Taken: AT 286 motherboard with mathco

Jules Richardson julesrichardsonuk at yahoo.co.uk
Sun Oct 14 04:41:46 CDT 2007

Jim Leonard wrote:
> I didn't either.  808x had about as long a run of usefulness as the 
> other popular/surviving home computers at the time (I'm thinking Apple 
> II, C64, Mac classic here), which was about 8 years.  As to why that is, 
> I'm still trying to hammer out theories (additional ones are welcome), 
> such as "the home computer software industry moved at a slower pace back 
> then" or "computers cost so much back then that people expected them to 
> last", etc.

I suspect the driving force was peoples' expectations; back then nobody 
expected new hardware and software to come out so frequently, and so it just 
didn't happen - the computer was a tool, not a status symbol, and purchased 
based on whether it filled a need.

I'm not sure if expense comes into it - look how many gadgets people buy these 
days (it all adds up!) or how many people change their car each year etc.

Then: "It's a bit clunky, but it does pretty much what I need it to do. Why 
should I change?"

Now: "Oh look, new shiny thing!"

More information about the cctalk mailing list