FAQ: Read first! Your question is probably answered here... "Why didn't you put machine X, Y and Z?" Because if I decided to put the Amiga 3000 and 4000, then I'd also need to put some Compaq Deskpro, a few more Tandy, and so on, and it would have been 150 and not 80 machines in total, and 1.5 hours long instead of 40 minutes which is already borderline (and it would have been even longer if there wasn't a real effort to speak quickly). "This is not the only available resolution" Yes. Same reason: if I was to put (and I tried) every possible resolutions, it would have been illegible as a result. So the answer is to indicate the most commonly used res, and not max res or every possible res. "This is not the right color palette" No. The "color" value is not about palette but on-screen colors. "Then why not add color palette?" Same reasons as above. In general the aim was to display only the most concise information. I tried different versions, and it doesn't look good when there's a lot of text. Thanks for watching and for your constructive comments! This video will get better with each iteration, that's the goal :)
I’d be curious to see something of the Mindset and Sirius/Victor machines. These were attempts to go beyond the IBM PC standard with extra capabilities, but it seems the market just wanted “compatible”, and nothing more, so they flopped.
It was actually a pretty good over view, but it should have started in 1975 instead of 1977, and thus included the Altair 8800 and the IMSAI (which was as later featured in the movie War Games). Basically the whole CP/M era of computing got ignored by this video (e.g., no mention of the Osborne or Kaypro?). By ignoring the Altair 8800, that is also implicitly ignoring how Bill Gates and Paul Allen founded what would become Microsoft by landing a deal to supply MS BASIC for the Altair. That is so hugely important to computing history from then on that talking about the Altair, well then that little tidbit could have been noted adjacently.
I totally love this video. Not only do you cover all the computers I remember, and the few I owned, but so many I never heard of not only internationally but domestically as well. I love the graphics, computer illustrations with specifications, as well as the ads that went along with them. This goes a long way in my computer history education.
The BUS speed as different from the CPU internal speed. The ZX81 may have had a Z80 but the machine didn't run at that speed. Brilliant nostalgia trip. Thanks.
The presentation was just the icing on the cake. It was a blast to watch it through, very interesting and nicely done. There was way more machines I never heard of.
Some days I wish I was a young girl in the those days hanging around computer stores, trading floppies and being amazing at the newest releases. Those were the golden age of personal computing, and while I'm thankful to live in a time where I can study all of these machines and emulate them, I wouldn't mind being able to experience it in some way.
Are you kidding me? :) This channel is almost exclusively about the "real thing", each and every video is telling you that emulators are OK but there's no substitute for actual vintage
What I like about the now, is that you can pick your options with the information and tools from now. Which makes me do different choices than our parents back in the day. A C64 for example is not a machine I would go after, as it has pretty abysmal basic and keyboard, and horrible video output, so you are having hard times using the real machine. I do have one as it is a magnet for parents on our school tours though. Back then the C64 was the best ticket to cheap game copying on a twin cassette deck, but today you get a PC Engine Mini and the gaming is covered with much more detail, nicer sound and all the colours. No I like machines for aesthetics of the original hardware, good to use BASIC, low maintanance to keep the hardware running (and its storage!), and good mods and expansion, preferably as non-destructive expansion cards inside the machine, so you can for example run a BBS server on it. Some nice machines in 2024 are the Spectrum+, the Amstrad CPC 464, the Philips P2000T, the Epson HX-20, Atari ST, Mac SE/30.
When I was first learning my PC hardware skills I built an 8086, 8080, 286 and 386 from spare parts a teacher gave me and a teach-yourself computers book. It was a tour of legends over the summer between junior and senior years in high school.
The Spectrum + was a normal spectrum stuck on an upgraded keyboard. They sold the keyboard as a it so you could DIY. I did, and also soldered on a joystick port. Those were the days.
