Talk:Commodore International

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of High priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:

Contents

[edit] CBM mgmt part needs NPOV'ing

The recent addition needs NPOVing -- it seems to be hostile to Commodore management. If it isn't cleaned-up then it has to be removed. --mav

it does need toning down a little. please let's keep the "dead hot bird" usenet joke! it gives colour & context and it made me laugh like a drain :-) -- Tarquin
I tried to clean up the stuff about management because it was still annoying me. I mean, I was an Amiga fan during Commodore's demise and I followed the antics of Mehdi Ali and Irving Gould as closely as was possible at the time. Was it selfish intent that drove them, or total lack of knowledge about the computer market? More likely it was a combination of both, regardless of what my emotions at the time wanted to believe. Anyway, I hope this puts us in the right direction. -- Dave Farquhar 23:54, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Sectioning; Mgmt coverage

I quite like the new sectionizing, I think the article is really starting to read quite nicely now. As to the management stuff, I've always found the owner's anger misplaced -- the market would have pushed Commodore aside no matter how good the tech was, even a perfectly run Commodore would still be gone today. Apple can barely hold on and they were once one of the largest computer companies in the world, DEC, Compaq, Atari, they're all gone. --Maury Markowitz

Re: new sectioning: Thanks! :-)  Re: the management stuff: I think the present article's treatment of these issues is quite OK, considering that CBM arguably could have been a contender for a little longer at least, if the management had known their market, and the extent of CBM's multimedia head start, properly (as for myself, sorry to say, I never took much interest in anything else than CBM's 8-bit machines, entering the "dark gray cloud" of IBM PC clones after my C128 days... :-/ ). --Wernher 20:36, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)

[edit] CBM UK holding out a bit longer?

Did't Commodore UK survive even after C= Int had gone down? // Liftarn

Yes it did, and it even placed a bid to buy out the rest of the operation, or at least the former parent company, but I don't know how long it survived or any other details. --Dave Farquhar 19:31, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I remember that they used to make computer speakers and simmilar things. I don't know what happened with them. Anyway, since it's confirmed I'll add it into the article. // Liftarn
I did some digging. The results are in the article. Thanks for bringing that up; somehow I'd forgotten about the Commodore UK part of the story. -- Dave Farquhar 17:17, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] New Ownership of Commodore

Just stumbled upon this: http://pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,119093,00.asp Someone take a look and add the new info. I'm too tired :( --Borisborf 09:31, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Another source: http://www.commodoreworld.com/site/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=4&tabid=702&bix=4&bid=5&itemIDS=18&ModID=2 --Borisborf 09:34, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Already in the article! --Alexwcovington 9:46, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that. The article had changed since I last read it and I didn't see that it was added.--Borisborf 21:59, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Since Yeahronimo Media Ventures changed its name, the Commodore brand is property of Commodore International Corporation (OTC:CDRL); see http://www.commodoreworld.com --KBoek 13:34, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Does that have anything to do with Commodore Gaming? They seem to use the same logo. -HuBmaN!!!! 15:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PET was not a KIM

This is the first time I've ever seen the claim that the PET was a repackaged KIM-1. I own a KIM-1, and I've seen the guts of a Commodore PET with the original "chiclet" keyboard, and aside from both using a 6502 processor there is no similarity. The PET had the power supply on the motherboard, as well as keyboard hardware, and of course a video section - and not trace of the hex display, keypad and 20 mA TTY interface that the KIM had. I will be bold. --Wtshymanski 22:15, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "engineers going behind mgmt's backs"

"A massive divide existed between the engineers and the management, with the technical staff resorting to getting their work done behind the backs of management. For example, CPU samples from Motorola were delivered to the home addresses of the engineers and, for interest, Motorola gave them priority over Apple, who also used the same CPUs."

I'd like to take that out, until someone can find a source?

[edit] "scathing commercials" and last two paragraphs

Two small suggestions:

1) Using the word "scathing" to describe the commercials in "Amiga Vs. Atari" seems like unecessary hyperbole, unless it can be substantiated with some proof.

2) The last two paragraphs seem temporally out of place as all the events up to that point are chronologically listed and then suddenly we jump back to 2001-- I found it slightly confusing. Perhaps a new section title can be added to separate those two paragraphs.

Otherwise, well done.

[edit] Amiga, Inc.

I just created an article called "Amiga Corporation". It deals with the history of the company that created the Lorraine, later to be called the Amiga, computer. To put together the article, I got information first from the Jay Miner article then from Commodore International. There is no information about Amiga, Inc. in the Atari article. But the information that I did find is somewhat contradictory. I meshed it as best as I can, but I suggest that the contradictions be decided in the Amiga, Inc. article and then be distributed back to the other two articles. Val42 00:43, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Logos

Do we really need both Image:Commodore Logo(197x).png and Image:Commodore Logo(1985).png? It looks like all that was changed is the typeface of the word "Commodore"; the classic "C=" logo design remained the same. I have replaced these images with Image:CBM Logo.svg, which is a scalable vector version of the logo. If anyone has an objection to this, please discuss it either here or on my Talk page, and we'll see what can be worked out. Crotalus horridus (TALK ● CONTRIBS) 03:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Amiga/bankruptcy

