Slashdot Mirror


Jack Tramiel, Founder of Commodore Business Machines, Dies At Age 83

LoTonah writes "Jack Tramiel, founder of Commodore Business Machines and later, the owner of Atari, died Easter Sunday. He was 83. He undoubtedly changed the computing landscape by bringing low cost computers to millions of people, and he started a price war that saw dozens of large companies leave the market. He also took a bankrupt Atari and managed to wring almost another decade out of it. The 6502 microprocessor would have withered on the vine if it weren't for Tramiel's support. Could anyone else have done all of that?"

46 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. Everyone ignores Commodore by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Looking at every article and documentary on the late 70's and 80's computing scene these days, you would think that the only computers that existed were Apples and PC's out of Silicon Valley, and that everyone out there had $2,000 to spend on a new computer back when that was the price of a decent used car. But the most popular computer in the 80's wasn't a Mac, or a PC. Commodore was by far the most popular computer line of that era. And they made computers than didn't require a second mortgage for working-class people to buy. And they were EVERYWHERE (not just in the yuppie homes).

    Not that you'll even find Commodore mentioned in The Pirates of Silicon Valley, or any other popular computing accounts about that time. You'd think everyone was going around back then just talking about IBM, Steve Jobs, and Bill Gates--when most people hadn't even *seen* a PC or Apple outside of a school or business.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Apple is the only company that matters. they invented the PC, they invented the smart phone and they invented the tablet. Literally no other company in the history of computing is anywhere near as important as Apple. Apple is all things to all people. Apple is Alpha and the Omega.

      Think different, think BETTER, think Apple.

    2. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >> Looking at every article and documentary on the late 70's and 80's computing scene these days, you would think that the only computers that existed were Apples and PC's

      The winners write the history. (More specifically, the marketing departments of the winners write the scripts, provide the footage and locate the retired experts to feed the articles and documentaries about how awesome they were decades ago.)

    3. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did you ever use a Commodore PET computer? It certainly wasn't anywhere near as sexy as an Apple or an Atari.

      The C-64 came far later. It's only interesting aspect was the low cost - the technology inside was 5 years out of date. Steve Jobs is off 'inventing' the Macintosh, while Tramiel is pushing a $200 computer in K-Mart. Which story makes the better movie?

      And if it's any condolence, the Radio Shack TRASH-80 also always gets the short shrift in these stories. They were at least as big as Apple for a while.

    4. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I bet Jack Tramel's death won't get the kind of coverage that Steve Jobs got. His 6502 CPU (plus variants) were used in Atari 2600/5200/7800 consoles, Atari computers, Apple I/II/IIgs computers, Nintendo ES and Super Nintendo consoles. His Commodore and Atari companies popularized music, video, and preemptive tasking when the Macs/PCs were going "beep" and had about 4 colors.

      And yet after today we'll probably never hear about him again. And yes the Commodore 64 was and still is the record-holder for most machines sold (peak years: 1983-86). The runner-ups:

      2. Amiga 500 (millions of C64 owners upgraded)
      3. Atari 800 (peak year: 1980-82)
      4. Tandy/Radio Shack TRS-80 (1977-1979)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    5. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by KlomDark · · Score: 4, Informative

      The C-64 was better than anything available at the time. Most amount of RAM (More than the Apple ][), color graphics (Mac was Black & White), the super-advanced SID synthesizer (Still used by a lot of musicians today) which gave it true sound back when the Apple and IBM offerings only offered pathetic beep noises.

      Sure, the 6502 (Really the 6510 in a C64) was a few years old then, but there was nothing else out there in the affordable range. The megahertz wars hadn't started. the IBM PC was faster with a 4 Mhz processor, but the PC was such a barebones POS at the time that nobody wanted it.

      It's what they did with the 5 year old 65xx line that was the groundbreaking part.

    6. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      All the American tech companies are guilty. Commodore made computers in West Chester, Pennsylvania and the Philippines and Ireland. Since those days almost all of the computers are made in The Peoples Republic of China. It's not Apple alone. The Apple haters are about as bad as the Apple fanboys about twisting facts.