Great job and impressive visualization of the computer timeline of that era. There is a small clarification about the BK-0010 - this is a real 16-bit home computer on a 16-bit K1801VM1 processor (PDP-11 compatible). The number of devices sold according to official data (all BK models - 0010, 0010-01, 0011, 0011M, etc.) is about 160 thousand; BK was produced from 1984 to 1993. Among the interesting and unusual Soviet PCs, one can also mention Electronica MS0511 (UKNC) - this is the most popular model of Soviet PCs, it was usually used as a school computer, it had two 16-bit K1801VM2 processors with frequencies of 8 MHz and 6.25 MHz (their speed in total is approximately 4 times higher than that of the BK-0010/0011M processor), 640x288 graphics with 16 colors (for each line of the screen the resolution was setting (80, 160, 320 or 640 pixels), palette and address in RAM (that is, smooth vertical scrolling was supported and stepped horizontal), RAM 192 KB (of which video memory is up to 96 KB), ROM 32 KB, single-voice sound (hardware and software), cost in the minimum configuration from 1000 to 1600 rubles (about 2 times more expensive than BK-0010 and almost identical to BK-0011M), was mass-produced from approximately November 1987 to 1993, more than 300 thousand units were produced. Another relatively widespread home PC in the USSR, close in distribution to the BK-0010 family, is the Vector-06C. It is on a regular 8-bit processor KR580VM80A (analogous to Intel 8080A) with a frequency of 3 MHz, RAM 64 KB (of which video memory is from 8 to 32 KB), ROM 0.5-2 KB (bootloader only, without BASIC), it has an excellent graphics and good sound - resolution 512x256 (2 or 4 colors) and 256x256 (2, 4, 8 or 16 colors), 256 color palette, hardware 3-voice sound, hardware vertical scrolling, video memory of 4 bitplanes, hardware overlay possible foreground to background, multiple frame buffers. Supported CP/M. Vector-06C produced from the end of 1987 to 1993. Cost 750 rubles (slightly more expensive than BK-0010-01). The exact sales volume is unknown, an approximate estimate is 100-120 thousand.
Many thanks for your very informative precisions! I didn't know about the UKNC and the Vector but they could be part of the future update in this Timeline. Very decent sales figures, they seem quite popular indeed. Need to investigate :)
18:58 That _Flight Simulator_ screen on the Tandy is apt, because that standard for demonstrating “IBM compatibility” was the ability to run that app. That’s why I think the proper term should have been “Microsoft compatibility”.
But the secret sauce was BIOS compatibility and hardware compatibility to the IBM PC - otherwise would have just an also-ran Microsoft compatible Tandy 2000. IOW, being Microsoft compatible, at that point in time, was not sufficient for being successful in the marketplace.
1. Vid says it starts with "first computers with widespread sales". But the IMSAI (1975) sold 20,000 units and the Altair (1975) sold 40,000 units, compared to the 65,000 of the Apple III which was included in the vid. No, what marks the three famous 1977 computers as being "first" was they were the first *pre-assembled* computers. IMSAI and Altair were just kits that the buyer had to solder together, though dealers would sometimes assemble them for customers, and eventually Altair itself did start selling pre-assembled units (but not very many). IMSAI, of course, is also notable for having been featured in the film War Games. 2. The term "ISA" was not appropriate for 1987. That term is a marketing term invented by the "gang of nine" EISA group, to distinguish their new slot from others. The term appropriate for 1987 was "AT bus compatible".
excellente video ! que de beaux souvenirs. Comme c'est agreable d'avoir toujours sur mon bureau un Amiga 1000, a cote d'un Apple //e et Apple ][europlus ! (entre autres) :)
Comme on se comprend :) Merci. Je suis en train de préparer la même chose version consoles. Il faudra que je vous confie mon Apple //e car il paraît que ses condensateurs sont 100% obligés de sauter dans un avenir proche
Awesome! So many memories! Machines I had, or friends parents had, or that I lusted after because of a leap in graphics (Apple IIGS Bard’s Tale demo!)… lol. You should do one on the advent of online gaming. That was the next big surge. Late 90s into the late 2000s was another great time to be alive and on computers for gaming between the technology and faster online access. It seemed like I was beta testing a new online game or MMORPG every few weeks when not obsessing on the current best of the best!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and glad you enjoyed! Need to see Bard's Tale on the IIGS, you've triggered my interest ;) The next one in the isometric series is about consoles, work in progress...
