Enjoy...........
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo7jnQXvtNo
Really biased in regard of the peripherals.. :laugh:
Suprise, suprise, the BBC once again "prove" that the computer that they profit from is the best.
Ah, the good old days, where you could proudly sport a tanktop on TV without being a guest star on the big bang theory.
Bryce.
"Finally, we give the BBC a bonus 20 points because it's the oldest machine in the lineup" :picard2:
Yes 32K and a PCB the size of a small planet is progress compared to 64K and a well designed minimal PCB looses out. Tripe! >:(
Quote from: Vyper68 on 08:10, 06 February 18
Yes 32K and a PCB the size of a small planet is progress compared to 64K and a well designed minimal PCB looses out. Tripe! >:(
You forgot to mention "and full of custom ASICs that will be impossible to replace in the near future" :)
Bryce.
Quote from: Bryce on 14:22, 05 February 18
Suprise, suprise, the BBC once again "prove" that the computer that they profit from is the best.
Except that show is Database produced by Thames Television. Nothing to do with the BBC.
Then their sudden leaning towards the BBC computer is suprising.
Bryce.
The chap was a bbc fanbois clearly, the weighting was a bit skewed.
Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
Quote from: Bryce on 08:47, 07 February 18
Then their sudden leaning towards the BBC computer is suprising.
Bryce.
The massive jump in the score was when it came to add-ons and he gave it a daft score - he didn't mention the kit you needed to buy to get the BBC to do anything useful. Or how unreliable the QL's Microdrives were.
It did seem like there was a lot of product placement for that old computer magazine - was it "sponsored" by said rag?
He was the Editor of Personal Computer World.
The biggest joke was that the amount of available hardware was judged by the amount of adverts in their magazine!! Instead of comparing the amounts in computer specific magazines.
Bryce.
Quote from: Bryce on 20:28, 07 February 18
The biggest joke was that the amount of available hardware was judged by the amount of adverts in their magazine!! Instead of comparing the amounts in computer specific magazines.
Bryce.
The inference being if you wanted a higher benchmark score for your product get more companies supplying add-ons for your product ( computer ) to advertise in that magazine. ::)
I did quite like to news segment. Something dodgy going on with Prism's MD getting duffed up, the rumoured upgrade that would be the 664 ( it's only the same but it has a disk drive - meh! ) i could only dream of having a disk drive back then and here was something that had one built in - shut the front door!
Comparing the QL with the CPC and the BBC seems a bit out of place in my opinion... then, putting the BBC above the others just a bit crazy :blank:
Those were stranger times. I did watch the video the other night, totally bonkers. I liked how they had a whole PANEL of experts on benchmarks :D
IIRC, they didn't even include the price into the argument, did they?
Seems like a clear win for the CPC to me.
BBC - £399 but requires screen and storage device.
QL - £399 with built-in storage but requires screen.
CPC - £239/£349 with green/colour screen, built-in storage, monitor and software pack.
Absolute no brainer...
Quote from: Skunkfish on 17:01, 21 February 18
Seems like a clear win for the CPC to me.
BBC - £399 but requires screen and storage device.
QL - £399 with built-in storage but requires screen.
CPC - £239/£349 with green/colour screen, built-in storage, monitor and software pack.
Absolute no brainer...
Well we all know how it came out. Ultimately the ql was a disaster, the amstrad was a success in the home market, the bbc was a success but less so in the home market and some world say ultimately went on to rule the roost with the arm chip.
Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
And strange of them to ignore the two bestselling computers of the time; both the C64 and Speccy were available for under £200 by that point...
A bit unrelated to the video, but I always felt a bit sad for QL´s destiny. I mean, it got rushed, it was buggy, it had microdrives instead of floppies... but the machine had a lot of potential. Later, when everything was corrected the Atari ST and the Amiga were almost there :picard:
I agree, the QL was missed opportunity. I used to go to the "All Format" computer shows here in Glasgow and there usually was a stand for the QL, its software and peripherals. For the time it was an impressive machine.
Quote from: Skunkfish on 17:21, 21 February 18
And strange of them to ignore the two bestselling computers of the time; both the C64 and Speccy were available for under £200 by that point...
I think they were seen as "Toys" by the wooly jumper/beard brigade not serious computers where you could do serious computering ;D
Quote from: ComSoft6128 on 01:33, 23 February 18
I agree, the QL was missed opportunity. I used to go to the "All Format" computer shows here in Glasgow and there usually was a stand for the QL, its software and peripherals. For the time it was an impressive machine.
Yes it was a bit of a mess at launch and by the time Sinclair got their act together it was too late. It did have some good ideas but they were adamant about those daft microdrive tape drives.
If it was not buggy and had a couple of floppy drives... the QL would have been a serious thing back in the days. In any case, the Amiga appeared in 1985 and that was basically it for the QL. OK, it was a much more expensive machine, but it was miles away from it (same about the price :laugh: ). The Atari was also there in 1985... all in all, bad times for the QL. The only chance for it to be a success would have been to be completely polished and ready at launch.
