Intellivision Keyboard Component pics

[Walter Ives]

On 12/3/2022 at 2:24 PM, Lathe26 said:

This reply mis-characterizes the original comment:

1. The original comment wasn't past tense; it was present tense.  The original comment was that if you wanted to make copy of a KC tape today, you would need a tape with a clear leader that was UV permeable.
2. The original comment neither stated nor implied anything about copy protection.  The comment had no relation to copy protection.

Your original comment read, "As for dubbing a copy, it is theoretically possible. The only issue is that you need to find a blank tape whose leader tape (the part that comes before the magnetized tape) is permeable to infrared light since the KC uses such a sensor to find the start of the tape." (Emphasis added.)

 

That's not true for the pre-programmed cassettes because they were copy-protected. I thought it might be useful (a) for younger members following the thread to know that splicing leaders onto tapes was an ordinary skill mastered by all the kids in the high school AV club, so that wouldn't be much of an issue, and (b) for you to know that "The Intellivision BASIC data tapes weren't copy protected." Well, at least they weren't originally supposed to be—can't certify that that didn't change after Mattel decided to start selling preprogrammed BASIC cartridges like Geography Challenge and Crosswords. That would have required a change to the BASIC cartridge, though.

 

WJI

[Walter Ives]

On 12/4/2022 at 5:12 AM, DZ-Jay said:

On my quoted comments specifically, related to the reliability of the product stemming from cost-cutting decisions, I was not trying to suggest that the device was a flaky, useless mess of unreliable components, but that a focus on maintaining the price point within the range of a retail product precluded the employment of actual commercial components out in the market.

My "nope" pertained to your statement was that "The reason it was unreliable was because of trying to keep costs down."

 

Almost all of the problems with units actually delivered to users were traceable to the cassette tape mechanism. Mattel had from the beginning recognized that that mechanism was THE core component of the Keyboard Component and paid a premium price for it. By spring of 1982 Chandler believed he was on a path to resolve the mechanism issues with no increase in its cost. So the statement I took issue with is simply not correct.

 

To put the tape mechanism's issues in perspective, the Keyboard Component's tape subsystem was every bit as complex as a floppy disk drive. You wouldn't be surprised if you were told the first few hundred floppy disk drives delivered to users had had a greater than 10% return rate.

 

Furthermore, the Master Component/Keyboard Component combination was cost and price competitive with contemporary systems that provided a single floppy drive in place of a cassette.

 

WJI

[+DZ-Jay]

5 minutes ago, Walter Ives said:

My "nope" pertained to your statement was that "The reason it was unreliable was because of trying to keep costs down."

 

Almost all of the problems with units actually delivered to users were traceable to the cassette tape mechanism. Mattel had from the beginning recognized that that mechanism was THE core component of the Keyboard Component and paid a premium price for it. By spring of 1982 Chandler believed he was on a path to resolve the mechanism issues with no increase in its cost. So the statement I took issue with is simply not correct.

 

To put the tape mechanism's issues in perspective, the Keyboard Component's tape subsystem was every bit as complex as a floppy disk drive. You wouldn't be surprised if you were told the first few hundred floppy disk drives delivered to users had had a greater than 10% return rate.

 

Furthermore, the Master Component/Keyboard Component combination was cost and price competitive with contemporary systems that provided a single floppy drive in place of a cassette.

 

WJI

 

Fair enough.  However, I believe I stand by my point:  the fact of choosing a cassette tape mechanism itself -- rather than an actual off-the-shelf high-end commercial reeled tape system, as in a mainframe -- is in itself a cost cutting solution to a product aimed at the consumer market.

 

That being said, your point is well taken and provides greater context to the discussion, so thank you for taking the time to follow up.

 

    -dZ.

[Walter Ives]

On 2/12/2023 at 8:28 AM, DZ-Jay said:

I stand by my point:  the fact of choosing a cassette tape mechanism itself -- rather than an actual off-the-shelf high-end commercial reeled tape system, as in a mainframe -- is in itself a cost cutting solution to a product aimed at the consumer market.

    Nice try, but no cigar. The Keyboard Component concept required a subsystem that could support the reading and recording of both digital data and audio, and the actual off-the-shelf high-end commercial reeled computer tape systems then available and selling for ten thousand dollars apiece did not support analog audio. You couldn't store the audio on them in digital form because the hardware of the day wasn't fast enough to perform the fast Fourier transforms needed to decompress the amount of audio required to fit on the tapes. Even if it had been the compressed audio would have strained the tape capacities of the day—look at the size of an hour-long .mp3 file! Furthermore, the seek characteristics of the tape drives were too long to be tolerable for Keyboard Component applications, so you would have had to go to disks or drums.

    Ah, you say, one could have included a second subsystem for the audio, a computer-controlled reel-to-reel audio tape recorder. Indeed, APh created exactly what was required: a computer-controlled audio editing bay using Ampex ATR-100 4-track tape recorders. Unfortunately the add-on commercial products needed to electronically control those recorders using a time code track were not yet adequate for its purposes and it had to design and implement those itself. Again, the seek and pre-roll characteristics of the recorders were too long to be tolerable for Keyboard Component applications.

    But that's all descending into a rabbit hole. I should probably just delete the above paragraphs, but I've typed them and they might actually interest you, so they stay. Popping back to the top, my point is that it's just not right to characterize the Keyboard Component's technical problems as being due to cost-cutting, especially in light of the fact that Chandler felt he had solved the tape mechanism problem without increasing its cost. Mechanical design issues yes, cost-cutting no.

