Failed vintage computers: PCjr, Sinclair QL... What is your favorite?

[cwpab]

I recently learned about the IBM PCjr debacle, and only some days ago I discovered that Timex released a non-compatible version of the Spectrum in the USA (apparently the ZX-81 compatible TS1000 sold a decent 600K there) called the TS2068, which of course failed terribly (it was more expensive than the Commodore computers and was basically worse). And there's also the Sinclair QL.

A 2011 article from PC Gamer includes these and other failed vintage computers in a list of "the 16 worst failed computers of all time": https://www.pcgamer.com/the-16-worst-failed-computers-of-all-time/

This is the list:
16. IBM PCjr (1984)
15. Mac Portable (1989)
14. Commodore Plus/4 (1984)
13. GateWay Destination (1996)
12. IBM PS/2 (1987)
11. Sinclair QL (1984)
10. Apple III (1980)
9. Go L Mach L 3.8 (never released)
8. Apple Lisa (1983)
7. Commodore 128 (1985)
6. Osborne Executive (1982)
5. NeXT Computer (1988)
4. Atari Falcon (1992)
3. Coleco Adam (1983)
2. Power Mac G4 Cube (2000)
1. Babbage's Difference Engine (1822)

What is your favorite failed vintage computer and why?

[ZorrO]

Oric Atmos - most pretty cute european micros, with only right 3 inch FDD of course.
Sam Coupe - most ugly case and best sound capabilities in 8bits family ever, too bad.
MSX Turbo-R - most powerful 8bit, but too expensive compared to 16bits.

And the most overrated are the C64 and A1200.

[eto]

Atari Falcon - I owned one and I loved it. And compared to the really small number of sold machines it's amazing how many apps, games, demos and hardware expansions were released. 

[Prodatron]

Haha, I like #1 in the opening post

Two british nice ones with a Z80, which unfortunately failed:
- Enterprise 64/128 (kind of a CPC Plus from 1985, came too late)
- Memotech MTX (beautiful case, too strong competition)

One of the biggest fail ever:
- Amiga 600

[lmimmfn]

Oric Atmos - most pretty cute european micros, with only right 3 inch FDD of course.
Sam Coupe - most ugly case and best sound capabilities in 8bits family ever, too bad.
MSX Turbo-R - most powerful 8bit, but too expensive compared to 16bits.

And the most overrated are the C64 and A1200.

I dont think the A1200 was overrated, it simply had a short lifespan between release and CBM going bust so it never really had a chance commercially. It's my favourite Amiga and I picked one up as soon as it was released.
The A600 on the other hand WTF.

The Enterprise seems like a souped up CPC, I think it's an amazing machine.

The SAM Coupe was a cool machine but like the plus range was still 8 bit and most people moved to or planned to move to 16bits by that stage.

[Gryzor]

Failed? Maybe. Worst? Nah, that list is shite. 

[ZorrO]

The A600 had a more favorable price HDD and Fast RAM than A500. And it started the fashion among Amigans for buying hard drives. And if you think that is not such a great advantage, tell me why do all computers today have them?

A1200 is the worst 32bits. Things that could be done on a Mac, on a PC and on a Falcon, but Only Amiga couldn't do it. Slow processor, poor sound, many years of delays in appearance of CD drivers, movie encoders, pathetic 3D, etc. It was a budget 32bit, only the low price was a reason to buy it on start. Later it could be useful only if you replaced various parts into PC parts; HDD, power supply, monitor, and on the end also graphics and sound cards for a huge amount of money, on which nothing worked anyway.

Were sold about 5 million A500, 1 million A600 and only half million of A1200. It speaks for itself. Most Amiga fans never seen Amiga with HDD, and playing CD or MP3. And when you show to PC owners capabilities and prices of A1200, they cannot believe that someone would want to buy it. Only in Amiga's magazines they lied that it was a great computer, otherwise they would cease to exist.

My enthusiasm for Enterprise palette cools when I learn that its Basic is 7 times slower than Amstrad's. Even slow Spectrums, MSX and Atari 8bit are twice as fast as it. At a similar price as CPC but without a monitor included. Noo thanks.

[dodogildo]

And the most overrated are the C64 and A1200.

For me, being in love with Amstrad does not require hating Commodore. C64 was a damn good gizmo for 1982 and still is today. Both a commercial success (and love) story for a generation. Have to admit.

[cwpab]

I agree that the list has a few questionable choices:

- 2 unreleased machines that couln't have possibly failed (including a 1800s computer just for the shock).
- 1 computer that was not a failure, the C128 (I confess I wasn't aware of this until someone mentioned it).
- This stupid use of 3 slots could have been improved by adding the cute but commercially terrible Amstrad CPC Plus range, the beautiful Compucolor or the cool BeBox instead.