    7. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by lord_mike · · Score: 2

      It's important to note that the Commodore 64 incorporated graphics support hardware (aka the first "graphics card") which helped make the computer much faster than it's CPU speed would indicate, especially for gaming.

    8. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Funny

      And the turtleneck sweater.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    9. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CaptainLugnuts · · Score: 3, Informative
      You Sir, must stop talking out of your ass.

      Most of the PCs back then had 'graphical support' hardware. Obviously I'm not talking about the D/A converter for analog video out. What do you think VIC in VIC-20 stood for? Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards. The Atari 8-bit PCs had the ANTIC with the CTIA & GTIA chips. Hell, even the 2600 had the Stella chip for dealing with player/missile graphics.

      Back in the day when I started out programming you had to rely on the hardware for functionality because there was no way the CPU could manage it.

      I hate the smell of noobs in the morning, It smells like ignorance.

    10. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Nyder · · Score: 2

      I think he was sarcastic; but I totally see your point. Besides everybody knows Apple just copied off some ancient Chinese guy who invented the abacus. They did however, dutifully bring the improved technology back to where it came from.

      Yep, them abacus had rounded corners and didn't work right if you held it wrong.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    11. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Dogtanian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Another issue that most of the accounts are written by Americans, and the Apple ][ ruled in the USA.

      Actually from what I understand, the Commodore 64 was- if anything- most successful in the USA, in part because it was sold so cheaply there (for what was actually a very good computer at the time) due to Tramiel wanting to win the home computer market. AFAIK the Apple II did well in educational and early business markets, but the C64 was *the* home computer in the US.

      But you're absolutely right- there's a problem with history being written by the victors, because it gives a misleading picture of the time. Sure, the IBM PC (and MS-DOS), predecessor to today's Wintel PCs, was big in the business market, but in its early days it wasn't a home machine. Who'd want to pay thousands of pounds for a machine with (at best) CGA graphics and *very* primitive sound when you could get a C64 for a fraction of the cost? Kids at home probably didn't give a **** about some horribly expensive green-screen machine that wasn't even that hot at games.

      I've heard that part of the problem with the C64- and the reason Tramiel was forced to leave C= - was that Tramiel was *so* aggressive with the price and driving competitors out of the market- that C= weren't actually making that much money on them (even though apparently they'd been exceptionally good at driving down the production cost, in part by becoming vertically integrated).

      I have to admit to having mixed feelings about Tramiel, as from what I've heard some of his business practices were very questionable, with- for example- some blaming him for contributing to the downfall of Synapse Software (well-known for developing many well-regarded early Atari 800 games) when he reneged on a supposedly binding agreement after taking over Atari's computer division. YMMV, there appears to be an interesting (archived) discussion here. (One comment; "Not paying suppliers, forcing them into bankruptcy, and them making them an offer to settle lawsuits for pennies on the dollar was a standard practice for him").

      At any rate, I think he at least deserves some credit for his successes- mainly with Commodore (and some level of respect for surviving Auschwitz) even if there were some aspects to him that were questionable.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    12. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by glassware · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also worth mentioning: Jack Tramiel was the only person who ever won a business deal over Bill Gates. When Jack Tramiel was looking for a BASIC for his computers - the Commodore PET specifically - he called in Bill Gates and wrung the worst deal out of him that anyone has ever produced. It's documented in the fantastic "Commodore" book by Brian Bagnall (http://www.amazon.com/Commodore-Company-Edge-Brian-Bagnall/dp/0973864966/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1334012789&sr=8-3).

      Every Commodore computer used Bill Gates' BASIC code and Bill got a pittance.

      Bill Gates has never since let anyone get the best of him. I suspect the experience of getting Tramieled directly led to his success in negotiating the rights to PC-DOS and winning the IBM PC contract.

      Here's to you, Jack. You gave Chuck Peddle the chance to be great, and you scared Bill Gates into building modern computers. That's a pretty damn good run.

    13. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by toejam13 · · Score: 2

      There are a number of reasons why Commodore is now a side note in history.

      First, Commodore really only had two major hits: the Commodore 64 and the Commodore Amiga 500. The Commodore VIC20 and Commodore Amiga 1200 sold well, but not to the degree needed to be remembered by the mainstream media. The rest of their product line-up, while sometimes revolutionary for the time, often had even less commercial success. In short, Commodore was either hot or not with their end-user products.

