I cannot confirm any of the objectives or motivations I'm about to write about in any official capacity. These are just my own personal observations and speculations, based on information I've been gathering from different resources; most of which is what has been written on the pages of Commodore 8-bit magazines, from back in the day.
Back in the late eighties and early nineties, I did have a terrible suspicion that, for some reason, Commodore Corporation was not interested in publishing much software for their last and (in my opinion) best 8-bit personal computer, the C128. I had no idea why this might have been the case, for the C128 really was an excellent machine. I thought perhaps that this feeling I was having was simply because of where I lived and that the computer market there was just too small to offer a large selection in software.
By the time I did move to a larger city, Commodore was pretty much out of the computer business and all that was left to choose from was PC and Mac. Only after the Internet explosion of the early 2000s was I able to find Commodore software resources again, which then opened up a whole new world of C64 and C128 software to me. I was astonished as to how much was actually published for the C128. Why was it so hush-hush during the 80s and 90s, I wondered.
If I saw any sort of advertising from Commodore or major software publishers about what was actually available, I would have been able to do so much more with my 128 back then. I probably would have used it as my main PC even longer than I did. However, very little advertising was done for the 128, apart from the general ads you saw from Commodore in the magazines. There was certainly nothing about new software that Commodore was developing for it.
The software that I was now discovering wasn't typically published by major software companies, but rather magazine publishers or by individuals who published their work on public forums and BBSes of the day. Of course, there were a few exceptions.
Commodore really dropped the ball, from what I was seeing, and I wasn't the only one with this opinion. As I now read back issues of the more popular Commodore magazines today, I see many letters submitted by readers who felt the same way about the matter. But it wasn't just the readers who felt slighted by Commodore, but some of the magazine editors and writers felt the same way, regarding the lack-luster support from Commodore for their C128.
As I read more, it started to dawn on me that Commodore didn't drop the ball on the C128, but rather, they threw it away. As one magazine editor put it, the C128 was Commodore's "dark horse" and it was winning. I don't think Commodore expected this, nor wanted it. And I think it was all due to their "golden child", Amiga.
Both the C128 and Amiga were launched at pretty much the same time as each other. According to certain sources, in 1985, Commodore was floundering and was finding it difficult to stay out of the red. Their previous home computer offerings (namely the TED machines) were not selling - thanks to a marketing team who had no idea what they were doing, if you ask me. So Commodore pinned their hopes and dreams (as well as a major portion of their spending capital) on their would-be-savior, the Amiga.
Simultaneously, work was also finishing up on the computer that was to be the successor to Commodore's cash cow (namely the C64), the C128. Now, depending on who you talk to, the thought behind the C128 was nothing more than a vehicle to liquidate some of the older 8-bit components that were left over from the failed TED line. Some say that the C128 wasn't even something people were asking for. But, after reading a great deal of magazine articles from the time period, I say this was not the case. In fact, my opinion is that the C128 filled a gap in the market that many Commodore owners were constantly calling out for. I seems to me that, between the two computers, it was the Amiga that no one was asking for. And, if you look at the sales between 86 and 89, it wasn't the Amiga that was putting Commodore back into the black, but the C128 and C64C. Not only was it selling well in North America, but from what I've read, the C128D did phenomenally well in Europe. I can only imagine how much more better it could have done, both here and there, if Commodore actually put some real effort into supporting it and the community who embraced it.
Against all expectations, the C128 (along with the C64C) sold very well throughout the latter half of the 80s and continued to do relatively well in the early 90s, too, only to be prematurely discontinued in and around '89 (according to Wikipedia). The 128 turned out to be popular with C64 owners wanting to do more than just play games on their Commodore, and it did so with little help from Commodore, itself. Apart from the handful of peripherals the company produced (the 1571 and 1581 floppy disk drives, 80 column monitor and RAM expanders) most of the development and support came from third party providers and the growing community of C128 owners.
Why would Commodore want to stifle the 128 if it was such a popular computer? I think it was because of their desire to claw back as much of their investment into the Amiga as they could. Just look at how poorly the Amiga performed when compared to the lowly 128. How much money and resources were poured into the Amiga? How much was allocated to the C128? What where they really getting in return for those investments?