Hi,

I modified the bit about bankruptcy today. I don't accept that the PC had the market cornered by the late 1980s; Amiga was doing a roaring trade in the late 80s. I added some more details about Commodore's missteps and made it all chronological. - Richardcavell 08:02, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I think part of the problem is looking at it in terms of raw number of sales, and not taking into account different markets. In the '80s, the PC had dominated the business market, and since this was by far the biggest use for computers, this meant it had by far the largest number of computer sales as a whole. But this ignores that the Amiga's primary market was the home market. It's a bit misleading to say that the PC had dominated, when this wasn't entirely in the same market. Similarly, I think including the Apple Macintosh is even more misleading - firstly this had not dominated in any sense of the word, and secondly this was mostly entirely different markets (e.g., Desktop publishing). It was the PC that the Amiga mainly finally lost market share to in the home market.
Just a small point regarding your edits - do you have a source that the CD32 was a "spectacular commercial failure"? I've heard this claimed by some, but never backed up with actual sales figures, meanwhile I've heard others say it was selling well, and sales only stopped short when Commodore went bust.
Lastly, a thought I had about this article is that it focuses rather too much on the Amiga as if it were the sole contributor to Commodore's bankruptcy, but I've never seen any evidence that this is actually true, and it doesn't appear to be provided by this article. I've heard other common claims that it was more to do with poor sales from their PCs, which they had invested a lot of money in. Unless this is backup up with solid evidence, I think this needs to be rewritten or possibly removed - material about the Amiga specifically is better suited to the Amiga article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mdwh (talk • contribs) .
One story I heard regarding C='s bankruptcy was that it was screwed over/plundered by the people in charge, and that had it been based in the US rather than the Bahamas (IIRC), such action would not have been permitted. Don't take this as fact until you can verify it, though.
Also, bear in mind that the Amiga was a bigger success in Europe than it was in America; I would consider *these* to be different markets, as opposed to different sectors of the market. Anyway, the assertion that the Amiga was to blame may reflect a U.S.-centric point-of-view. Not saying that this is definitely the reason, but it's worth considering who wrote it. Fourohfour 18:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commodore Business Machines redirect?

This appears to be the proper article for discussing all aspects of Commodore's business. Perhaps a redirect from Commodore Business Machines to Commodore International is in order? I'm new at contributing, so I have no idea how to do this, or how to speed up the suggestion process. Pyrogen 09:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] generally poor writing

I'll try to give this article a bit of a going-over to improve it a bit. Landroo 20:58, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tramiel quits; The Amiga vs ST battle

I removed this awkward and inappropriate sentence: "This was intended to in effect, bar Jack from releasing his new computer."

It was promptly put back in.

While I appreciate the author's intent to attribute motives to Commodore management for that action, it's unwise to do so, especially in an encyclopedia, which is supposed to be factual and unbiased. Landroo 05:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Its factual, this was also covered in the book cited in the external links: "On the Edge: The Spectacular Rise and Fall of Commodore". Pg 423, paragraph 4: "In a suit filed July 10th in Chester County Court, Commodore charged that Shiraz and three other former employees had stolen information on new products Commodore was developing. A Washington Post article soon appeared with the headline, 'Commodore Says Four Stole Trade Secrets'. Commodore obtained a preliminary injunction against releasing the new Atari computer." --Marty Goldberg 06:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please give this list a look-thru as well

http://www.zimmers.net/commie/docs/cbm-products.txt -andy 80.129.113.55 00:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Amazing how Apple survived, isn't it?

When they were both working, Apple and Commodore seemed to be on the same track, computer companies on the drift of bankrupcy. Commodore went, but Apple is still here today.. Isn't it amazing? What do you think helped Apple survive Bankrupcy? :) User:RaviC

making polished, high-quality products, something commodore never quite managed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.110.223 (talk) 20:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Apple's leadership. Job's is a force of nature. Alatari (talk) 15:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commodore Resurrected

Commodore is back with high-end gaming rigs, they released them at CeBit 2007. tech digest

Yeah, I'm surprised that this information has not been included in the article. Commodore has launched its new website and are planning to release high-end gaming computers, much like what Alienware are doing. Here's a dailytech article on that. - Anas Talk? 18:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
This Commodore has not practical relation with the "real" and "original" Commodore. It only shares the name. Jcea 18:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Which isn't really an issue, since they are the legal holder of the name (and some of the properties) and therefore part of the legacy that is documented here. Its no different than Tramiel's Tramel Technologies Ltd. buying the Atari name and some of the properties and renaming it Atari Corp., or Infogrames buying the Atari name and some of the properties and renaming its U.S. division (formerly GT Interactive) into Atari Inc. --Marty Goldberg 20:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
What exactly do they own? Name and logo? Perhaps better than to refer to "Commodore Gaming" as "Commodore" would be to write a section in the discussion of post-bankruptcy follow-ons discussing the them as yet another purchaser of a limited set of rights, and list exactly what connection they have to CBM per se. If they're notable enough, create a separate page (assuming they're "Commodore Gaming" and not "Commodore", in which case we may want Commodore (Gaming) with disambiguation of some sort. (Once they merit a separate page.) --- jesup 22:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the immediately-preceding comments on what to do. — Val42 (talk) 23:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tulip have re-acquired Commodore International.

http://www.commodorecorp.com/corporate/news+center/news+articles/articles/CIC+confirms+Tulips+offer+on+its+remaining+shares.aspx

[edit] No mention of the Super Pet

I see no mention of the Super Pet.

This was a Pet with the processor (6801?) removed and a daughterboard in its place with a Motorola 6809 and 64K more RAM on it. It came with WatCom compilers for Assembly, Basic, Pascal, Fortran, Cobol, and APL! It was developed partially before the release of the 6809 with Waterloo getting the NDA spec for the processor from Commodore without Motorola knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.43.16 (talk) 22:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)