Greg Buchner

This was a good read about Christmas 1984 sales:

> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/25/charles_eicher_christmas_1984/>

Greg B.

--
Actual e-mail address is gregbuchner and I'm located at gmail.com

Kevin Dady

On Nov 27, 2:21*pm, Greg Buchner <n...@none.invalid> wrote:
> This was a good read about Christmas 1984 sales:
>
> > <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/25/charles_eicher_christmas_1984/>
>
> Greg B.
>
> --
> Actual e-mail address is gregbuchner and I'm located at gmail.com

yea I read that as apple defeated a computer that was already a total
stinker and had nothing but bad press at the time while trying to come
back for a second round, its not quite as glorious when said that way
=)

Michael J. Mahon

Kevin Dady <kevin@hackaday.com> wrote:
> On Nov 27, 2:21 pm, Greg Buchner <n...@none.invalid> wrote:
>> This was a good read about Christmas 1984 sales:
>>
>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/25/charles_eicher_christmas_1984/>
>>
>> Greg B.
>>
>> --
>> Actual e-mail address is gregbuchner and I'm located at gmail.com
>
> yea I read that as apple defeated a computer that was already a total
> stinker and had nothing but bad press at the time while trying to come
> back for a second round, its not quite as glorious when said that way
> =)

But one should recall that most of the purchasers were not into computers
or the trade press, so they saw the two machines as toe-to-toe competitors
for their gift-giving dollars.

I think the story makes a valid point quite dramatically.

-michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon

Kevin Dady

On Nov 27, 7:48*pm, Michael J. Mahon <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
> Kevin Dady <ke...@hackaday.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 27, 2:21 pm, Greg Buchner <n...@none.invalid> wrote:
> >> This was a good read about Christmas 1984 sales:
>
> >>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/25/charles_eicher_christmas_1984/>
>
> >> Greg B.
>
> >> --
> >> Actual e-mail address is gregbuchner and I'm located at gmail.com
>
> > yea I read that as apple defeated a computer that was already a total
> > stinker and had nothing but bad press at the time while trying to come
> > back for a second round, its not quite as glorious when said that way
> > =)
>
> But one should recall that most of the purchasers were not into computers
> or the trade press, so they saw the two machines as toe-to-toe competitors
> for their gift-giving dollars.
>
> I think the story makes a valid point quite dramatically.
>
> -michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II:http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon

apples / oranges, these uninformed consumers were not the mindless
sheep that it seems they were, that is how we were an apple family,
about this time is when my dad wanted a computer for his business and
wanted something for me to do educational type stuff on, he must have
spent months reading crap before even setting foot in the stores. Due
to how much praise he had read in the local ham community a TRS was in
the future, an IBM PC for the serious biz applications but at the end
of the day it was an Apple IIe due to its mix of serious apps, and
educational titles from years of software and decent support ...+ a
little talking up from a buddy or two.

But even before looking he was scoffing the PC Jr. as it "did not run
PC software" (semi half truth but mostly correct), he was not "in to
computers" nor reading trade press, just a guy making a shopping
decision, and never saw the PC Jr. as something toe-to-toe to really
anything.

2 cents, take it for what its worth

Michael J. Mahon

Kevin Dady <kevin@hackaday.com> wrote:
> On Nov 27, 7:48 pm, Michael J. Mahon <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Kevin Dady <ke...@hackaday.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 27, 2:21 pm, Greg Buchner <n...@none.invalid> wrote:
>>>> This was a good read about Christmas 1984 sales:
>>
>>>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/25/charles_eicher_christmas_1984/>
>>
>>>> Greg B.
>>
>>>> --
>>>> Actual e-mail address is gregbuchner and I'm located at gmail.com
>>
>>> yea I read that as apple defeated a computer that was already a total
>>> stinker and had nothing but bad press at the time while trying to come
>>> back for a second round, its not quite as glorious when said that way
>>> =)
>>
>> But one should recall that most of the purchasers were not into computers
>> or the trade press, so they saw the two machines as toe-to-toe competitors
>> for their gift-giving dollars.
>>
>> I think the story makes a valid point quite dramatically.
>>
>> -michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II:http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon
>
> apples / oranges, these uninformed consumers were not the mindless
> sheep that it seems they were, that is how we were an apple family,
> about this time is when my dad wanted a computer for his business and
> wanted something for me to do educational type stuff on, he must have
> spent months reading crap before even setting foot in the stores. Due
> to how much praise he had read in the local ham community a TRS was in
> the future, an IBM PC for the serious biz applications but at the end
> of the day it was an Apple IIe due to its mix of serious apps, and
> educational titles from years of software and decent support ...+ a
> little talking up from a buddy or two.
>
> But even before looking he was scoffing the PC Jr. as it "did not run
> PC software" (semi half truth but mostly correct), he was not "in to
> computers" nor reading trade press, just a guy making a shopping
> decision, and never saw the PC Jr. as something toe-to-toe to really
> anything.
>
> 2 cents, take it for what its worth

Read the article again. It's quite clear that the sales rates were
determined, not by the capabilities or quality of the computers, but almost
solely by whether it was running an interactive demo.

