Jump to content

What would you do if you were the CEO of Commodore Computers?


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, codewar65 said:

Never the less, I would have loved to have seen a 832 and a real CBM using it. I left the Commodore scene when the Amigas started to pop up and went full IBM. I never cared for the GUI OSs until OS/2 Warp and then Win XP.

After reading about the 832 proposal, I agree with WDC never finishing it. Sure, it would be nice to have something that could internally deal with 32 bit numbers, but the 8 bit bus was just too limiting at the point it was being considered.

I'm with you about GUIs. I like *using* a *good* GUI (though there are many GUIs that are not good). I did like OS/2 Warp and worked for a company that released OS/2 software. Windows 2000 Pro was my favorite flavor of Windows until Win 7 was released. I don't care for writing GUI software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kalvan said:

And as for computers with good chipsets already baked into the system being on their way out, consider that the Sharp X68000 sold over 16 million over a lifetime of seven years (1987-1994) and three major chipset revisions.  If Sharp had marketed a version in the West without the expense of the Kanji font ROM and the Video RAM to support it, it could have sold at least half as many more, allowing it to beat out the Commodore 64 and NEC PC93/98 for best selling computer series before the Windows 95 era.

I've never heard of that machine until today. What information I can find about it online suggests it was hugely expensive, only sold about 1% of the number you quote, and was only available in Japan. I'd be interested in more information about it though, as two pages, one of them being Wikipedia, do not necessarily paint an entire picture. Wikipedia claims about 150,000 were sold, as contracted with almost 5 million Amigas.

Creating computers (and software for that matter) is a balancing act. There is always more you can do if resources are no object. But since resources are finite (time, money, silicon, elctricity, etc), it takes judgement to come up with a reasonable set of features that people are willing to pay a reasonable amount of money for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scott Robison said:

I'm not @rje and I haven't talked to him about it. I didn't *laugh* at your specs, but they seem overly optimistic to me for the technology that was available in the day for "consumer hardware" or effectively a game console.

Don't get me wrong, I loved my C=64 & C=128DCR back in the day. Wish I still had them. That's what appeals to me about the CX16. But I don't see any 8-bit being a realistic path forward for much past the C=128. ...

Yes, the C64 was a cash cow, the C128 lived off of being an upgraded C64 ... "it can play C64 games and it can also ..." ... more of that than we now perhaps recall was that the C128 really WAS an effective upgrade for GEOS users ... the only more commercially successful strategy would be to make it a more effective upgrade for a broader range of users. Money spent on anything 8bit other than tweaking the C128 to expand its market niches would have been money thrown down a rat-hole.

But Commodore was a company built on "own your IP, build them cheap, sell them cheap, and stack them high", and the 90s were an age when "build them cheap, sell them cheap and stack them high" was moving toward "with licensed IP" while "own your own IP" was moving towards "and charge people through the nose for the features you can get from our IP and not from the clone army".

So it may be that the Amiga or Atari ST or whatever 68K based follow up to the 8bits that Commodore made would have been destined to fade out, and the "better strategy" would simply have seen the fade postponed by a few more years.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kalvan, I loved your post for the sheer level of rich detail.  It deserved more than a "like", and it wasn't a "thanks", so I chose joy... I think these reaction buttons are limited.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1985 would have been a busy year for me.

Just after Winter CES, I would begin negotiations with NEC, offering to license my patent with Micron for stacked Pseudo-SRAM in exchange for an architectural license for the NEC_µPD7720 DSP.  If I can't get a deal by Taipei COMPUTEX, it's still early enough that I can cut my losses and roll my own design, confident that I can stick it on motherboards by 1987.*

I will also begin R&D on CMOX flash, which, since I'll bring the white paper with me, should allow me to bring it to the market in computer hardware by the time for my next generation of computer hardware in 1987 at the 2 micron node, if not smaller.

in early May, once finals are done at U.C. Berkley, I'll take a drive down there and personally recruit Dr. Leon Chua, bringing him into the corporate sector two years ahead of schedule from when Hewlett-Packard would have poached him.  And since I won't allow any manager or the board to constantly yank funding just prior to a breakthrough in the development of the memristor, forcing his (chronically manpower turnover effected) team to start from scratch each time, I predict a breakthrough sooner than 2009, so process geometries will be much more forgiving to productization.  Also, this way Intel won't be able to steal the work and create an early version of Optane.