      The second issue was fragmentation. While Apple had a somewhat smooth transition from the Apple II through the II+, IIc, IIe and IIgs, Commodore's 8-bit era was a frenzied smorgasbord of products: the PET series, SuperPET, VIC20, MAX Machine, C64, CBM-II, C16/Plus4 and C128. Little to no unifying naming scheme, cross-platform binary compatibility, or cross-platform source code compatibility. Commodore got better with the Amiga and Tramiel got better with the Atari ST, but in the history books, the damage to Commodore's early days was done.

      The third issue is that discrete component supplies often get little notoriety. Commodore's MOS Technologies subsidiary may have been revolutionary at the time, but was too early in the game to get the sort of notoriety that Intel, AMD, 3Dfx, IBM, SiS, Nvidia and ATI received in the modern desktop world. Branding played a part, too. It was a number of years before they renamed the subsidiary to Commodore Semiconductor Group and even longer until they stopped stamping MOS on their chips. It may have been necessary to keep companies such as Apple, Atari, Sinclair Research and the like happy since it was a more neutral name, but it fragmented the Commodore brand.

      The fourth issue is that the Commodore name essentially died when they went bankrupt. Atari is still an active game publisher, even after purchase from Infogrames. So is Sega Corporation. Apple, IBM and Nintendo are still active hardware manufacturers. The Compaq name has only recently been phased out by HP. History is written by the winners and people tend to have short memories.

      The last issue is very open to debate, but part of it may be because of embarrassment. Amiga users were zealots. People joked about the fanboi culture that existed within the Amiga community. "I can format a floppy disk while playing Marble Madness!". Even today, when I point out that I used to own Amigas in my younger days, it will occasionally be met with a chuckle by whoever I'm talking to. In short, nobody wants to talk about you when they think you're a joke.

    14. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by xero314 · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that MOS was able to under cut the price of every other vendor at the time because, MOS and only MOS had a process to correct flaws in their masks after producing them and before replication. This process allowed MOS to achieve a 70% production rate compared to the 30% that was industry standard. Thus allowing MOS to sell the 6502 was soat $25 each compared to the competitors of Zilog and Motorola that where selling at nearly $200 each for comparable products. This and this alone was the key factor in success of the MOS IC lines.

      That's not to say that the 65xx line isn't better than it's competitors, as in many ways it is, but that was not the key to success.

    15. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by eulernet · · Score: 2

      No, the GP is right.

      I programmed a few games on the C64 and on the PC before 1987 (in assembler).
      The C64 hardware was a lot better than the IBM PC's one.
      For example, there were hardware scrolling and sprites, and you could even trump the video card in removing the borders and surpassing the limits of the hardware (check a few demos without border).
      It was very dedicated towards console games.

      In comparison, the IBM's video card was the same as the Amstrad CPC's one. It barely allowed scrolling (I'm not even sure it was able to scroll pixel by pixel), and when you wanted to display something, you had to draw the objects pixel by pixel, and video memory was slower to access too !
      I remember I wrote a medical curve displayer in assembler on the very first PCs and CGA was terrible.
      When VGA appeared, it was a lot easier to write games, but the video memory was still slower than the rest of the memory, and scrolling was impossible.
      Then VESA cards appeared, but it was in the 90s.

      Of course, a few years after, the first 3D cards appeared, but the C64 was already dead at that time.

    16. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by qubezz · · Score: 4, Informative

      The yield of a process, which seems to be the percentages you are quoting, isn't directly related to the ability to rework hand-drawn rubylith masks. In fact, the 6502 worked with the very first tape-out (virtually unheard of).

      Jack Tramiel was a typical narcissistic domineering businessman, who had a typewriter and then calculator business that bought it's way into computers with the acquisition of MOS, mainly to ensure their calculator chip supply. The amazing success of the 6502 and the Commodore computers can be attributed to the brilliance of a very small group of genius engineers at MOS, led by Chuck Peddle. There will not likely be a time again where we will know the developers of a CPU by name, a CPU that sold hundreds of millions and who's architecture is still in use.

