6 Mar
2013
6 Mar
'13
2:30 p.m.
> > but the cheapest computers in the first half
of the
> > 1980s cost $100 and were practically useless for anything except
> > programming in Basic
> citation, please
> $100 did NOt buy you anything that could run CP/M, MS-DOS, Apple-DOS nor
> ANY other operating system.
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
Isn't this what I had said?
NO. Not in the context of comparing it as "cheapest 1980s" to $2000 as
"cheapest 1990s" for a "complete" machine WITH operating system.
citation,
please
My MOTHER was able to find a mass-marketed machine with drive and OS for
$500.
While WE would prefer having language in ROM,
by the 1990s, you could run any languages from disk.
Was it a Commodore Amiga?
The CHANGE
that you claim to observe is simply that in the 1980s, you were
interested in the $100 machines, but in the 1990s, you ignored them, and
refused to acknowledge the existence of anything less than $2000.
The computer market changed MUCH LESS than YOU did.
That is not entirely true. I
designed very low cost computers at the
time and so did pay attention to what was happening in
Brazil, the USA
and the UK (with some difficulty). I did not have any data for the rest
of the world (except bits and pieces from Japan).
I agree completely that many things were different geographically.
THAT is not the issue being discussed.
No, I don't count used stuff. I have no problem
with it myself and
several of my work machines were given to me by people who were going to
throw them away. But I have a lot of experience with poor people (an
important part of my intended market) and they prefer to not have a
computer at all than to get something that isn't the very latest. So
while a new $12 computer (an 8 bit Nintendo videogame inside a computer
keyboard) instead of a $20 Pentium 4 PC from 2004 is an amazingly stupid
technical choice, it is the most popular one.
That is, indeed, sad.
Another issue is the lack of uniformity in used
machines. I have been
trying to help in a project to reuse computers siezed by the local
government from illegal gambling rings. Inside the machines are regular
PCs, but with lots of different processors (Pentium II to more modern
stuff), lan cards, disks and so on. Installing a simple Linux on them to
run something like Scratch for the children is a lot of work, and
getting it done on one machine doesn't help much with the next. In the
end, it takes up more than $35 worth of our time.
Refurbing can be a fun hobby. It is not particularly practical as a
business venture, unless you have some special deals to take advantage of.
WHY can't
they just say, "it's FUN! and you can cobble together the rest
of what you need to make it usable from the crap that is lying around"
And THAT is fun, too!
But that is exactly what they do say. By the way, I should explain to the several people
commenting in this
thread that I am Raspberry Pi's *competitor*. So while I think I do
understand them, I obviously don't fully agree with them. And I started
designing computers and processors in the late 1970s while in high
school, so I did participate in some of this history and am not someone
who just read about it years later.
You obviously have been there.
However, your claim of cheapest machine shifting from $100 to $2000
reflects a change in focus on which segments of the market rather than a
change within the market.
a few random data points:
1978 TRS80 $400 (however, admittedly more commonly purchased at $600 with
monitor and cassette)
1981 5150 $1280 (or ~$2000 to $3000 with minimal drives, RAM, monitor)
1990s generic CRAP $500 complete, decent quality fading from the scene
2013 Poladroid on Woot for $50 (Android 2.x 8GB tablet), although most
such devices are ~$100 to $150
If we were to compare RPI to machines with case, keyboard, monitor, and
peripherals, then we need to include those costs in the RPI side.
"Have those lying around" can apply to BOTH sides of any comparison, and
needs to be stated as one of the parameters of the comparison.
1979 TRS80 fully functional with drives, etc. $2000
1979 TRS80 with scrounged/third party parts ~$1000
1979 TRS80 bare $400
1981, 5150 complete and functional from IBM was ~$2700
1981 5150 using "have those lying around" (RAM, drives, monitor, etc.) ~$1700
1981 5150 bare $1280
1985 Mac ~$3000
1985 Mac using scrounged stuff ~$3000 - NOT AN OPTION.
1985 Mac bare ~$3000 (Macintosh was not amenable in the 1980s to cutting
any corners on cost)
How did YOU get cheapest 1980s $100/cheapest 1990s $2000?
Citation, or data points, please! Howzbout the specific examples?
The only way that I can see would be comparing completely different
categories of machines while ignoring machines in the other categories,
or concentrating on a market segment that I can't pick out.
WHICH category went up from $100 to $2000?
NOTE: in general, with plenty of exceptions, the price within a category
did not change anywhere near as much as the capabilities.
Price of RAM for a machine didn't change anywhere near as much as
capacity. It seems that 16G now costs what 16K used to.
If the price per unit goes down, the industry is better off increasing the
number of units than lowering the price.
OTOH, hard drives did come down in price ($2000 for 5M V $150 for 2TB),
and keyboards came down from $300 to less than lunch.
But, with speed and capacity increases, Boyle's law says that MS^H^H
system software will expand to fill all available capacity.
Yes, there are additional features - a simple piece of text takes longer
to produce, but now has dancing kangaroos and yodelling jellyfish - very
important for shopping lists, meeting reschedule memos, etc.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com