Just after the Fourth of July, I plan to begin development on Silicon-on-Interposer fabrication, placing the vias on a layer below the logic elements, so that chip sections can be placed to optimize chip geometry and allow more flexibility in element placement.  I don't plan for this development to find product application before 1992, but once I need, I'll need it bad.  Also that month, I'll begin joint development of TTL's 65832 core with Western Design Center.

Finally, sometime between September and November, I'll put in a tender offer for Dataram, as at this point, it is in financial dire straits, until its breakthrough contracts with HP and Digital Equipment in 1987.  This will allow me to put out my current and future RAM designs at materials and production costs, rather than have to pay cartel prices for it, something for which the period 1987-92 will become infamous for.  In particular, this should substantially reduce the production price of the Sharp X68000, and make the Amiga Ranger Chipset a practical venture for whichever company is TTL's customer for Hi-Toro Labs.  Either that, or when Edwin Meese files an antitrust suit over my memory fab ownership as a consumer OEM, I'll expose every dirty RAM industry secret during discovery if the judge doesn't grant my motion for dismissal.

*The reason I'm not going with the Texas Instruments TMS 32000 series is that Tramiel would try to launch a junk bond fueled re-aquisition (or at least make a spectacular effort) the moment he would have heard of this development, and neither I nor Atari could have afforded the distraction at that moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to keep it simple and not really get into the tech specs or what specific features or hardware I think they should have used in what system. There are a lot of good ideas floating around in this thread already. 

Basically, if I had somehow landed in that role in 1984, I would have done everything in my power to do what Jack was doing. I mean, he basically made Commodore into a powerhouse it was back then, he knew what he was doing and he did it very well. I am a firm believer in "If it isn't broke, don't fix it", and Jacks vision of Commodore was far from broken. That being said, if they had stayed on that track and Gould would not have had something different in mind on how to run the Company, Jack probably would have not left and the world of home computing may have looked a bit different than it does today. 

If they had kept the Plus 4 as cheap as it was originally intended, kept on innovating and improving their products to not only compete with the competition, but offer something better, and kept the pricing competitive, I think Commodore would have survived. The same goes for Workbench, it was a great OS, and while I still believe Windows would have still taken over the world, there is a really good chance we would see Commodore machines today, somewhat like Mac's, running their over custom Workbench OS.

But of course, hindsight is 20/20. It's still fun to speculate. 🙂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Strider said:

I'm going to keep it simple and not really get into the tech specs or what specific features or hardware I think they should have used in what system. There are a lot of good ideas floating around in this thread already. 

Basically, if I had somehow landed in that role in 1984, I would have done everything in my power to do what Jack was doing. I mean, he basically made Commodore into a powerhouse it was back then, he knew what he was doing and he did it very well. I am a firm believer in "If it isn't broke, don't fix it", and Jacks vision of Commodore was far from broken. That being said, if they had stayed on that track and Gould would not have had something different in mind on how to run the Company, Jack probably would have not left and the world of home computing may have looked a bit different than it does today. 

If they had kept the Plus 4 as cheap as it was originally intended, kept on innovating and improving their products to not only compete with the competition, but offer something better, and kept the pricing competitive, I think Commodore would have survived. The same goes for Workbench, it was a great OS, and while I still believe Windows would have still taken over the world, there is a really good chance we would see Commodore machines today, somewhat like Mac's, running their over custom Workbench OS.

But of course, hindsight is 20/20. It's still fun to speculate. 🙂

Good thoughts. One of the things that has was true from the beginning of the microcomputer revolution was that the hardware was the important part, and software followed. CP/M was arguably the first software that became popular enough to drive what hardware would be released, but there was still a lot of room for companies to create consumer level microcomputers that would each be custom little systems (like game consoles especially today).

Had IBM kept their platform proprietary, and kept their OS rather than "giving it" to Microsoft, many things could have been different. But once that genie was out of the bottle, it provided all the incentive in the world for companies to start cloning IBM compatible hardware.

Had it not been MS-DOS, it could have been custom CP/M systems. Or ultimately unix / posix systems.

