Since your correspondent is getting email notifications about comments on one particular post, let’s debunk the author’s reply to one of those as well.

I’m sorry to hear that you seem to have been brainwashed by the cult of the Commodore 64, founded by Commodore founder Jack Tramiel and his penny pinching ways! How would you know who does and doesn’t care about it? You’d have to trace everyone who’s ever owned a Commodore 64 to find that out.

And yet the author feels he can write on behalf of large swathes of C64 owners based purely on his own, skewed opinions and minimal experience; most C64 users were able to find word processors on cassette despite the author failing to do the same, took up programming using BASIC V2 and in some cases moving on to assembly language (again, something the author wasn’t capable of) and generally enjoyed their experience with the C64.

Don’t forget, Commodore supplied this so called “computer” with a 5 year out of date version of BASIC, just so they could increase their profits by less than $3, or perhaps a maximum of $10 per Commodore 64 sold.

This is, of course, utter guesswork on the part of the author and he has absolutely no idea how much adding a 16K ROM rather than 8K for BASIC and retooling the C64’s design for it would have cost per unit or the technical implications of such a change.

This can be summed up in the classic expression “Spoiling the ship for a ha’p’worth of tar”, as my Mum used to say. BTW, I think I’ll mention this to some dictionary editors and get them to list the Commodore 64 as a prime example of this!

And yet this  supposedly “spoilt ship” has appeared in the Guinness Book of World Records for most units sold by an 8-bit computer and the C64 has dedicated fans all over the world, many of who learnt to program with it despite the author’s failure to do so. To quote another, far more common expression “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

This entry was posted in Commentary, Debunking and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.