably and the younger set was buying them now. And as always, it's more fun to have the same stuff as a buddy. Which out weighed "better" (I have a story for that one)

[Drummerboy]

Commodore 64 = Volkswagen Beetle!

[Rybags]

They neglect to take XL/XE sales into consideration, the spreadsheet and graphics give the impression that the ST took over from 400/800 and nothing else was sold by Atari.

 

If that 2 million is right for 400/800 then it'd be fair to assume that XL/XE added at least that amount again.

[sack-c0s]

 

a soundchip that only an Ultravox fan could like.

 

 

 

 

This comment means nothing to me...

[Foebane]

Those charts are ridiculous when they cover the IBM PC as well - everyone knows the IBM PC is the most prolific computer of all time!

 

Here's an idea: OMIT the PC sales and see how the also-rans fare then.

[Level42]

Those market shares look 100% US focussed. Situations were very different in Europe in the 80s.

[Chris++]

 

It was simply great aggressive marketing by Commodore that put the C64 where it was.

 

Frankly, I find the C64 specification rather pathetic, with a backward step in graphics and a soundchip that only an Ultravox fan could like.

 

ATARI FTW!

 

I've always gone with the games, rather than the company. Some games are much better on the C64, whereas some are superior on the Atari computers. Some of my favorite C64 games aren't even available on the A8s, and vice versa. Everyone has different tastes, after all.

 

Each computer had its complementary strengths and weaknesses. That's what's cool about having both. As just one arbitrary example of many, the C64's sound tends to be better, depending on whether or not the coder knows what he's doing, whereas the A8's scrolling was easier for ML programmers to access and change.

 

Brand loyalty is purposeless. Thirty-year-old brand loyalty borders on the pathetic.

 

(I'm assuming you agree, lest that sound personal in intention, which it's not.)

 

(Edit for added sentence)

Edited March 3, 2014 by Chris++

[Foebane]

 

Brand loyalty is purposeless. Thirty-year-old brand loyalty borders on the pathetic.

1. I guess I was rather harsh on the C64, but I still maintain that it has that "acquired taste" look and sound with the dreadful colour palette, which isn't even constant (I've heard the technical reasons).

2. I grew up with the A8, so of course I'll prefer it, although the C64 did give birth to the Demoscene, which I've followed and enjoyed ever since.

[Chris++]

1. I guess I was rather harsh on the C64, but I still maintain that it has that "acquired taste" look and sound with the dreadful colour palette, which isn't even constant (I've heard the technical reasons).

2. I grew up with the A8, so of course I'll prefer it, although the C64 did give birth to the Demoscene, which I've followed and enjoyed ever since.

 

By the same token, I understand what you mean about Commodore's aggressive, over-the-top marketing. I remember the constant ads at the time, which tended to say things like, "If you don't buy your child a Commodore 64, he'll wind up so stupid that he'll be clinically brain-dead, and he'll be digging ditches in the Ukraine with a spork. You don't want that, do you? What kind of parents are you?!"

[Lynxpro]

I've always considered Commodore inferior. Case point, the Commodore 64, despite being released in 1982, couldn't run rings around the Atari platform that had been designed circa 1977-1978.

 

Commodore's pricing tactics destroyed the 8-bit market, plain and simple. Only Apple remained unscathed due to their ability to command excessively high prices trading upon ignorant higher income consumers believing the Apple // series was of high quality and would translate into Junior earning better grades and going off to college.

 

VW makes quality vehicles at a decent price. The analog to Commodore in the auto industry was Yugo. The Sinclair Spectrum was an AMC Pacer.

[Chris++]

I've always considered Commodore inferior. Case point, the Commodore 64, despite being released in 1982, couldn't run rings around the Atari platform that had been designed circa 1977-1978.

 

Commodore's pricing tactics destroyed the 8-bit market, plain and simple. Only Apple remained unscathed due to their ability to command excessively high prices trading upon ignorant higher income consumers believing the Apple // series was of high quality and would translate into Junior earning better grades and going off to college.

 

VW makes quality vehicles at a decent price. The analog to Commodore in the auto industry was Yugo. The Sinclair Spectrum was an AMC Pacer.

 

Commodore's pricing tactics led to the enormity of the 8-bit market, rather than destroying it. In my opinion, many of the games did run rings around the Atari stuff...and vice-versa. It's all about what is actually being run on the computer, and whether or not the programmer knows the computer well. Choosing sides even seemed silly to me at the time, as a kid. It's a game-by-game prospect, not a matter of specs.

 

What destroyed it was both companies confusing customers with far too many models that all basically did the same thing. Atari did that early (400 vs. 600 vs. 800 vs. 800XL vs. 1200 vs. XE130 vs. 65XE...etc. etc. etc.), and Commodore did it later on with the 64GS, and then releasing the 128 (easily the flower of the 8-bit era) but not supporting it or trying to get developers on board.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Chris++

[WizWor]

And your point is valid SLX, in the very early days most computers were purchased by adult men who bought rather expensive machines on specifications as there wasn't anything else for us to "measure" with.

A couple years later the prices had dropped considerably and the younger set was buying them now. And as always, it's more fun to have the same stuff as a buddy. Which out weighed "better" (I have a story for that one)

 

I would say this a little differently. In the very early days, the computers were bought by engineers and hobbyists who were price insensitive. Later, 'lay' people arrived on the scene -- first teachers, then parents -- and price became a bigger factor.

[ClausB]

1. I guess I was rather harsh on the C64, but I still maintain that it has that "acquired taste" look and sound with the dreadful colour palette, which isn't even constant (I've heard the technical reasons).

2. I grew up with the A8, so of course I'll prefer it, although the C64 did give birth to the Demoscene, which I've followed and enjoyed ever since.