      If the bottom line of the 6502 was affected by mask design, it is that they had the finest designers at MOS. The quote below is from the book ("On the Edge: the Spectacular Rise and Fall of Commodore"

      Pavinen and Holt handed off the completed mask to the MOS technicians, who began fabricating the first run of chips. Bil Herd summarizes the situation. “No chip worked the first time,” he states emphatically. “No chip. It took seven or nine revs [revisions], or if someone was real good they would get it in five or six.” ...

      Implausibly, the engineers detected no errors in Mensch’s layout. “He built seven different chips without ever having an error,” says Peddle with disbelief in his voice. “Almost all done by hand. When I tell people that, they don’t believe me, but it’s true. This guy is a unique person. He is the best layout guy in world.”

      If you have hours to watch it, here's an informal interview with Chuck Peddle from a year and a half ago, where he goes into depth about the design of the 6502 and the Commodore computers, working Jack and Microsoft, and all sorts of topics, in the kind of interview you never thought you would see from the central figure in all of CBM:

      Part 1: http://blip.tv/file/4055830
      Part 2: http://blip.tv/file/4084084
      Part 3: http://blip.tv/file/4084124

    17. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by hawk · · Score: 2

      the coco was *not* "basically" a soured up trash80.

      he two had nothing in common other than slapping the name on them,being sold by RS, and using MicrosoftBASIC 2.0 (and even then,the were significant differences between the 6800 versions and the 8080 versions [err' I think the coco used version 2])

      The trs80 was a z80 8 bit system with 16 bit addrssing; the coco used a 6809, a bizzare partial 16 bit extension of the 6800 with 19.5 bit addressing (seriously, it addressed 768k of 8 bit words).

      The trs80 and the coco had about as much in common as the Apple ][ and the Mac . . .

      hawk

    18. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by mvdwege · · Score: 2

      It is generally considered a good idea to not talk about things you don't know anything about.

      For your information, the problem with the 1541's speed was not the fact that it used a serial interface. The problem was that on both sides of the link the processor was doing the bit-banging, instead of the dedicated hardware interfaces that were available on both the drive and the computer.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    19. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by KingMotley · · Score: 2

      The Apple 2 was released in 78, Atari 800 in 79, C64 in 82.

      The Apple 2 could have been upgraded to be everything the C64 had, but it wasn't standard.

      The Atari 800 could do everything (graphics, sound, drives, connectivity, processor) the C-64 could, but better and 3 years earlier.

    20. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by QQBoss · · Score: 2

      When I worked with Motorola, I worked to try to get more of our products into Commodore. Specifically trying to get them interested in using the 56000 DSP in place of something they wound up using an AT&T DSP for. I kept being told that it wasn't worth the time, that Commodore management was infamous for stabbing you in the back if it meant they could save a penny even on low volume products. The regional sales manager listed 3 different products off the top of his head from the last time he dealt with them years before that made him never willing to deal with Commodore again. I wasn't successful, but Haynie gave me the Fat Agnus I needed to upgrade my A2000 (engineering version, with tape holding the lid on), so it was all good ;-).

    21. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Hamsterdan · · Score: 2

      "Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards"

      No. I owned one of those machines.

      The Video was on the motherboard itself. Some applications could use an add-on 80-column card, but the *main* card was on the board itself. I still have the 80-column card, and its cable that hooked up on the motherboard.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_80-Column_Text_Card

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    22. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by bipbop · · Score: 2

      Heh. Ignorant mods, today.

    23. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by mwvdlee · · Score: 2

      Before Apple, the guy was named Saac Newton.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    24. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by clickclickdrone · · Score: 2

      As others have noted, modern history seems to completely bypass several machines which were immensely popular and influential. When I first got into computers, it was TRS80/Atari 800/Apple II/Pet etc yet only Apple gets remmebered.

      Those who get dewy eyed about their B&W soundless ZX80/81s would be surprised to find say the Atari 800 came out in 78/79 and offered colour, high res (at the time), sprites, hardware scrolling, display interrupts and most of the hardware features the Amiga built on later). The C64 was approx the equivelent of the Atari 800 but came out nearly 4 years later and only improved upon it in a few areas and in many ways was inferior.