Look at the difference in the sticker price between the two systems, then compare to that what a typical household could do with either of the system. Where's the return on investment for the user? Who could really benefit from what the Amiga had to offer and who could really afford/justify the expense of it?
Now, full disclosure here, I never owned an Amiga nor have I ever used one for an extended amount of time. My only exposure to the Amiga has been via emulation, and mostly for just trying out some of the games that were released for the system. Even though my experience with the Amiga is limited, I still have to say, I couldn't see myself spending that kind of money for what the computer offered. Well, to be blunt, there's no way I HAD that kind of money to spend in the first place. There were much less expensive and comparable options on the market at the time. Unless you wanted to do video production work with Video Toaster or something like that, the Amiga could just not be justified by many consumers. For example, a 128 with dual 1571 disk drives, 512K REU and GEOS 128 would get you a pretty productive GUI office suite at the fraction of the cost of an Amiga.
I think Commodore wanted the C64 and C128 to die a quiet death and then fill the void with their over-priced "next generation" PC. But let's face it, the Amiga had no real practical place in either the home or office. With the company's inability to fill anything but a niche market with the Amiga and it's missed opportunity with the likes of the C128, C65 and LCD portable, Commodore soon went bankrupt. It's obvious to me now that Commodore backed the wrong horse. (It also didn't help them having a CEO like Irving Gould)
Today the "retro" computer community looks back on the C128 as the lame horse in this story. In actuality, I think it was the Amiga that was the horse which lost the race for Commodore. Yes, it was a ground breaking piece of technology, with many innovations, but it was too expensive for the "average" home computer user and over qualified for the general business office.
If you who are reading this was working for Commodore at the time and know differently about all I've said here, don't take anything what I've said personally. I'm only speculating as an outsider and purely from a consumer perspective, trying to piece together what information I can find after the fact, and as proud owner of a Commodore 128... the best 8-bit personal computer ever produced.
If you have your own thoughts on the subject you'd like to share with me, feel free to post a comment below.
Here are a few magazine clippings that back up my thoughts...
Back in the late eighties and early nineties, I did have a terrible suspicion that, for some reason, Commodore Corporation was not interested in publishing much software for their last and (in my opinion) best 8-bit personal computer, the C128. I had no idea why this might have been the case, for the C128 really was an excellent machine. I thought perhaps that this feeling I was having was simply because of where I lived and that the computer market there was just too small to offer a large selection in software.
By the time I did move to a larger city, Commodore was pretty much out of the computer business and all that was left to choose from was PC and Mac. Only after the Internet explosion of the early 2000s was I able to find Commodore software resources again, which then opened up a whole new world of C64 and C128 software to me. I was astonished as to how much was actually published for the C128. Why was it so hush-hush during the 80s and 90s, I wondered.
If I saw any sort of advertising from Commodore or major software publishers about what was actually available, I would have been able to do so much more with my 128 back then. I probably would have used it as my main PC even longer than I did. However, very little advertising was done for the 128, apart from the general ads you saw from Commodore in the magazines. There was certainly nothing about new software that Commodore was developing for it.
The software that I was now discovering wasn't typically published by major software companies, but rather magazine publishers or by individuals who published their work on public forums and BBSes of the day. Of course, there were a few exceptions.
Commodore really dropped the ball, from what I was seeing, and I wasn't the only one with this opinion. As I now read back issues of the more popular Commodore magazines today, I see many letters submitted by readers who felt the same way about the matter. But it wasn't just the readers who felt slighted by Commodore, but some of the magazine editors and writers felt the same way, regarding the lack-luster support from Commodore for their C128.
As I read more, it started to dawn on me that Commodore didn't drop the ball on the C128, but rather, they threw it away. As one magazine editor put it, the C128 was Commodore's "dark horse" and it was winning. I don't think Commodore expected this, nor wanted it. And I think it was all due to their "golden child", Amiga.