    A largest contributor to the Keyboard Component's poor reputation is the fact that Rochlis began selling it to the trade a full year before development was even started and that he promised delivery, both to the trade and to Mattel corporate, on an imaginary schedule that he pulled out of … thin air. When the Intellivision was teased at the January 1978 Computer Electronics Show he was telling select large customers that both the Keyboard Component and the Keyboard Component would be available later that year in time for Christmas. At the January 1979 Consumer Electronics Show he was telling the world at large that both components would be available that fall. In fact, not a finger was lifted in developing the Keyboard Component until January 15, 1979 (there's a memo with the date of the original meeting in the Chandler archive). It took about a year and a half to get both hardware and software to a state where the cassette mechanism could be realistically exercised which, if you look at what was created from absolutely nothing, was actually quite fast. Furthermore, the assembly house had no experience building anything nearly as complex and it took many months to get them to a point they could do so without errors. So when the problems with the cassette began to surface, they Keyboard Component already had a terrible reputation for being late and a bitch to manufacture.

    As an aside, the APh and Mattel engineers involved in the design would have much preferred to use a floppy disk instead of a tape, but the audio recording capacity of a disk just wasn't adequate. Among themselves they were quite aware of other technologies too, including FFT compression (like .mp3), bubble memory and optical digital and audio disks.

 

    WJI

 

    Mattel's Optigan optical audio disk, introduced in 1971. Richard Chang was a key mechanical engineer on the Optigan project.

[+DZ-Jay]

8 hours ago, Walter Ives said:

    Nice try, but no cigar. The Keyboard Component concept required a subsystem that could support the reading and recording of both digital data and audio, and the actual off-the-shelf high-end commercial reeled computer tape systems then available and selling for ten thousand dollars apiece did not support analog audio. You couldn't store the audio on them in digital form because the hardware of the day wasn't fast enough to perform the fast Fourier transforms needed to decompress the amount of audio required to fit on the tapes. Even if it had been the compressed audio would have strained the tape capacities of the day—look at the size of an hour-long .mp3 file! Furthermore, the seek characteristics of the tape drives were too long to be tolerable for Keyboard Component applications, so you would have had to go to disks or drums.

    Ah, you say, one could have included a second subsystem for the audio, a computer-controlled reel-to-reel audio tape recorder. Indeed, APh created exactly what was required: a computer-controlled audio editing bay using Ampex ATR-100 4-track tape recorders. Unfortunately the add-on commercial products needed to electronically control those recorders using a time code track were not yet adequate for its purposes and it had to design and implement those itself. Again, the seek and pre-roll characteristics of the recorders were too long to be tolerable for Keyboard Component applications.

    But that's all descending into a rabbit hole. I should probably just delete the above paragraphs, but I've typed them and they might actually interest you, so they stay. Popping back to the top, my point is that it's just not right to characterize the Keyboard Component's technical problems as being due to cost-cutting, especially in light of the fact that Chandler felt he had solved the tape mechanism problem without increasing its cost. Mechanical design issues yes, cost-cutting no.

    A largest contributor to the Keyboard Component's poor reputation is the fact that Rochlis began selling it to the trade a full year before development was even started and that he promised delivery, both to the trade and to Mattel corporate, on an imaginary schedule that he pulled out of … thin air. When the Intellivision was teased at the January 1978 Computer Electronics Show he was telling select large customers that both the Keyboard Component and the Keyboard Component would be available later that year in time for Christmas. At the January 1979 Consumer Electronics Show he was telling the world at large that both components would be available that fall. In fact, not a finger was lifted in developing the Keyboard Component until January 15, 1979 (there's a memo with the date of the original meeting in the Chandler archive). It took about a year and a half to get both hardware and software to a state where the cassette mechanism could be realistically exercised which, if you look at what was created from absolutely nothing, was actually quite fast. Furthermore, the assembly house had no experience building anything nearly as complex and it took many months to get them to a point they could do so without errors. So when the problems with the cassette began to surface, they Keyboard Component already had a terrible reputation for being late and a bitch to manufacture.

    As an aside, the APh and Mattel engineers involved in the design would have much preferred to use a floppy disk instead of a tape, but the audio recording capacity of a disk just wasn't adequate. Among themselves they were quite aware of other technologies too, including FFT compression (like .mp3), bubble memory and optical digital and audio disks.

 

    WJI

 

    Mattel's Optigan optical audio disk, introduced in 1971. Richard Chang was a key mechanical engineer on the Optigan project.

As an arrogant know-it-all and unabashed pedant, I reluctantly — but very much deservedly — stand corrected.  I fully admit I have been kicked back down to my proper place, and will retire to my lowly corner to lick my wounds.  😁

 

No, seriously, that was an entire truckload of context which I either was not aware of, missed or misunderstood from your previous responses, or just plainly ignored out of misplaced self-assured blindness.

 

So, thank you for taking the time to respond again with more details.  It helped me understand what you were trying to say.

 

Quote

 But that's all descending into a rabbit hole. I should probably just delete the above paragraphs, but I've typed them and they might actually interest you, so they stay.

 

It does actually interest me, very, very much; and I sincerely appreciate your you wrote all that.

I do see clearly your point now.  I’m just sorry it took me this long.  In addition to arrogant pedant, I can be shamefully obtuse.

 

    dZ.

[+DZ-Jay]

* For the record, the above comment was in earnest — apart from the cheeky first and last paragraphs, meant to lighten the post, not a single drop of irony was intended.

 

   dZ.

[Walter Ives]

On 4/25/2023 at 11:47 AM, DZ-Jay said:

apart from the cheeky first and last paragraphs, meant to lighten the post

Cheek, for lack of a better word, is good. Cheek is right. Cheek works. Cheek clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Cheek, in all of its forms, cheek for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind.

 

Gordon Gekko