@@RetroDream maybe I’m old but using actual machines, it engages your senses, the touch of the disks, the noises, the flashing lights, even the smell of the disk when you open the case all add up to an experience. I feel the same for cassette, cd (especially caddie ones), record players. Something so analogue about it somehow. I remember when I dad got one back in the day, I was amazed by the 100mb compared to 1.4m floppies I’d been using until then.
That's it, you're right: nothing replaces actually sensing these good old things (as opposed to just remembering them). It's like a time machine come true!
In The Netherlands there was the Philips P200t personal computer in 1981. Maybe not famous in The States but here in The Netherlands an nice and sturdy computer.
You have the TRS-80 with 128x48, which uses 3x2 custom characters to achieve that. The Commodore PET also had 2x2 custom characters which allowed it to achieve 80x50 resolution.
23:30 No, the Mac Plus did not have a faster processor; it was exactly the same processor as the previous Mac models. 23:44 The case design was exactly the same as before, just the ports were slightly different. The keyboard now had a built-in numeric keypad and arrow keys. Remember, Steve Jobs had already -been kicked out of- left Apple by this time, so he couldn’t stop these features going in.
Nice video. I think this version already contains some bug fixes from the last time, doesn't it? I think the TRS-80 is now fixed and not confused with the later color computer. Maybe worth mentioning would be the SHARP MZ series of computers starting already in the 70's with the MZ-80K and going through MZ-80B, MZ-700, MZ-800 and X1 (since you then have the X68000).
28:54 Actually, the base unit came with no graphics card at all. The Apple “TFB” (“Toby Frame Buffer”) card came with base VRAM for only 16 greylevels/colours, upgradeable to 256 greylevels/colours (greylevels on a monochrome monitor, colours on colour monitor, naturally). Another thing the Mac II could was run multiple monitors (via multiple graphics cards) at once, and move/size windows across them.
30:21 How powerful was the ARM chip? This was the first time I saw a 3D rendition of a flag waving ... in _real time_ . No other PC-class machine could do that.
The PC1512 has a max Resolution of 640x200 (CGA) in 16 Colors (rarely used) and the PC1640 had a maximum of 720x348 (Hercules Monitor) or 640x350 (EGA Monitor)
@@RetroDream I had a 1640 and it mostly did 720x348 because it came with a monochrome Monitor. There is no different res on hercules possible... And with an EGA Monitor one would use 640x350 if possible (Windows, GUI Applications)
I noticed an error for the Amiga 1200. It ran with a Motorola 680EC20 at 14 MHz, not 7 MHz. I would have expected to see the first home computer sold with an Intel 80386.
Then I should also include the Compaq Deskpro, the various Kaypro, the many other Tandy and so on. I've thought about these but that would make 150 not 80 models. You have to make choices...
The Commodore PET/CBM 4000 couldn't do 640x200. It was limited to 40x25 characters on screen with 8x8 pixel characters, giving 320x200 but it wasn't a bitmap mode and the characters could not be modified. Using characters in the ROM with a 2x2 grid, a "bitmap" of 80x50 was achievable.
IDK if somebody already mentioned this, but you completely skipped the Atari 1200XL. Considering that it only lasted 3 or 4 months, that's not surprising, but it at least paved the way for the 600XL and 800XL. It was killed by incompatibility with 400/800 software which became a warning to Atari which ensured that the later XL and XE machines remained mostly compatible. This was also a detriment to innovation as many advanced versions of the 8-bit line never saw the light of day.
I just noticed you said the Apple II had a relatively affordable price. At 2 1/2 times the price of the TRS-80 and PET, it was not relatively affordable. Also, you said it was, "the first widely popular microcomputer", which is easily falsifiable by looking at sales figures for the Apple II and the TRS-80 which vastly outsold the Apple II cumulatively by 40 to 1 in 1977, to 2 to 1 in 1982, and finally 1 to 1 after the Apple IIe came out in 1983. Interestingly, in the TRS-80 description, you admit it's sales set a record, contrary to what you said about the Apple II's popularity. As you said correctly, the Commodore PET was far behind both of them. The only benefits the PET had over the Apple II and TRS-80 was the screen and tape drive were included giving the consumer the best bang for the buck, and that it had a Microsoft BASIC from the start. In every other way the PET was inferior.
