XPost: comp.sys.cbm, rec.games.video.classic
From: starsabre@net.att
In article <298Ti.2916$_64.2467@trnddc02>,
"Sam Gillett" wrote:
> First you bring the PET in from outer space. Now here comes IBM from the
> same place. Keep in mind that the personal computer market was much more
> fragmented in the 1980's than it is today. Two major segments were the home
> computer segment, which was dominated by Commodore and Atari, and the
> business computer segment where there were several CP/M machines which were
> quickly displaced by the IBM PC/XT and the various clones. And then there
> was Apple whic sort of stradled the line between the home and small business
> market.
>
> IBM had very little to do with the rise and fall of either Commodore or
> Atari.
I was incorporating responses to earlier elements of the thread with the
IBM related commentary. And the PET was heavily discussed in this
thread. If your news-reader supports back-threading, chase back up the
thread and you will see earlier posts about these, to which my reply was
intended.
Someone had posted that the PET was selling strong up to the advent of
the C=64. I did a little online research and found what I thought to be
accurate was correct, that the PET had fallen off dramatically before
the C=64 became a significant player.
Elsewhere, someone offered up that the IBM was or was not a player in
this time frame (I now cannot remember which), and I was trying to lay
some specific time frame elements to the IBM for the sake of time
perspective.
And I never said IBM related directly to Commodore's or Atari's home
computer successes or downfalls, although a lot of people left both of
those to go Mac or PC late in the 80's.
jt
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
