Why Commodore failed (YouTube Interview)

Atari talk, or the life and the universe and things. Just keep it clean!
Post Reply
User avatar
DrF
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:18 pm

Why Commodore failed (YouTube Interview)

Post by DrF » Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:01 pm

I'm sure you loved title :lol: , but I found this interesting interview from David Pleasance the former head of Commodore UK.
Any lover of old computers it's interesting anyway :)

He has a book coming out soon so he's been doing a lot of this, i'm still waiting :p

https://youtu.be/BhTNR6XZJd0

User avatar
exxos
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3993
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:19 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Why Commodore failed (YouTube Interview)

Post by exxos » Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:37 pm

Interesting :)

what was the super Amiga that never made it then ?
4MB STFM 1.44 FD- VELOCE+ 020 STE - 4MB STE 32MHz - STFM 16MHz - STM - MEGA ST - Falcon 030 CT60 - Atari 2600 - Atari 7800 - Gigafile - SD Floppy Emulator - PeST - HxC - CosmosEx - Ultrasatan - various clutter

https://www.exxoshost.co.uk/atari/ All my hardware guides - mods - games - STOS
https://www.exxoshost.co.uk/atari/last/storenew/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.

User avatar
DrF
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:18 pm

Re: Why Commodore failed (YouTube Interview)

Post by DrF » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:36 pm

exxos wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:37 pm
Interesting :)

what was the super Amiga that never made it then ?

Which one lol

I think his going on about the "AAA" that was meant to come after "AGA" (A1200/A4000).
I have seen it called A5000 and just "triple AAA"

Or they might even be on about so called "Hombre" which was the next jump after that which from the bits I know was meant to be some almost PC like levels of 3D acceleration for the time anyhow I think that was meant to be 64bit while AAA was a 32bit

I cant remember much there was so much BS flying about at the time :lol:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Adv ... re_chipset

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Hombre_chipset

User avatar
exxos
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3993
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:19 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Why Commodore failed (YouTube Interview)

Post by exxos » Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:06 pm

Looks like they had some pretty ambitious design goals there! Looks like they were looking at 64-bit. Atari beat them to it with the Jaguar :P

Saying that, I suppose was Atari folks are fortunate that Atari managed to get the Falcon out when they did. I mean they were basically going bankrupt at the same time. It would have been nice if development could have continued for a little longer. Even so all the software houses moved on so was unlike any companies were writing software the Atari any more anyway.

I think Atari made a bit of a mistake around the STE production times. Obviously they were "upgrading" the machine, but not really doing a whole lot with it. It was just basically a recycled design with a few better options with sound. But really they spent way too much time basically reinventing what they already had. I think the recycled design is of course the cost saver, but the STE did not really bring anything more to the table other than the blitter really terms of speed increase.

Looking back it is easy to say this now, but like the work that is going on currently about speeding up the basic ST design, it is exactly the same design, but running faster. Faster CPU, faster ROM, faster CPU. And practically zero changes to the hardware. Atari could have done this really easily and produced a super ST no time at all. It would be selling and be generating more revenue for them, to then develop basically the next step machine. Probably even just keeping the ST resolutions adding more colours. Should not really take that long to do this. They also could have easily added a 030 running at high speed even if they only had 32-bit access to ROM. Later machines could have 32 bit access to RAM also.

Of course the next step would be higher resolutions and better sound, in which case you're basically looking at the Falcon. I think Atari were just trying to do too much too fast and basically getting nowhere. They went with the Videl design, a super shifter really, but again you really it was as slow as hell and further crippled with the slow CPU speeds.

With no software development for the Falcon, all the legacy software would be all there would be, and simply a faster machine would have least been something. It may have kept Atari in the business little longer, would have still ultimately failed anyway.

Well, it is all being talked to death before anyway :)
4MB STFM 1.44 FD- VELOCE+ 020 STE - 4MB STE 32MHz - STFM 16MHz - STM - MEGA ST - Falcon 030 CT60 - Atari 2600 - Atari 7800 - Gigafile - SD Floppy Emulator - PeST - HxC - CosmosEx - Ultrasatan - various clutter

https://www.exxoshost.co.uk/atari/ All my hardware guides - mods - games - STOS
https://www.exxoshost.co.uk/atari/last/storenew/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.

KyleB
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 7:08 pm

Re: Why Commodore failed (YouTube Interview)

Post by KyleB » Sat Sep 01, 2018 4:44 pm

Short of a miracle, the Tramiel business model was always to just sell 520STFM until nobody buys it anymore and then jump ship to the Lynx and Jaguar. Tramiel is fundamentally a delboy. He finds a market with big sales potential, sells cheap and fast and greedily, even screwing over his business partners to earn a bit more cash. Then when he's used up that market and everybody there is burned by him, he quits and moves to another thing. After the ST it would be games consoles. Before computers it was calculators, digital watches, filing cabinets, adding machines, mincemeat grinders, all kinds of stuff. Tramiels fly by night.

The ST department engineers were only kept around to make new design revisions that can be manufactured cheaper. Development of stuff like STE, TT, Falcon was not given any resources because they don't want to spend any money at all if they can help it, and only tolerated because they thought it would bring in a little extra cash. There was no commitment, Tramiels don't commit. Once the bank account has a few million in it then nothing matters.

User avatar
zack4mac
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Why Commodore failed (YouTube Interview)

Post by zack4mac » Sat Sep 01, 2018 7:39 pm

David Pleasance seems like one of the good guys, he should have been the Commodore president instead of Mehdi Ali. I cant wait for the book :)

I know people have called Jack Tramiel and it's always easy to find fault, like the video says the victors always write the past. But we should thank him for what he gave, he was good at utilising what was available and marketing brilliant products for the average person who would never be able to afford them. Also Chuck Peddle whom is a great electronics engineer but not business man would not have produced the C64, maybe a Victor 9000 with a 6502. Without Mr Tramiel people in the uk would have had zilog based Sinclair and Amstrads and then the intel.

Thanks Jack
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt
"Bertrand Russell" :?

Post Reply