You're certainly right. I tried my best with a very limited number of words per machine which excluded the possibility for nuances and subtleties. It's definitely not a perfect script yet but hopefully it will take a more refined shape with each iteration. By relatively affordable I meant as compared to the Apple III and Lisa for instance.
You have the Acorn BBC Micro with 8 colors and the Acorn Electron with 16 colors. They have the same palette of 16 colors but half of them are the same color but flashing, so there are really only 8 colors on both systems. Also, you have the Acorn BBC Micro with a resolution of 640x256 but the Acorn Electron at 160x256 but the Electron could also do 640x256 the same as the BBC Micro.
You have the Amstrad CPC 464 with a resolution of 160x200 and 16 colours but it could do up to 640x200 resolution, although in only 2 colours. You have the Acorn BBC Micro with a resolution of 640x256 and 8 colours, even though it can only do 2 colours in 640x256 mode. This is inconsistent. I think the best solution for consistency would be to show the highest resolution (regardless of colours) and the highest simultaneous colours (regardless of resolution).
Since the pronunciation of the letter z has now been changed from zeee, to zed, how does one pronounce words that start with this letter such as zebra, zap, zulu and others ?
Unless I misheard, I'm certain I heard "zed X 81", "zed X Spectrum" and so on equipped with "zee 80 processors". When in Rome, pronounce like the Romans do.
The pronunciation of a letter is completely different to how its used in words. I was thought that when I was five of six. Whats wrong with people today.
That was the nominal speed. As I recall, 1 in 4 memory cycles were stolen by the video/audio refresh circuitry (no VRAM). So you have to deduct 25% off the effective CPU speed for that.
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 It's normal for stats to show the physical speed, not the nominal speed. Almost every system loses clock cycles to other circuitry.
I noticed you are rounding off the MHz but the IBM PC was 4.77 MHz so it should round to 4.8 MHz, which you did for the IBM PC XT. Also, the Tandy Color Computer is 0.895 MHz so should round to 0.9 MHz. The rounding is inconsistent.
Without equivalent? what about the Atari 8-bit (that came out 3 years earlier)? It had a 4 voice sound chip, 256 colors (16? Bwahahahaaha), a serial port that allowed peripherals to be daisy chained together so extra cards were not needed (the Atari serial port was the father of today's USB port (some of the people who designed the Atari port also worked on the design of the USB port). They were the first home computer with a separate graphics co-processor that gave it capacities like sprites, had multiple graphics modes (somewhere around 12) and text modes (somewhere around 6) that could be mixed together to make custom screens. It's used a 6502C micro processor clocked at 1.79 mhz (1.0 mhz for the C64 - bwahahahaha). They had superior visuals and audio compared to other systems - the maker of the video left out (except for the Atari 8-bit). The making of this video LOVES C64 so I guess bad mouthing other systems, even LYING about them (see Atari 8-bit) is laughable.
the QL keyboard is good i still run one , its downfall was its delays and a move to more office style PCs but it is still going today with a great fan base mine has an expansion which seemed to be secret for many years as you could booster it by up to 512k at the time and i believe further i believe its super basic is still used today in various systems , its a good machine IF you get its hardware sorted out
Jay Miner's 8bit machines (Atari 400/800) were the most impressive especially if you consider their date of release (1979). They were the first home machines with. -256 colors and a Display list interrupt allowing more than 60 colors on screen -Custom chips, one for Soundand two for Graphics(one of which was a CPU(ANTIC) itself with its own instructions) - Sound chip with PCM capabilities , High Pass filter in two out of four channels -Hardware scrolling , scaling and sprites - Auto boot mode across all mediums (Disk, Cassette, Cartridge). No need for cryptic commands. -USB like peripheral Port (SIO - high speed out of the box). Joe Decuir later participated in the development of the USB port. - Screen Saver -Svideo output
@@RetroDream Every machine brought something new and innovative on the table so I don't know how many hours your video would end up if you had to mention every single one! The truth is that Jay Miner's work on this 8bit architecture did set standards for the whole industry of multimedia machines to adopt and improve upon them. Great video btw. I never realized how long the list of the 80s machines really was!