      I used to like text adventures and back then, the TRS80 got pretty much all the new ones first, witness Scott Adams et al.

      For me, by the time the 64, Amiga, Atari ST etc came along, all th exciting and interesting stuff had happened. The only thing the ST did for me was offer a proper C compiler so I could write Unix/C code for work at home and at least check it compiled OK before bringing it in and properly building it.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    25. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by pegr · · Score: 2

      Yup, that was David Small's "Magic Sac". You had to find your own Mac ROMs, though.

      How about PC-Ditto, a daughter card with a NEC V20 processor on it so your ST could be a PC as well.

      Yes, my Atari 1040ST was a Mac and a PC. And the Atarti ST wasn't too shabby either.

    26. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Dogtanian · · Score: 2

      It wasn't until 1982 that the extra cost of a Z80 could be justified for home use.

      The 1980 Sinclair ZX80 used a Z80 (though apparently most ones produced used an equivalent part manufactured by NEC).

      That was the first machine under £100 in the UK, and one whose design used every cost-saving, corner-cutting trick in the book to keep its cost down (e.g. the display generation was primarily done in software, which meant that the screen went blank when the CPU was busy with other things).

      Certainly not a place for expensive frivolities. :-)

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    27. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Crass+Spektakel · · Score: 2

      The C-64 was NOT better than anything. It was more economic than its competitors but not exactly bleeding edge.

      Only two months after the C64 the Sinclair QL was released: For the same price you got 128k, an 68008/7Mhz, 512x200 graphics and two tape drives.

      About power, the old Ataris and Apples were all a bit better, faster, more nifty. But they did cost a fortune in comparison to the C-64.

      Honestly I didn't see much improvements in the first C-64 against my first PET2001/CBM3032. The C-64 had a slower CPU, a slower floppy, was less expandable and not much cheaper. Hell, the C-64 CPU was only half as fast as an Atari-800 and 50% slower than an VIC-20.

      But you could get a complete System with floppy and printer for 1000 Euros in 1984. Noone could beat THAT.

      --
      "Life is short and in most cases it ends with death." Sir Sinclair
  2. interview from 1989 by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  3. My First Computer by preaction · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The computer that started my love, and now my career, was an Atari ST. I would spend hours watching demos, playing (probably pirated) video games, and experimenting with voice synthesizers, drawing, and music programs.

    TOS ERROR #35 in heaven, Jack.

    1. Re:My First Computer by mccalli · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They were great. With an SM124 mono monitor in hand, he ST was my first serious computer (coming off the back of a Spectrum and another Tramiel machine, the C64).

      I learned C with the cheap GST C compiler. I did serious text crunching with Signum (superb output). I learned to do MIDI sequencing with Steinberg Pro 12. I used Spectre for Mac emulation and had a hardware 286 emulator fitte on which I ran Turbo Pascal. And then, of course, were the games.

      Excellent machine. Tramiel's great hit, the C64, was also responsible for getting me into music in the first place. People like Rob Hubbard and Martin Galway got me hooked, and I still use C64 sounds today via plugins like QuadraSID.

      Jack Tramiel's influence is severely understated by many (he schooled both Gates with the Commodore BASIC contract for instace) and I am sad to hear of him going.

      Ian

    2. Re:My First Computer by marsu_k · · Score: 2

      Tramiel's great hit, the C64, was also responsible for getting me into music in the first place. People like Rob Hubbard and Martin Galway got me hooked, and I still use C64 sounds today via plugins like QuadraSID.

      ++ for this. There were two factors that got me interested in electronic music, Rob Hubbard and Depeche Mode. Of the two, I'd have to say Hubbard was a greater influence (and I'm a huge DM fan).

  4. impressive adaptation by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One thing that's particularly interesting about Jack Tramiel is that, unlike some of the other 70s tech entrepreneurs (Woz, say), he was really from a previous generation, not natively a computer guy. But, he managed to anticipate and succeed over several technological transitions. He immigrated to the U.S. after surviving a concentration camp during WW2, and started a reasonably successful typewriter company in the 50s. That successfully transitioned to mechanical calculators in the early 60s after the typewriter market started getting too competitive and low-margin, and then once transistors started becoming affordable, he digified that line and put out a line of digital calculators in the late 60s. In fact Commodore in effect put out the first Texas Instruments calculator, using commodity circuits sourced from TI, which TI only later realized they could assemble under their own label, resulting in the now-famous TI calculator line.