Commodore had a hardware empire and software was a necessary evil that didn't make them money. As long as they made their money from selling new hardware to the same people every few years, without a focus on backward compatibility, I think their demise was inevitable (though as you say, 20/20 hindsight and all that). 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's one thing I always agree on, my biggest gripe looking back, was backwards and cross platform compatibility. Just about everything back then was proprietary, nothing was really compatible with anything else. You basically either had to pick one platform and stick with it and hope it survived, or have deep pockets to buy multiple machines. Thankfully, many good games and software packages were ported to different popular platforms, but that was really band-aid in my opinion. I can't even count the number of time I heard of people buying the wrong version of something for the system they owned.

The next big key to success was "standardization", followed by quality control. Nintendo did it for consoles and it made them rich. IBM was already rich and powerful and had good standardization and QA becasue that was simply a fact of the corporate and industrial worlds. Microsoft did it, and they basically took over the planet (all be it by shady means IMHO, but that's a different argument).

I have been a hardware man most of my life, software always came second, but standardizing an OS to work on the most readily available hardware at the time, was something that needed to happen. I  just wish Commodore had gotten on that bus much earlier.

In fact, to this day, even though I love Apple as a company, and think they make excellent products! I don't actually use any of their products becasue I have a dislike for closed ecosystems. I go on and on about QA and standardization, and Apple did it wonderfully, but the world has a standard now (perhaps an evil one), but it's there and a vast majority of the worlds software is designed for it. Apple kinda reminds me of the 1980's when nothing was compatible with anything else and everything had to be ported.

That's why I stick to Windows based machines these days. I do love and play with Linux in various forms, but it's an open platform, and I am huge supporter of open source these days when it comes to my modern hardware.

😛

Edited by Strider
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really have a problem with "non standard hardware" per se, as long as I know what I'm getting it for. I had the first three generations of Playstation, for example. I have my modern PC compatible hardware. I have my android phone, I have a kindle, I have a reMarkable tablet, I have a few RPi's, looking to add an X16 to the bunch. 🙂

I run Windows and FreeBSD on some of it, and certainly there is a lot to be said for standardized interfaces so that we don't have to throw everything away when we buy a new computer, but I like non-standard (or maybe I should say new-standard) things. It helps keep the standard keepers moving forward so as to not be left behind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

1. I would sell Plus/4 series for as low price as possible, like how Jack wished that to be, but I'll axe the Commodore 16 computer, like what David Murray of The 8-Bit Guy said, was a huge obstacle of Plus/4 becoming a great selling platform. And they'll compete with ZX Spectrum.

2. I'll make sure Plus/4 is suitable for educational purposes as well, to brand it as the PET's successor.

3. Striking a deal with Motorola so Commodore can make their own Motorola 68k clones for Amiga, like they did with Intel chips for their PC compatibles.

4. Speaking of PC compatibles, I would make the Commodore PC compatibles have Tandy/PCjr sound and graphics (along with their own DeskMate competitor), so they can compete with Tandy, but also some nifty little features unique to Commodore PC compatibles, such as an ADPCM channel, a proper reset button and early support for 3.5 inch floppy disks.

5. Design a Commodore 64 card for Amiga, IBM PC, Plus/4 and Apple II, so they can run Commodore 64 software and games (be it from diskette, cartridge or even cassettes) thru it.

6. Design a better CP/M card with faster Z80 and better blitter graphics support and support for all CP/M OEM formats. Would be similar to C128 CP/M mode, but faster.

6. Design an actual successor to Commodore 64 in 1987 with no need for backwards compatibility (unless if the said C64 card was preinstalled), with specs similar to Commander X16, with some differences, such as Commodore's own version of Weitek's 65186 CPU, 512 colors at once with 256KB VRAM, 256KB main RAM, BASIC v10 to take full advantage of new graphics and sound commands, an ADPCM channel in addition to YM2151+YM3012 DAV, as well as enhanced SID with 15 voice with more waveforms (more variations of Mix, an NES-style 4-bit pseudo-triangle in addition to real triangle wave and pseudo-sawtooth in addition to actual sawtooth), stereo, superior ADSR, better manufacturing methods, 12 octave ranges and backwards compatibility to original SID. And three cartridge slots, in addition to 1581 disk drive and five expansion slots.

7. Axe the C64GS, Amiga CDTV and CD32 and instead opt for original game console (or an arcade cabinet as a Neo Geo competitor) with unique specs such as Intel i980, 512KB RAM, 512KB VRAM with 4096 colours at once, a YM2610B+YM2151+ADPCM+DAC+Enhanced SID combo and support for CD format in addition to cartridges, as a Sega CD and Neo Geo CD competitor. Optional support for Roland MT-32 and SC-55, and maybe, just maybe LD-ROM with playback for PAL and NTSC discs.