Your dad was unusual in the Christmas season of 1984.

-michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon

Michael Black

On Sun, 27 Nov 2011, Kevin Dady wrote:

> On Nov 27, 7:48*pm, Michael J. Mahon <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Kevin Dady <ke...@hackaday.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 27, 2:21 pm, Greg Buchner <n...@none.invalid> wrote:
>>>> This was a good read about Christmas 1984 sales:
>>
>>>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/25/charles_eicher_christmas_1984/>
>>
>>>> Greg B.
>>
>>>> --
>>>> Actual e-mail address is gregbuchner and I'm located at gmail.com
>>
>>> yea I read that as apple defeated a computer that was already a total
>>> stinker and had nothing but bad press at the time while trying to come
>>> back for a second round, its not quite as glorious when said that way
>>> =)
>>
>> But one should recall that most of the purchasers were not into computers
>> or the trade press, so they saw the two machines as toe-to-toe competitors
>> for their gift-giving dollars.
>>
>> I think the story makes a valid point quite dramatically.
>>
>> -michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II:http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon
>
> apples / oranges, these uninformed consumers were not the mindless
> sheep that it seems they were, that is how we were an apple family,
> about this time is when my dad wanted a computer for his business and
> wanted something for me to do educational type stuff on, he must have
> spent months reading crap before even setting foot in the stores. Due
> to how much praise he had read in the local ham community a TRS was in
> the future, an IBM PC for the serious biz applications but at the end
> of the day it was an Apple IIe due to its mix of serious apps, and
> educational titles from years of software and decent support ...+ a
> little talking up from a buddy or two.
>
> But even before looking he was scoffing the PC Jr. as it "did not run
> PC software" (semi half truth but mostly correct), he was not "in to
> computers" nor reading trade press, just a guy making a shopping
> decision, and never saw the PC Jr. as something toe-to-toe to really
> anything.
>
> 2 cents, take it for what its worth
>
That assessment probably applies to more than your father.

Something like the VIC-20 or the Sinclair ZX-81, those were cheap and
likely were bought without a lot of thought. I have no idea what the IIC
was going for back then, or the PC Jr, but it was a bigger chunk of money,
you had to justify it (ie have some useful reason for buying it) and it
wasn't just throwaway money. 1984 is still a different time, still a lot
less electronic stuff in the home, computers still not that common, and it
did seem pretty common for people to pay attention when making major
purchases and I think a computer still ranked as a major purchase in 1984,
if for no other reason than that it was new terrain for many people.

Michael

mdj

On Nov 28, 3:13*pm, Michael J. Mahon <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:

> Read the article again. It's quite clear that the sales rates were
> determined, not by the capabilities or quality of the computers, but almost
> solely by whether it was running an interactive demo.

Agreed, but it shouldn't be discounted that the Apple IIc demo
included AppleWorks :-)

winston19842005@yahoo.com

Texas Instruments solved the shoplifting problem a year or two earlier, by having their cartridges connected to their display via chains... you can still see some on ebay ever so often.

Michael J. Mahon

mdj <mdj.mdj@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 28, 3:13 pm, Michael J. Mahon <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Read the article again. It's quite clear that the sales rates were
>> determined, not by the capabilities or quality of the computers, but almost
>> solely by whether it was running an interactive demo.
>
> Agreed, but it shouldn't be discounted that the Apple IIc demo
> included AppleWorks :-)

Good point! ;-)

Appleworks sold more Apple II's than even VisiCalc.

-michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon

Tony Cianfaglione

On Sun, 27 Nov 2011, mdj wrote:

> On Nov 28, 3:13*pm, Michael J. Mahon <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Read the article again. It's quite clear that the sales rates were
>> determined, not by the capabilities or quality of the computers, but almost
>> solely by whether it was running an interactive demo.
>
> Agreed, but it shouldn't be discounted that the Apple IIc demo
> included AppleWorks :-)

What I found incredulous in the article was the fact the owner simply
handed over Apple's demo disk to its major competitor to disect and build
a better demo to beat out Apple sales.