    Then, finally, he anticipated the home-computing trend, with Commodore releasing its first design in 1977, the same year as the Apple II.

    It's not very difficult to imagine an alternate history where Commodore was a typewriter company that had a brief adding-machine phase before completely missing the digital-computing wave and going bankrupt by 1980.

  5. Being a supplier to Atari or Commodore sucked.... by rimcrazy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can tell you unequivocally that being a supplier to both companies sucked big time. They never paid you. It got so bad that we (when I was a supplier to them) basically made any business with them COD because if you didn't you would never get your money. You may all love Jack but I couldn't stand doing business with them. Major PITA.

    --
    "TV, a medium as it is neither rare nor well done." Ernie Kovacs
  6. The Volkswagen of computing by hessian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Rest in peace, Jack Tramiel, famed for "The Jack Attack."

    The Commodore 64 truly was The People's Computer, like the Volkswagen "bug" was The People's Car.

    At a time when an Apple //e cost $2500 for monitor, CPU, extra RAM (necessary), and two disk drives, you could walk out of the store with a full Commodore system for $350 and hook it up to an old TV.

    This is why C64 culture was so vital: people took risks with their computers instead of treating them like business machines or expensive curiosities. Back in the BBS days, the Commodore boards were where it was at. Total anarchy zones. If the feds or feebs swooped in to confiscate them, one paycheck later they were up and operating again.

    I hope Jack gets the recognition he deserves in the great beyond. With any luck, he's just finished sliding a whoopee cushion onto Steve Jobs' easy chair and is watching from behind a corner with a devilish grin.

  7. Re:Being a supplier to Atari or Commodore sucked.. by default+luser · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, this book details Jack purposefully not paying suppliers, nice to hear it repeated from someone first-hand. According to the book they made a point of not paying suppliers, especially if they were interested in acquiring the company. When the company was cash-strapped and desperate, Commodore would buy them out.

    It made more money on the short-term, but was bad for the long-run because it burned bridges in the industry. This made it hard for Jack to get now-wary suppliers and dealers to help him grow his business when he saw an opportunity for a new market/device.

    --

    Man is the animal that laughs.
    And occasionally whores for Karma.

  8. Re:Why is he associated with the 6502? by default+luser · · Score: 2

    He's not. That's Chuck Peddle's baby.

    He did allow Chuck to design the Commodore PET, but this was only after Chuck witnessed the Apple prototype and finally convinced Jack that the calculator market was dead.

    Jack was a smart businessman who could run a tight ship, but he was a poor prognosticator of the tech industry. Most of his products he pushed were derivatives made more efficiently, and he (and Commodore management once the company grew) had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the next big new thing.

    Hell, the legendary Commodore 64 chipset was only as amazing as it was because Jack wanted a game console. Never mind the fact that the console market was saturated, at the VIC-20 was the same price - Jack wanted to be the best console maker, and that was that. And when the console market caved he was left with a game chipset, and he still had to be convinced by an internal team of the best engineers at Commodore to turn it into a product.

    --

    Man is the animal that laughs.
    And occasionally whores for Karma.

  9. Re:6502 by KPexEA · · Score: 2

    Commodore bought MOS technology in 1976 when they were on the verge of bankruptcy, Apple would not have had a source for chips if they had gone under.

  10. Re:Guru Meditation by Osgeld · · Score: 2

    Jack was at Atari by the time that happened

  11. ..But it ended up at WDC with Bill Mensch by rimcrazy · · Score: 2

    The 6502 has had a very sorted past and changed hands many time. It ended up with Bill Mensch and the Western Design Center (http://www.westerndesigncenter.com/wdc/WDC_Founder.cfm) I worked with Bill when I was at VLSI Technology as we were fabricating the 65C816 for the Apple IICS. Let's just say it was "interesting" and leave it at that. Bill had his own idea what fabrication design rules "should be". Actually checking the design rules of the foundry you wanted to fabricate your parts at was a detail that was beneath him. Made for lots of "fun"........