8. Unrealistic, but manufacture some Commodore-branded CD players and VHS VCRs, and maybe even LaserDisc players.

9. In Japan, why not Commodore to manufacture their own MSX computers?

Edited by xanthrou
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, xanthrou said:

1. I would sell Plus/4 series for as low price as possible, like how Jack wished that to be, but I'll axe the Commodore 16 computer, like what David Murray of The 8-Bit Guy said, was a huge obstacle of Plus/4 becoming a great selling platform. And they'll compete with ZX Spectrum.

2. I'll make sure Plus/4 is suitable for educational purposes as well, to brand it as the PET's successor.

3. Striking a deal with Motorola so Commodore can make their own Motorola 68k clones for Amiga, like they did with Intel chips for their PC compatibles.

4. Speaking of PC compatibles, I would make the Commodore PC compatibles have Tandy/PCjr sound and graphics (along with their own DeskMate competitor), so they can compete with Tandy, but also some nifty little features unique to Commodore PC compatibles, such as an ADPCM channel, a proper reset button and early support for 3.5 inch floppy disks.

5. Design a Commodore 64 card for Amiga, IBM PC, Plus/4 and Apple II, so they can run Commodore 64 software and games (be it from diskette, cartridge or even cassettes) thru it.

6. Design a better CP/M card with faster Z80 and better blitter graphics support and support for all CP/M OEM formats. Would be similar to C128 CP/M mode, but faster.

6. Design an actual successor to Commodore 64 in 1987 with no need for backwards compatibility (unless if the said C64 card was preinstalled), with specs similar to Commander X16, with some differences, such as Commodore's own version of Weitek's 65186 CPU, an ADPCM channel in addition to YM2151+YM3012, as well as enhanced SID with 15 voice, more waveforms (more variations of Mix, an NES-style 4-bit pseudo-triangle in addition to real triangle wave and pseudo-sawtooth in addition to actual sawtooth), better manufacturing methods and backwards compatibility to original SID.

7. Axe the C64GS, Amiga CDTV and CD32 and instead opt for original game console (or an arcade cabinet as a Neo Geo competitor) with unique specs such as Intel i890, 512KB RAM, 512KB VRAM with 4096 colours at once, a YM2610B+YM2151+ADPCM+Enhanced SID combo and support for CD format in addition to cartridges, as a Sega CD and Neo Geo CD competitor. Optional support for Roland MT-32 and SC-55, and maybe, just maybe LD-ROM with playback for PAL and NTSC discs.

8. Unrealistic, but manufacture some Commodore-branded CD players and VHS VCRs, and maybe even LaserDisc players.

Oh, I never would have made the Plus/4 or the Commodore 16. 

The Commodore 64 should have been the last 8-bit computer. 

The 68K and 808x were clearly the future. I knew it then, even as a kid. I'm still baffled that Tramiel thought 8 bit computers were going to be competitive once the Mac and Amiga arrived... I've seen the sales figures for that timeframe, and the 8-bit sales simply tanked in favor of the IBM PC (and clones) and the 68K machines from Apple and Commodore. The world didn't need a $100 POS computer. The world needed a $400-500 good computer. Apple understood. Commodore didn't. 

 

 

Edited by TomXP411
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TomXP411 said:

Oh, I never would have made the Plus/4 or the Commodore 16. 

The Commodore 64 should have been the last 8-bit computer. 

The 68K and 808x were clearly the future. I knew it then, even as a kid. I'm still baffled that Tramiel thought 8 bit computers were going to be competitive once the Mac and Amiga arrived... I've seen the sales figures for that timeframe, and the 8-bit sales simply tanked in favor of the IBM PC (and clones) and the 68K machines from Apple and Commodore. The world didn't need a $100 POS computer. The world needed a $400-500 good computer. Apple understood. Commodore didn't. 

 

 

Under my hypothetical decision, Plus/4 would have better graphic capabilities (aside from a larger colour palette) than C64, while being cheaper than the C64, so it would sell great in workplace and education markets.