Many of these machines were ahead of its time, so it's also a bit hard to call them "failures" just because they didn't sell well. The PCjr, for example, brought a lot of new good ideas to the table, including IBM requesting an adventure "with animations" to Sierra to promote the machine, which resulted in certain medieval game with a crocodile moat (and in my opinion created multiple problems by forcing players to watch their character walk across the screens for hours instead of the more natural 1st person approach).

[cwpab]

And the most overrated are the C64 and A1200.

For me, being in love with Amstrad does not require hating Commodore. C64 was a damn good gizmo for 1982 and still is today. Both a commercial success (and love) story for a generation. Have to admit.

I don't think he hates Commodore... I mean, he bought an A1200 in the 90s in Poland!

(Or maybe he ended up pretty disappointed with the machine...)

The C64 has a better catalog than the CPC, but the colors depress me. I wish one of these machines had the colors of the CPC and the sprites/scrolling of the C64 (yes, I know the CPC can also scroll if programmed masterfully). I also wish I could look at the eyes of a C64 fan and say "yeah, but you didn't have the Abbey of Crime! And you didn't have all those French adventures!". But I'm not sure... 

I think we're lucky that the 8 bit computer "system wars" were never too dramatic. Modern Sony Vs Nintendo Vs Microsoft wars and earliy on when Sega was still a player were often too rude. As a CPC, MS-DOS and PSX fan, I have much more love for the C64, the Amiga and the N64 than for the PS3, PS4 or PS5. That's the real war: retro Vs modern. But that's another topic, so here's a picture of the compucolor, a wonderful, 2mhz CPU failed computer from 1976:

[lmimmfn]

The NeXT being in this list is crazy, the computer that Doom was created on, the computer that brought Steve Jobs back to apple and which Apple subsequently used the OS from in OS X after multiple failed attempts at a decent preemptive multitasking system.

Nevermind the fact that the NeXT was mega sexy in terms of how it looked and the OS was quite revolutionary.

[Bryce]

How about the Jupiter Ace. One of my favourites, because the in-built language was Forth instead of BASIC.

Bryce.

[SkulleateR]

If you take a look back you have to put MSX 1/2 on that list ...

They failed everywhere except in Japan, the Netherlands and Brazil 

[Prodatron]

Typical german view on this platform...
If the MSX was a fail with 8million sold units, what's the CPC with half of it?
It wasn't very succesful in Germany and UK, but the MSX was one of the most sold 8bits ever (just a little bit behind the C64).

[cwpab]

I just read a very heated debate among Commodore fans. Apparently while all admit the Cplus/4 failed, some (most) think it could have been successful if properly marketed towards the cheap segment (as the final entry in the C16 series instead of the separate C64/C128 one) or maybe as a business machine for small companies, while a few believe it could never have succeeded because "nobody wanted cheap computers in the USA".

About the C128, while it undoubtedly succeeded commercially, I wonder if it can really be called a success considering only 28 games were released for it and people mostly used it as a more reliable C64 (due to the C64 power supply problems).

[ZorrO]

NEC had 50% of Japanese market, next two companies were Sharp and Fujitsu, each with about 20%. None of these three ever produced MSX. And MSX never reached 10% in Japan.

MSX is one of the three most popular 8bit platforms in history. Of course not in Europe. Not in the US, and not in Japan. But all of South America, Arab countries and the Asian Tigers are the mainstay of MSX computers. The Brazilian fan club of this computers estimates its production worldwide at approximately 20 million, half of then is MSX2. Equally great sales success achieved only Commodore C64 + C128, and Spectrums and their clones together. 2 million was made by Sinclair, 3 million by Amstrad, 3 million by Timex and 1 million by Investronica, and the rest are unofficial clones without a license divided into dozens of small producers from the Soviet Union and South America. (where they fought for the top spot with MSXs).

Yes, they were difficult to find in Europe outside the Netherlands and Spain, but I wouldn't count them among the machines that failed. Only their third generation Turbo-R I would be considered a sales failure.

About 1 million of C+4,C16,C116 were produced, half of them were C+4. There are many worse outcomes. And only in Mexico and Hungary, thanks to an agreement with the Ministry of Education they were introduced into schools, and became more popular in these two countries than C64. Graphics in this wonderful palette make Amstrad fans jealous, but I don't understand how a computer without an 80-character mode can be considered as suitable for business.

[SkulleateR]

Typical german view on this platform...
If the MSX was a fail with 8million sold units, what's the CPC with half of it?
It wasn't very succesful in Germany and UK, but the MSX was one of the most sold 8bits ever (just a little bit behind the C64).

Maybe I should have choosen a better smilie for my post ... It's not my opinion, I just read that statement in a german mag from 2012 in an article about the MSX 

So it was ment "just a little" ironic