TRS-80 Model 1 (was: Arty computers (was: Re: PDP-11/70 in Yates Center, KS)

[Ethan Dicks]

On 2/1/07, Jim Isbell, W5JAI <jim.isbell at gmail.com> wrote:
> The apple was a flop, yes.  The Commodore also was a flop.  Just look at the
> numbers.  The apple was a flop because it was marketed as entertainment and
> drawing pictures (which it excelled at) while the TRS-80 was a scientific
> machine that crunched numbers.

Hmm... my recollection of the times was that the TRS-80 was pitched
more as a home/business computer, not scientific.

Certainly until the CP/M card for the Apple II came out, it was
primarily an entertainment computer, but at a place I worked at in
1984, the boss used his Apple more in CP/M than AppleDOS - for
spreadsheets, especially.

>  Yes, today the tables are reversed, but back
> then, those of us who were into computers (I had been in computers since
> 1960 on the IBM 7070) were looking for computing power for serious work.
> The Apple was just not that.  The Commodore didnt make it because it was
> under powered and again was marketed toward using it for games not serious
> work.

While the 4K/8K original PET with the 40 col screen and chicklet keys
had a ways to go until it could be taken seriously outside of the
home/entertainment market, it had one thing that no other mass market
computer had at the time - an IEEE-488 (GPIB) bus.  I have seen plenty
of PETs used in laboratory settings to talk to DVMs, pH meters,
oscilloscopes, etc., all with the built-in IEEE port.  It might not
have been a great machine for number crunching, but for a wee while,
it was a great machine for data collection.  The all-in-one
construction was also a benefit in the classroom as well as the
laboratory - sturdy, easy to move, trivial to install ("plug into
wall, flip switch").  Without dragging this into a 40col vs 64 col vs
80col or 1MHz 6502 vs 4MHz Z80 debate, the PET had its place in
history.

-ethan