 

I don't think it's possible to be too harsh on the C64.

 

There were plenty of demo coders before the C64. I wrote some on A8s in 1981 (e.g. my avatar). Others wrote many on A8s, Apples, etc. long before then.

[Foebane]

 

I don't think it's possible to be too harsh on the C64.

 

There were plenty of demo coders before the C64. I wrote some on A8s in 1981 (e.g. my avatar). Others wrote many on A8s, Apples, etc. long before then.

 

You think the C64 is a pile of shit? I think I agree.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Foebane

[re-atari]

 

You think the C64 is a pile of shit? I think I agree.

I know I agree. Which self respecting manufacturer would allow his product to destroy part of itself (the VIA) when a user simply plugs in a joystick? It only took a few diodes to prevent that from happening.

 

re-atari

[kenjennings]

 

 

There were plenty of demo coders before the C64. I wrote some on A8s in 1981 (e.g. my avatar). Others wrote many on A8s, Apples, etc. long before then.

 

I know. Long before there was a C64, each Atari User Group meeting I went to would take time out to show graphics demos from the members and other groups.

I once tried updating the Atari 8-bit and demo scene pages on wikipedia reflecting this and the changes were rescinded.

[Foebane]

 

I know. Long before there was a C64, each Atari User Group meeting I went to would take time out to show graphics demos from the members and other groups.

I once tried updating the Atari 8-bit and demo scene pages on wikipedia reflecting this and the changes were rescinded.

 

Oh, don't bother with Wikipedia - every page I've edited has long since been reverted or rescinded ever since, there's always some dick who thinks he's the authority on the subject, and unfortunately they have more clout than us.

[JamesD]

I don't care how accurate the sales figures are, fans of one computer or another are going to argue with the sales figures because they want to believe a greater numbers of their computer sold.

 

I remember discussing this before and Atari people seemed to want the magic number of at least 5 million computers sold. We found quotes from the CEO complaining about the sales of the 8 bit at the time it was supposed to be selling in the millions in Europe and that got completely ignored. The minimum goal was 5 million and nothing was ever going to convince people sales might have been less.

If you look at the initial sales of the Atari on that chart you can clearly see they had the chance to dominate but they blew it.

 

People on that MC-10 discussion also don't seem to care about facts but I didn't want to argue, it would be pointless because they would never listen.

Commodore people in that MC-10 discussion claim the PET sold in huge numbers due to the education market based on anecdotal evidence. They seem to forget that the anecdotal evidence is posted on Commodore forums by Commodore fans that probably got interested in Commodore because their school had them. They also argue with anyone with anecdotal evidence to the contrary and ignore the comments from people like Bill Herd who said there was literally a single person in charge of education sales at Commodore's headquarters. (I met the guy when I was developing software for the Amiga and selling Amigas, his assistant pretty much did all the work from what I saw)

 

Tandy had the largest total market share ($) but that gets argued with because they weren't big in Europe or because they didn't have the top selling machines in the '80s. People seem to forget that Tandy offered over 20 different models from pocket computers and portables to multi-user business systems and PCs. Tandy also had better profit margins than Commodore. Commodore was making money on peripherals more than the machines themselves. People also forget that the US was the largest computer market in the world and accounted for over 75% of all computer sales worldwide.

[Bill Loguidice]

The Commodore 64 outsold everything else because it was the right combination of power and incredibly low price. Commodore's aggressive price cuts were the cause of many a competitor's demise, including behemoths like TI. Commodore's masterstroke was their control of the supply chain, something no other competitor had.

 

I also find it funny the criticism of the C-64's graphics and sound in comparison to the Atari 8-bit in this thread. I think you'd also get the opposite reaction from many people. Let's face it, while it's true the Atari 8-bit platform was around for over two years earlier, it was rarely properly taken advantage of, and also had the significant disadvantage of a lower target memory spec (8K, 16K, 48K being common targets for many years) to the C-64's base of 64K. You only need to compare the best-of-the-best games on each platform (and even the homebrews that are produced for each today) to see how well the C-64 does in comparison.

 

As for Reimer's numbers, I've found them to be the best available. I used them as reference points in several places in my two most recent books, "Vintage Game Consoles: An Inside Look at Apple, Atari, Commodore, Nintendo, and the Greatest Gaming Platforms of All Time," and "CoCo: The Colorful History of Tandy's Underdog Computer." Until someone comes up with better numbers, those data points are the gold standard. With little produced to date to contradict his research/sources or analysis, I think we'll be waiting a long time.

[Chris++]

...I also find it funny the criticism of the C-64's graphics and sound in comparison to the Atari 8-bit in this thread. I think you'd also get the opposite reaction from many people. Let's face it, while it's true the Atari 8-bit platform was around for over two years earlier, it was rarely properly taken advantage of, and also had the significant disadvantage of a lower target memory spec (8K, 16K, 48K being common targets for many years) to the C-64's base of 64K. You only need to compare the best-of-the-best games on each platform (and even the homebrews that are produced for each today) to see how well the C-64 does in comparison...

 

Well said. Personally, I love 'em both. I consider them equals in general, but again, it depends on the game. I can't play Raid on Bungeling Bay or Dino Eggs on the Atari computers; I can't play Stellar Shuttle or Electrician on the C64. I don't care about the sales figures; the number of other people who've bought something has nothing to do with my enjoyment. I don't see how it's even relevant.

 

I continue to think it's silly for grown men to argue about which thirty-plus-year-old thing was better. Isn't it cool that we all have such uncommon enthusiasm for old games, and can meet to discuss them? That's what I think is awesome about these forums...not brand-related bickering, based on rationalizing one's purchases. That's unnecessary. Taste is subjective.