Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed
That's how Microsoft develop Windows, doesn't do them any harmOpa-Opa wrote:Thats the trouble with only making nasty cheap knock off machines - You have to wait untill some else has done all the hard work such as inventing and building something before you can steal it....Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Does make you think about what could have been achieved by Amstrad if they'd got in on the act a little quicker.
Yeah! But Microsoft buy out anyone who tries to oppose them.RocketRanger wrote:That's how Microsoft develop Windows, doesn't do them any harmOpa-Opa wrote:Thats the trouble with only making nasty cheap knock off machines - You have to wait untill some else has done all the hard work such as inventing and building something before you can steal it....Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Does make you think about what could have been achieved by Amstrad if they'd got in on the act a little quicker.
Yeah! Eat that Charles Babbage!Opa-Opa wrote:Thats the trouble with only making nasty cheap knock off machines - You have to wait untill some else has done all the hard work such as inventing and building something before you can steal it....Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Does make you think about what could have been achieved by Amstrad if they'd got in on the act a little quicker.
Well, he had said so in another thread... I don't find it very humorous, rather flame-bordering, and of course it's a silly argument. Of course the CPC was not a knock off of any particular computer, like most of the Z80 machines back then. Clive was not the first in the race, and was not the last. Sugar's success was in combining all sorts of common items to build something that worked (and was of a much higher manufacturing quality than the competition to boot).Ritchardo mkII wrote:Yeah! Eat that Charles Babbage!Opa-Opa wrote:Thats the trouble with only making nasty cheap knock off machines - You have to wait untill some else has done all the hard work such as inventing and building something before you can steal it....Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Does make you think about what could have been achieved by Amstrad if they'd got in on the act a little quicker.
I assume the knock-off machine comment is to do with it using the same chip as the Spectrum. This will be the same chip developed in 1976 by Intel?
On a related note, did you know that Goodyear tyres are a cheap knock off of a Mr. F. Flintstone of Bedrock, USA who created the first wheel from stone around 24,000 years ago. What a shower of robbing bastards!
Aww look, thats so cute... The poor deluded CPC owner thinks the cartoon antics of stoneage man are real...Ritchardo mkII wrote: On a related note, did you know that Goodyear tyres are a cheap knock off of a Mr. F. Flintstone of Bedrock, USA who created the first wheel from stone around 24,000 years ago. What a shower of robbing bastards!
....This statment is so wrong it's funny... EVERYTHING amstrad ever made has been a cheap, nasty copy of someone else's product made using cheap nasty parts.Gryzor wrote: Sugar's success was in combining all sorts of common items to build something that worked (and was of a much higher manufacturing quality than the competition to boot).
I think that talking about how Sinclair was a visionary is old news, really. He was, and he built some wonderful products that were ahead of their era - and some that flopped badly. And indeed Sugar was an entrepreneur - he never hid the fact. (By the way, I don't think you'll find many Amstrad users adoring him, because he always made it absolutely clear that he was in it for the money and not for the vision; but you *will* find many Spectrum users who would be ready to convince themselves that if Clive invented the pocket nuclear bomb for kids aged 3-5 it'd still be a sign of his vision and of things to come.)Spector wrote:I always looked at Sir Clive as a guy that wanted to actually make a difference to society with technology and wasn't in it just for money, whereas Sir Alan seemed purely concerned with profit.
The Sinclair Executive Calculator was a technical jump ahead of the rest when it came out in 1972 as well as being cheaper, but it also went on show at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, such was the appeal of the design. The 48K Speccy was also a great looking machine, as indeed was the stylish 128+ model.
Then Sugar takes over and what do we have? A grey plastic box with a tape recorder that fast forwards slower than it plays and doesn't have a tape counter. But hey, at least it has "DATACORDER" in gaudy multicoloured writing on the front. Ooh, how futuristic!
The Amstrad CPC range looked just as bad. Check out that horrible red button on the tacked on player. I bet it came off when you blew on it.
In saying that, I'd still like to play the Amstrad. The blocky hi-colour graphics may be like looking at a parrot through a pair of broken glasses, but they are interesting, especially Target Renegade and Chase HQ.
Where did I say that?SirClive wrote:I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.
you fancy himSirClive wrote:I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.
The ZX80 was a success
The ZX81 was a success
All of his Spectrums (16k/48k/48k+/128k) were a success
His calculators were a success
His strange desire to revolutionary the way we travel is a bit baffling, but if that is his holy grail then good luck to him.
The Master wrote:you fancy himSirClive wrote:I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.
The ZX80 was a success
The ZX81 was a success
All of his Spectrums (16k/48k/48k+/128k) were a success
His calculators were a success
His strange desire to revolutionary the way we travel is a bit baffling, but if that is his holy grail then good luck to him.
"you know that beardy wierdy bloke who made cheap tat through out the 80's and 90's...?"The Master wrote:you fancy himSirClive wrote:I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.
The ZX80 was a success
The ZX81 was a success
All of his Spectrums (16k/48k/48k+/128k) were a success
His calculators were a success
His strange desire to revolutionary the way we travel is a bit baffling, but if that is his holy grail then good luck to him.
You have been on form over the last week or so, must be something in your toast! Almost... but not quite. While NOONE says Amstrad was a synonym of innovation (I do wonder why counter-arguments keep coming up, while there's no argument), the business model was taking what was good, putting it together, and giving more value for money to the consumer. Not "cheaper".RocketRanger wrote: Despite my soft spot for the CPC having grown up with the 464 and 6128, I certainly agree with Opa's point about Amstrad taking what was good about other brands and making cheaper consumer tat, that's pretty much their entire business model.
Gryzor wrote:
Almost... but not quite. While NOONE says Amstrad was a synonym of innovation (I do wonder why counter-arguments keep coming up, while there's no argument), the business model was taking what was good, putting it together, and giving more value for money to the consumer. Not "cheaper".
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
