> > > >>
> > > > I would *like* to throw my TRS 80 stringy floppy into the river.
> > > >
> > >Then it would skip across the water, thereby putting its read/write
> > >heads further out of alignment, before finally careening into a rock
> > >jutting out of the river which ends its long and productive life..
> > >
> > >:-)
> > long and productive life? ha.
>Brian or other readers may not know that the "stringy floppy" is a
>small tape cassette technology, not a floppy diskette technology. It
>was built by one company only, to my knowledge, and simply did not
>catch on. So Bill's point is reasonable. In a bit of irony, I read
>this after I posted here on the long and productive life of "compact"
My VCF exhibit covered the concept of the "appliance computer" and the
stringy floppy, but that was not the original plan. I had spoken with
Lichen Wang who wrote the ROM for the drive, and I also spoke with the
inventor (his name escapes me at the moment) of the stringy floppy at
Exatron (a company that's still in business). I was all set, except that
the drives did not work!
Anyway, I was really only half serious about not liking either the TRS 80
or the stringy floppy...I was referring mostly to my frustration that my
original plan for the VCF, to exhibit the stringy floppy primarily, was
squelshed due to technical problems. As a result I had to resort to the
more boring/common TRS 80 Model 1 for my exhibit. In hindsight I should
have just done the Altair 680b.
>As to the thread subject's Web site, the article mentioned starts like
>"It has been thirty years since the first wave of mass-produced home
>computers ignited a revolution. 1977 saw the introduction of the
>so-called "Big Three": The Apple ][, Tandy/Radio Shack TRS-80 Model I
>and the Commodore PET 2000. These machines dominated the North
>American market for several years."
From the original text of the article "PET 2000"...?? Are there any fact
checkers for these people? I noticed that there were a few errors and
semi-errors in this article.
>Actually, it's a surprisingly reasonable and specific claim. Most of
>these "decades of personal computing" articles suggest that one event
>or one company - usually Microsoft or IBM - started it all. This one
>makes specific claims and so its claims can be tested and argued. And,
>it does NOT suggest that there was no computing BEFORE these machines.
Personally, of the first "appliance computers" I favor the PET 2001-8 and
the Apple II to the TRS 80 Model 1, but all three have their claim to fame
for just this one thing - all-in-one, out-of-the-box computers.
Next week in class the topic will be early 1982. details: the "IBM PC vs.
the XOR S-4", "MS DOS vs. CP/M", "SA vs. S-100", and " 8" disks vs. 5
1/4" " ...with live demos.
>I don't follow these systems in my work, but I knew about them at the
>time. Does anyone want to argue about this "big three in 1977" claim?
>Were there other systems, mass produced about that time, which led to
>a whole product line as these machines and companies did? Of course
>"thirty years" is a nice reference point and so is a little arbitrary
>in that way. WOuld 1976, or 1978 be more "accurate", and why?
I have written a lot about the subject of the "appliance computer" on my
web site for the past 6 months. What other computers in 1977 or before had
a computer with a built-in operating system out of the box other than these
three? All three could interact with cassette mass storage without any
additional configuration. The Sol-20 and Icom's ATTACHE computers, ALMOST
all-in-ones at the time, cannot claim this feature out of the box without
additional software or cards.
50, 30, 25, 20 years? - just convenient non-tech numbers.
If you want to be a purist...2 to the 5th years - 32 - is more binary,
yes? How about we celebrate the 32nd anniversary of the something? The
16th is too soon.
The above are just opinions, I hope I did not offend anyone, just blabbing...