Storm Fox
Trying the find the next noun to verb
Getting thread from Wasting you Bandwidth where Sasaferrato souljacker fishfinger may be interested.
I had an Acorn Electron which was shit for both.I had a BBC Micro which I learned to program, it had less memory than a ZX Speccy but in my school nerd circle it was understood the Speccy was better for games and the Beeb was better to write stuff with.
Getting thread from Wasting you Bandwidth where Sasaferrato souljacker fishfinger may be interested.
The Amstrad PCs were toilet, shitty build quality, but they were cheap enough for a civilian to afford, just about. They were still at the high end of consumer purchases - my dad was (and is) a bit of a sci-fi and tech nut so was prepared to spend money on that sort of stuff.
I had both - started out with a ZX81, then got a Spectrum 48K+ and then a SAM Coupe (which was actually pretty decent and I learned a lot about programming on).I had a Sinclaire Spectrum 48K, (the one with the rubber keys.)
A few years later, I wanted to upgrade to a Sam Coupe(A whatnow ,) I'd read about in Your Sinclair.
You can get a Raspberry Pi for that price today. But £39.95 adjusted for inflation from 1978 is £234. Or going the other way a Raspberry Pi would cost £6.92When I was a nipper I desperately wanted to buy one of these but couldn't afford it
256 bytes of RAM for goodness sake!!
Everything they made was utter garbage. Every. Single. Thing. They were the Ratners of electronics, but worse.First computer I owned was an Amstrad PCW in '86 or '87. Later used one at work for several years running dbase II and supercalc. Can't say I have any nostalgia for them but they did what they claimed to, unlike some of the other shit Amstrad knocked out. Had one of their video recorders once - now that really was fucking garbage.
Don't disagree with that at all.They were the Ratners of electronics, but worse.
The thing that pissed me off most was a cost and unreliability of the 3" disk. I lost a few school assignment due to that.Don't disagree with that at all.
However in the late 80s and for a very short while afterwards (I stress that time period), for cheap word processing, and for very small business use, the PCW was at a price point which IBM and it's competitors weren't remotely interested in matching. And as I said, it worked. I'd used Commodore PETs before - it was significantly more usable at a fraction of the price.
The PCW's optional (and fucking noisy) daisy-wheel printer produced better quality output than the standard 'entry level' dot matrix printers for PCs. Bolt the optional serial interface and a modem onto the PCW and you could send and receives faxes saving the cost of a separate fax machine. The built-in word processing software was adequate. dbase II was a good database for it's time. Supercalc wasn't the greatest spreadsheet, but it pissed on the earliest versions of Excel. There were also disadvantages of course, starting with the non-standard 3" floppy discs. And compared to what became affordably possible a few years later (running more than one programme at a time!!) it was nothing.
Now I've no desire to defend that cunt Sugar and his works. I suspect the PCW was some sort of accident. Had he realised he was producing more than just a 'mugs eyeful', as he eloquently described his business strategy, he'd probably have tried further cost cutting and screwed it. On this occasion, and within the parameters I've indicated, he somehow failed to do so.
At least you had that excuse. We didn't even have a dog. I was reduced to the far less exculpatory excuse of "I forgot".The thing that pissed me off most was a cost and unreliability of the 3" disk. I lost a few school assignment due to that.