    --
    "TV, a medium as it is neither rare nor well done." Ernie Kovacs
  12. As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by perpenso · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's important to note that the Commodore 64 incorporated graphics support hardware (aka the first "graphics card") which helped make the computer much faster than it's CPU speed would indicate, especially for gaming.

    You Sir, must stop talking out of your ass.

    Actually, he is correct. The C-64 did have "graphics support hardware" beyond offering a bitmap that programmer could directly manipulate. The GP is only mistaken in that he characterized the hardware as being like a "graphics card". The specialized C64 graphics hardware supported 8 sprites. It was a very handy thing.

    You could also consider the reprogrammable character set as such graphics hardware that sped up games. Various VIC-20 and C-64 games used this technique to good effect.

    Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards.

    Huh? *If* such cards existed they were certainly so rare that hardly anyone had them, a real niche thing. Are you thinking of the 80 column card? It added 64K RAM too but I don't recall this card enhancing graphics. My recollection as a former Apple II, //e, and C-64 programmer is that on the Apple II you had bitmapped graphics and that on the C-64 you also had bitmapped graphics, but it was better, plus specialized hardware support for sprites. The Apple was primitive in comparison.

    I hate the smell of noobs in the morning, It smells like ignorance.

    You might want to check that attitude if you yourself aren't remembering things quite correctly either.

  13. Re:Wring another decade? by LoTonah · · Score: 2

    Thank you. :)

    I never know what to think or say when I think about the last decade of Atari. Warner had no idea how to run a tech company, and there were too many projects going nowhere. They took a look at a few months-worth of profits and decided that they could spend money like that forever. Suddenly the videogame market, then the home computer market tanked.

    So Jack comes in, and has a lot of hard decisions to make. Cut here, slash there. Discontinue products. Write off factories and warehouses full of product that isn't moving. Kind of like how Steve Jobs came back to Apple and had to gut things fast.

    He knew that selling the Atari 8 bits wasn't going to work for long--PC compatibles and Macintoshes were starting to make inroads into homes and smaller businesses. Game machines were dead. He knew what Amiga had cooking, and when Commodore got ahold of that he knew he needed a counter-product. So, like the IBM PC, Atari used off-the-shelf components and built something quick and dirty.

    A lot of people took him to task for not advertising. There was advertising, just not in expensive publications. Very little in Byte, for instance. There was a big campaign at first, but then it seemed like nothing. Atari turned inward, producing magazines like Atari Explorer instead. Besides, who is to say that spending $5 million dollars a month on advertising actually is effective? BTW, I heard that it cost $1 million to do a full page colour ad in Byte. So how much for Newsweek, Time, etc., and how effective is it?

    I think Atari did a lot with the little money they had. I doubt Tramiel got any richer from his time there. He came into Atari with $40 million personal worth--how much did he leave with?

  14. Rest in peace, Mr. Tramiel by ChipMonk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have a story to tell about Mr. Tramiel. He touched my life in such an obvious way, with such a hackable C64, and I got the chance to thank him in person for his vision.

    I used to work in Silicon Valley. When I first went there, I had visions of rubbing elbows with personal computing luminaries like Jobs, Wozniak, Tramiel, and Bushnell. Let me tell you, working in a startup is not the way to make this happen. Of course, Nolan Bushnell doesn't live in Silicon Valley, and Steve Jobs was busy running Apple, so they got scratched off my list. I did get to meet Steve Wozniak, simply because I was in the right place at the right time. But Jack Tramiel was... well, someone I wanted to meet badly enough to track down myself.

    I had heard he still lived near Silicon Valley, but it was only by sheer luck that I came across a way to contact him (which I won't share here). It was my last week to work before moving back east, and I worked up the courage to initiate contact with him. Immediately, I found out he was someone who valued what privacy he could get, so I had to explain why I wanted to meet him in person. He graciously agreed to meet me for Thursday lunch. That gave me two days to think about what I wanted to say to him, and to ask him.