Both the C128 and Amiga were launched at pretty much the same time as each other. According to certain sources, in 1985, Commodore was floundering and was finding it difficult to stay out of the red. Their previous home computer offerings (namely the TED machines) were not selling - thanks to a marketing team who had no idea what they were doing, if you ask me. So Commodore pinned their hopes and dreams (as well as a major portion of their spending capital) on their would-be-savior, the Amiga.
Simultaneously, work was also finishing up on the computer that was to be the successor to Commodore's cash cow (namely the C64), the C128. Now, depending on who you talk to, the thought behind the C128 was nothing more than a vehicle to liquidate some of the older 8-bit components that were left over from the failed TED line. Some say that the C128 wasn't even something people were asking for. But, after reading a great deal of magazine articles from the time period, I say this was not the case. In fact, my opinion is that the C128 filled a gap in the market that many Commodore owners were constantly calling out for. I seems to me that, between the two computers, it was the Amiga that no one was asking for. And, if you look at the sales between 86 and 89, it wasn't the Amiga that was putting Commodore back into the black, but the C128 and C64C. Not only was it selling well in North America, but from what I've read, the C128D did phenomenally well in Europe. I can only imagine how much more better it could have done, both here and there, if Commodore actually put some real effort into supporting it and the community who embraced it.
Against all expectations, the C128 (along with the C64C) sold very well throughout the latter half of the 80s and continued to do relatively well in the early 90s, too, only to be prematurely discontinued in and around '89 (according to Wikipedia). The 128 turned out to be popular with C64 owners wanting to do more than just play games on their Commodore, and it did so with little help from Commodore, itself. Apart from the handful of peripherals the company produced (the 1571 and 1581 floppy disk drives, 80 column monitor and RAM expanders) most of the development and support came from third party providers and the growing community of C128 owners.
Why would Commodore want to stifle the 128 if it was such a popular computer? I think it was because of their desire to claw back as much of their investment into the Amiga as they could. Just look at how poorly the Amiga performed when compared to the lowly 128. How much money and resources were poured into the Amiga? How much was allocated to the C128? What where they really getting in return for those investments?
Look at the difference in the sticker price between the two systems, then compare to that what a typical household could do with either of the system. Where's the return on investment for the user? Who could really benefit from what the Amiga had to offer and who could really afford/justify the expense of it?
Now, full disclosure here, I never owned an Amiga nor have I ever used one for an extended amount of time. My only exposure to the Amiga has been via emulation, and mostly for just trying out some of the games that were released for the system. Even though my experience with the Amiga is limited, I still have to say, I couldn't see myself spending that kind of money for what the computer offered. Well, to be blunt, there's no way I HAD that kind of money to spend in the first place. There were much less expensive and comparable options on the market at the time. Unless you wanted to do video production work with Video Toaster or something like that, the Amiga could just not be justified by many consumers. For example, a 128 with dual 1571 disk drives, 512K REU and GEOS 128 would get you a pretty productive GUI office suite at the fraction of the cost of an Amiga.
I think Commodore wanted the C64 and C128 to die a quiet death and then fill the void with their over-priced "next generation" PC. But let's face it, the Amiga had no real practical place in either the home or office. With the company's inability to fill anything but a niche market with the Amiga and it's missed opportunity with the likes of the C128, C65 and LCD portable, Commodore soon went bankrupt. It's obvious to me now that Commodore backed the wrong horse. (It also didn't help them having a CEO like Irving Gould)
Today the "retro" computer community looks back on the C128 as the lame horse in this story. In actuality, I think it was the Amiga that was the horse which lost the race for Commodore. Yes, it was a ground breaking piece of technology, with many innovations, but it was too expensive for the "average" home computer user and over qualified for the general business office.
If you who are reading this was working for Commodore at the time and know differently about all I've said here, don't take anything what I've said personally. I'm only speculating as an outsider and purely from a consumer perspective, trying to piece together what information I can find after the fact, and as proud owner of a Commodore 128... the best 8-bit personal computer ever produced.
If you have your own thoughts on the subject you'd like to share with me, feel free to post a comment below.
Here are a few magazine clippings that back up my thoughts...