The C64 is quite early to be the last 8-bit home computer, as it was released in 1982, while Plus/4 was released in 1984, fun fact: a year before NES arrived at the American video game market, or at least release Super Mario Bros. there. Sure technology does evolve rapidly, but consumers couldn't always keep up with the evolution, so that's why Commodore needed a perfect timing to finish their 16-bit successor to C64. To make sure Commodore wouldn't get cheap (as they did in C64GS and Amiga CDTV/CD32), that's why they released Amiga as a high-end computer for both workplace and home markets, while they need time to replace the C64 and Plus/4 in the mid-range and eventually low-end markets.

In addition, to make sure no expense really would be spared, that's why Commodore at the meantime (aside from making Amiga) make their own enhanced Tandy 1000-compatible variants of their PC compatibles, extending marketing life on Plus/4 and C64 until mid-1990s, making Commodore 64 cards for Amiga, Apple II and IBM PC, a better CP/M card for C64, Plus/4 and Amiga, and licenses JVC for VHS, Sony and Phillips for Compact Disc, Pioneer for LaserDisc (for both home and professional market) and ASCII for MSX, allowing them to create a 16-bit successor, based on 65186 CPU, to both C64 and Plus/4 and eventually an arcade machine/video game console with above specs.

Edited by xanthrou
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the 8 bit era, I'd have kiboshed any attempt (c16, plus4, c128) at diluting the market for, or generating pointless internal competition to the C64 line, instead focussing on miniaturisation / optimisation of the chipset to reduce costs to keep it a profitable super budget line. Creating a plugin addon for existing devices aimed at upgrading the video capabilities of the C64 architecture, without having to sell a whole new device to existing users or breaking backward software compatibility (think proto-VERA on a cartridge). Bundle this with new c64 devices, sell it as an addon to existing customers, and eventually integrate it onto a c64U (c64 upgraded) board to lower costs and make that the new default model (functionally identical to a C64 classic with expansion).

With 8 bit lifetime extended somewhat due to existing users buying our expansion module in droves, software developers feverishly working on upgraded versions of software leveraging the new capabilities, shift all internal development over to a true 16 / 32 bit successor built out of MOS derived IP, rather than rely on Motorolla. Acquire Hi Toro and merge them into Chip R&D. Aim for something much more akin to the A500 out of the gates, rather than as late, cut down A1000. Attempt to recreate the success of the C64, but getting the most powerful device into as many users hands as cheaply as possible, leveraging vertical production integration. 

Work with productivity software developers to get their tools onto the C2048 (or whatever we end up calling it). Offer the same device in multiple desktop form factors (to satisfy home users and corporates users, but maintaing 100% software compat).

Perhaps buy Atari before Jack 😛

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SlithyMatt said:

Exactly when did Apple "understand" this? They have never been in that price point.

That part is true. The IIC sold for $1200 new. Regardless, Apple worked on building better computers, rather than racing to the bottom. And where Commodore eventually failed, by trying to build cheaper computers and compete with video game consoles, Apple and PC makers succeeded by making computers faster and more powerful. I think it's obvious what the winning strategy was, in the end, since out of Apple, IBM, and Commodore, only one of those companies no longer exists...

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2021 at 1:36 PM, TomXP411 said:

That part is true. The IIC sold for $1200 new. Regardless, Apple worked on building better computers, rather than racing to the bottom. And where Commodore eventually failed, by trying to build cheaper computers and compete with video game consoles, Apple and PC makers succeeded by making computers faster and more powerful. I think it's obvious what the winning strategy was, in the end, since out of Apple, IBM, and Commodore, only one of those companies no longer exists...

To be fair, only one of those three exist as a computer maker, and for that company, making computers sometimes seems like it is more of a sideline to making smartphones.

Edit: Oops! "PC maker"

 

Edited by BruceMcF
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BruceMcF said:

To be fair, only one of those three exist as a computer maker, and for that company, making computers sometimes seems like it is more of a sideline to making smartphones.

Lenovo (who bought IBM's PC division) is still going strong - and is possibly the largest maker of PC clones today. IBM still makes computers, but entirely for the upscale market. 

 

Edited by TomXP411
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, TomXP411 said:

Lenovo (who bought IBM's PC division) is still going strong ...

IBM selling its PC division to get out of the PC business is exactly what I was referring to ...

20 hours ago, TomXP411 said:

...  IBM still makes computers, but entirely for the upscale market.