    Not that it mattered. I got there a little bit before he did, got shown to his customary booth, and started tripping over my own tongue as soon as he showed up. Any photos you've seen of him reflect exactly how he looked: somewhat rotund, mostly bald, clearly Jewish, and very contented with life. The ease with which he greeted me showed I wasn't the first 37-year-old Commodore fanboi he'd ever met.

    We ordered our meals, and began to chat. I tried to present myself as respectfully as I could, but... really, this was Jack Tramiel, and I was having lunch with him! He explained right away that he had just come from the gym, he always ate there after his workout, and that's how the restaurant host knew where to seat me. He worked out three times a week, as a way to stay somewhat active, but he had a good life, he knew it, and it showed.

    We talked about how he had learned what American business was about, and how he had learned about America. When I told him I was from Ohio, he piped up immediately with, "Ah, my favorite city is Toledo, Ohio. Even though I've never been there." I knew he was a Holocaust survivor, but I didn't know that an American from Toledo, Ohio was the first Allied soldier to greet him when the Ahlem labor camp was liberated. This soldier taught him to speak basic English, talking about Toledo, Ohio enough that it essentially became young Jacek's understanding of what city life in the USA was like.

    We talked about Commodore Business Machines, and how the design evolved from the early PET, through the VIC-20, C-64, and C-128. He had wanted economical designs from the beginning of his involvement with computers, and his products reflected that. He bore no ill will towards IBM, Apple, or any of the other competitors. It was all business; life is too short for animosity on any level. As the fortunes of CBM varied through time, that philosophy made it easier for him to stand aside and let history take its course. (I've heard that from a few other Holocaust survivors as well.)

    We also talked a little politics. I asked him what he thought about the conservative/liberal polemic, and his response was simple: The government governs a nation, but it's a nation of people. When a government prefers the nation over her citizens, they suffer as he suffered. He asserted that no form of government was completely immune to this hazard, but some are less suceptible to it.

    I had a website that the time, and said something about what an incredible brag I would have for it. He demurred a little, and asked that I refrain from speaking publicly about having lunch with him, at least while he was alive. So I did.

    The hour and a half I spent

  15. I heart my Jackintosh! by beaverdownunder · · Score: 2

    My family couldn't afford a Mac, but could manage a 'Jackintosh' -- a 520ST with a single-sided floppy drive and a monochrome monitor. Sure, it wasn't as fancy as a Mac, but neither is a Toyota Corolla as fancy as a Ferrari. It had a mouse-driven GUI, didn't need a bunch of disks just to get to the desktop, could play some pretty cool games -- even in monochrome mode (Bolo anyone?) -- could use a standard printer, and the floppies were PC-compatible!

    In terms of business, gaming and design and music, the ST was a really cheap way to touch on all of these when no other contemporary computer could, at an even-remotely similar price-point. Amiga for business? Yeah, right. Macintosh for home gaming? Not that inspiring, Dark Castle notwithstanding. PC for design? Bleah. Never mind MIDI. You can't really argue with the ST's flexibility -- and it was remarkably easy to sell the idea of buying one to parents who already felt burned when they discovered too late that using that 8-bit computer you talked them into had an extremely steep learning curve when it came to business and productivity applications.

    The ST's only real failing was it wasn't marketed particularly well. Had Jack been willing to lift prices to cover advertising costs I expect that it would have done much better, but he seems to have always had a bit of a personal philosophy on that matter that in retrospect was perhaps a little naive.

    Regardless, were it not for the ST I probably wouldn't have had a 16-bit computer until several years later. Thanks Jack.

  16. If he hadn't pushed the "compatible" Plus/4 by smchris · · Score: 2

    I'd have known a lot less about computers -- since the built-in decompiler came in handy when "compatibility" with C64 programs meant you had to recode because they moved the video addresses, among other things. I guess sometimes the best master is the one who throws you down a well and makes you find your own way out.

  17. Re:Speedscript was incredible! by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 2

    It's in the only "big boy" word processor that matters: emacs.

    transpose-chars is an interactive compiled Lisp function in
    `simple.el'.

    It is bound to C-t.

    (transpose-chars ARG)

    Interchange characters around point, moving forward one character.
    With prefix arg ARG, effect is to take character before point
    and drag it forward past ARG other characters (backward if ARG negative).
    If no argument and at end of line, the previous two chars are exchanged.