Quote from: ||C|-|E|| on 17:47, 23 February 18
If it was not buggy and had a couple of floppy drives... the QL would have been a serious thing back in the days. In any case, the Amiga appeared in 1985 and that was basically it for the QL. OK, it was a much more expensive machine, but it was miles away from it (same about the price :laugh: ). The Atari was also there in 1985... all in all, bad times for the QL. The only chance for it to be a success would have been to be completely polished and ready at launch.
I remember all the carry on when they finally shipped the QL a lot later than promised ( enough to start causing problems but not ZXVega+ levels of nonsense ). They sold it with part of the ROM in a dongle ( the guy who wrote the ROM said it was done for other reasons i thnk ). You are right though the Atari ST with GEM and Amiga with Workbench turned up with Mouse driven GUI. It made the QL look quite outdated. I also read that Sinclair were charged the same price for the 68008 as Atari/Commodore were charged for the 68000 because they could push for a better deal.
I do have a QL (used for a grand of two times, I think). I like it very much, but of course bugs blahblahblah.
What's interesting is that Sinclair tried to kickstart a business-oriented erm, business capitalising on their name only, without taking a look at what was coming from others. It didn't look outdated, it *was*, hopelessly so. It made no real business sense even if it was correctly built etc. In this case, Sinclair just didn't see far enough.
Quote from: Gryzor on 19:02, 25 February 18
I do have a QL (used for a grand of two times, I think). I like it very much, but of course bugs blahblahblah.
What's interesting is that Sinclair tried to kickstart a business-oriented erm, business capitalising on their name only, without taking a look at what was coming from others. It didn't look outdated, it *was*, hopelessly so. It made no real business sense even if it was correctly built etc. In this case, Sinclair just didn't see far enough.
I know i had a choice of a QL or a Atari 520STF at the time and i went with the Atari and i never regretted it for a minute. I know the Amiga was a better machine and i did have an A1200 in the end but that was when the ST was coming to an end.
How anyone thought this was the future given how IBM was creating a standard "PC" - It does look like it came from the mind of a mad scientist.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/MerlinTonto.jpg/800px-MerlinTonto.jpg)
Is that the OPD?
Quote from: ComSoft6128 on 14:45, 26 February 18
Is that the OPD?
Yeah - QL Clone - Notice the microdrives have moved to the top at the back. I can't remember if it had a modem or that was just a telephone. I don't know if BT used many of them, if they did their IT Department needed their head looked at. :)
Funnily enough "Tonto" in Spanish means "Dumb" :laugh:
Another view of the CPC from 85:
Matt Nicholson, Editor of What Micro?
'When we first looked at the Amstrad we thought immediately that it looked amazing value for money. It's a sort of hi-fi rack system for computers - you've got everything there. You can take it home, put on a plug, plug it in and you've got a computer system. Whereas if you've got a Spectrum or a 64 you've got to worry about cassette players and TVs and power supplies. When we did a feature comparing the Amstrad 464 with the MSX computers, the Enterprise and the Memotech MTX we concluded that the Amstrad was the best all round value. In fact we're constantly recommending it. It's the only home computer I'd totally recommend as being certain to be around in a year's time. I think it could replace the Commodore 64. We'd only recommend the Commodore to somebody if they only wanted a computer for games. If they also want to do other things on it, then the Amstrad's a much better buy. The Basic is very good - it's the only home machine to have got anywhere near the BBC for speed. It's also got good graphics, so there's no reason why you shouldn't get really good games developed for it. It's an excellent all round machine."
Quote from: ComSoft6128 on 14:00, 01 March 18
Another view of the CPC from 85.
Matt Nicholson, Editor of What Micro?
'When we first looked at the Amstrad we thought immediately that it looked amazing value for money. Ifs a sort of hi-fi rack system for computers - you've got everything there. You can take it home, put on a plug, plug it in and you've got a computer system. Whereas if you've got a Spectrum or a 64 you've got to worry about cassette players and TVs and power supplies. When we did a feature comparing the Amstrad 464 with the MSX computers, the Enterprise and the Memotech MTX we concluded that the Amstrad was the best all round value. In fact we're constantly recommending it. It's the only home computer I'd totally recommend as being certain to be around in a year's time. I think it could replace the Commodore 64. We'd only recommend the Commodore to somebody if they only wanted a computer for games. If they also want to do other things on it, then the Amstrad's a much better buy. The Basic is very good - it's the only home machine to have got anywhere near the BBC for speed. It's also got good graphics, so there's no reason why you shouldn't get really good games developed for it. It's an excellent all round machine."
"It's the only home computer I'd totally recommend as being certain to be around in..." 2018 :D
Bryce.