Yes, I was sloppy in saying computer maker when I should have said PC maker. Indeed, to the extent that Power System servers are the descendant of IBM mainframes and minicomputers, they were in that part of the computer business long before they entered the PC market, and with "cloud computing" there is no particular end in sight.

Edited by BruceMcF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, BruceMcF said:

Yes, I was sloppy in saying computer maker when I should have said PC maker.

Just a bit sloppy. It's a fun fact, when I try to think about this: most common people refer the word "computer" mostly to desktops or laptops - generaly to a "home computer". But the word "computer" actually has a much-much broader meaning. And right beside it we have a casual meaning for a word "computer", which appeared, well... casually. )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Cyber said:

Just a bit sloppy. It's a fun fact, when I try to think about this: most common people refer the word "computer" mostly to desktops or laptops - generaly to a "home computer". But the word "computer" actually has a much-much broader meaning. And right beside it we have a casual meaning for a word "computer", which appeared, well... casually. )

Reminds me of the movie Hidden Figures, about the computers who worked at NASA, before NASA brought in the tape-fed, refrigerator-sized contraptions that people today would identify as computers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2021 at 9:56 AM, xanthrou said:

1. I would sell Plus/4 series for as low price as possible, like how Jack wished that to be, but I'll axe the Commodore 16 computer, like what David Murray of The 8-Bit Guy said, was a huge obstacle of Plus/4 becoming a great selling platform. And they'll compete with ZX Spectrum.

2. I'll make sure Plus/4 is suitable for educational purposes as well, to brand it as the PET's successor.

3. Striking a deal with Motorola so Commodore can make their own Motorola 68k clones for Amiga, like they did with Intel chips for their PC compatibles.

4. Speaking of PC compatibles, I would make the Commodore PC compatibles have Tandy/PCjr sound and graphics (along with their own DeskMate competitor), so they can compete with Tandy, but also some nifty little features unique to Commodore PC compatibles, such as an ADPCM channel, a proper reset button and early support for 3.5 inch floppy disks.

5. Design a Commodore 64 card for Amiga, IBM PC, Plus/4 and Apple II, so they can run Commodore 64 software and games (be it from diskette, cartridge or even cassettes) thru it.

6. Design a better CP/M card with faster Z80 and better blitter graphics support and support for all CP/M OEM formats. Would be similar to C128 CP/M mode, but faster.

6. Design an actual successor to Commodore 64 in 1987 with no need for backwards compatibility (unless if the said C64 card was preinstalled), with specs similar to Commander X16, with some differences, such as Commodore's own version of Weitek's 65186 CPU, 512 colors at once with 256KB VRAM, 256KB main RAM, BASIC v10 to take full advantage of new graphics and sound commands, an ADPCM channel in addition to YM2151+YM3012 DAV, as well as enhanced SID with 15 voice with more waveforms (more variations of Mix, an NES-style 4-bit pseudo-triangle in addition to real triangle wave and pseudo-sawtooth in addition to actual sawtooth), stereo, superior ADSR, better manufacturing methods, 12 octave ranges and backwards compatibility to original SID. And three cartridge slots, in addition to 1581 disk drive and five expansion slots.

7. Axe the C64GS, Amiga CDTV and CD32 and instead opt for original game console (or an arcade cabinet as a Neo Geo competitor) with unique specs such as Intel i980, 512KB RAM, 512KB VRAM with 4096 colours at once, a YM2610B+YM2151+ADPCM+DAC+Enhanced SID combo and support for CD format in addition to cartridges, as a Sega CD and Neo Geo CD competitor. Optional support for Roland MT-32 and SC-55, and maybe, just maybe LD-ROM with playback for PAL and NTSC discs.

8. Unrealistic, but manufacture some Commodore-branded CD players and VHS VCRs, and maybe even LaserDisc players.

9. In Japan, why not Commodore to manufacture their own MSX computers?

How would Commodore manufacture their Neo-Geo competitor exactly?

 

And how would Commodore make their VHS VCRs, LaserDisc and CD players? (Especially LaserDiscs as they're niche format)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, OrionTEX said:

How would Commodore manufacture their Neo-Geo competitor exactly?

And how would Commodore make their VHS VCRs, LaserDisc and CD players? (Especially LaserDiscs as they're niche format)

This is a "what if" dream thread. Don't interfere with people's dreams. Just dream along if you fell the same. And don't do if you don't. )

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please review our Terms of Use