Japan took the IBM's PC standard instead of NEC's PC-88/98 and what ever Fujitsu and Sharp were doing as NEC, Fujitsu and Sharp also took IBM's PC standard, same with ASCII so no MSX.
What changes?
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Japan took the IBM's PC standard instead of NEC's PC-88/98 and what ever Fujitsu and Sharp were doing as NEC, Fujitsu and Sharp also took IBM's PC standard, same with ASCII so no MSX.
What changes?
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Couldn't possibly happen because the home computer market inevitably needed low cost models. Unless IBM didn't refuse to sell low cost computers, they couldn't get rid of the semigraphic computers and MSX.
Atari and Commodore had that market, they just use those computers just like the west.
Who knows? Unlike Americans, the Japanese love small electronics, and the ultra low budget platform was very lacking in Japan. The Spectrum was cheaper than the NES and good enough for shmup games, JRPG, visual novels, and any kind of game the Japanese loved, it would be popular among kids and adults alike. . Most Spectrum games have better framerate than PC-88 and MSX games thanks to the low resolution and simple color attributes.
meant for
Tape games never took off in Japan.
Even the high end PC-88 had many of them though. The format would be more popular for the Spectrum, because it's the budget gaming computer. Sony, Matsushita, and Mutsumi would also develop compatible floppy drives for it, but I think cassette tapes would remain as the most popular format due to its low price.
MSX and X1 as well.
Obscure Japanese PC/PCjr clones and a lot of Japanese DOS software
Touhou 1-5 no longer need emulator.
That's it.
If they're coded in 32-Bit.
Sinclair enters and subsequently dominates the Japanese market
He failed in the North American market, same will happen in Japan.
Speccy was already well respected in Japan. Many Speccy games were localised in Japan such as Monty on the Run for the Famicom Disk System. It was also rumored that Gunpei Yokoi was highly influenced by Sir Clive when he started developing his ‘Lateral Thinking with Withered Technology’ philosophy. So I think Sinclair would’ve done well in the Japanese market. They probably would’ve been able to further develop the ROM cartridge and disk peripherals for the Speccy as Japanese consumers were already used to more expensive and sophisticated tech.
Speccy was never released in Japan at retail.
And that precludes it being respected in Japan how exactly?
There was the Spectrum 16K model that could run software from cartridges. Or alternatively the user could insert a RAM cartridge, turning it into a Spectrum 48K.
not his fault americans are so allergic to computers safe for the apple II
Speccy failed at everywhere other than UK. Stop with historical revisionism nonsense.
Another "Oi mate speccy" post. Yokoi actually built good systems. Where as Speccy was known as shit everywhere.
>Speccy was shit no matter what
I agree with the original 16k and 48k versions being described as such, but the + and 128k models?
16/48K speccy was the most powerful computer you could buy for the money.
>the + and 128k models?
It's an amazing QoL improvement, with sound chips and an actual keyboard, but the larger games took over 10 minutes to load without a speedloader. But that's understandable those games are bigger than 48K games.
When you compare it to C64 it is.
>It was really successful in France, Spain, Portugal, India, South America, and Eastern Europe, although the last two mostly had illegal clones.
Do you have sales figures to back it up? Just because it was released doesn't mean it was successful. It only sold well in UK and Communist countries.
>Such as the virtual boy.
Yeah also such as Game Boy. Compare that to Clive's career.
>There wouldn't be high demand for it if it was actually shit.
Commies were poor. British I have no idea. False advertisement?
>Do you have sales figures to back it up?
2 million in spain, 800K in portugal, captured 80% of india's home computer market share, a few millions in south america, around 3.5 million in ex soviet countries, 800K in poland, 600K in the US even though it wasn't deemed as very successful.
https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5377
>Game Boy
It wasn't a particularly good hardware but nintendo lucked out, tetris and pokemon carried the sales. Gameboy without pokemon would end up like the wonderswan, it died sooner than the Lynx and GG did no matter how cheap it was and how many quality games by squeenix and bamco were pumped into it.
>Compare that to Clive's career.
All his computer products were quite successful before the decline of British electronics.
>Commies were poor.
ZX Spectrum wasn't the cheapest computer back in the day. There were cheaper ones, but its capability and performance obliterated those below and within its price range.
>False advertisement?
it wouldn't get over 20 million software throughout its lifetime and a very lively modern homebrew scene if that was the case.
>2 million in spain, 800K in portugal, captured 80% of india's home computer market share, a few millions in south america, around 3.5 million in ex soviet countries, 800K in poland, 600K in the US even though it wasn't deemed as very successful.
>https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5377
From that thread's first page:
>I am also highly in doubt about the numbers you came up with. For example, I am not sure about this but I don't believe Spectrums were actually manufactured in Spain, yet you just threw out this figure of 2 million for the country alone ... and a lot of the various numbers you list seem optimistic to me rather than pessimistic.
There are other comments like that. Sources seem really unreliable. I would guess France's numbers would have been be more reliable than a lot of countries yet it's nowhere to be found.
>It wasn't a particularly good hardware but nintendo lucked out, tetris and pokemon carried the sales. Gameboy without pokemon would end up like the wonderswan, it died sooner than the Lynx and GG did no matter how cheap it was and how many quality games by squeenix and bamco were pumped into it.
Game Boy is one of the best consoles ever built. It's my favorite handheld. You can find reliable sales numbers about it everywhere. Wonderswan failed because of Game Boy and Game Boy Advance. GG had a terrible design. Lynx died because people didn't want to trust Tramiel.
>I don't believe Spectrums were actually manufactured in Spain
They were, by this company
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investr%C3%B3nica
>Sources seem really unreliable
Maybe not, but there were indeed 50 or more ZX Spectrum clones being made all around the world. There's no reason to say that it's not a successful platform.
>Game Boy is one of the best consoles ever built. It's my favorite handheld.
Quite a subjective opinion isn't it? I think the original STN screen was its biggest flaw, it's such an awful screen even though most GB games were scrolling heavy. There's a ton of ghosting and playing it in a low light condition could damage your eyes.
>You can find reliable sales numbers about it everywhere.
Because all gameboy units were produced by nintendo while the spectrum had so many clones and unlicensed copies.
>Wonderswan failed because of Game Boy and Game Boy Advance.
Well duh. As I said, gameboy lucked out by carrying nintendo's brand recognition and game studios alone.
>GG had a terrible design
GG and the Lynx were designed to be like boomboxes. It's not a terrible design, they were great for being played indoors next to a power socket or in a car ride at night.
>Didn't his company go bankrupt and bought by Amstrad in 1985 before decline of British electronics? There was also a terrible electronic car thing (Sinclair C5) that seems to be a massive failure.
Yes, that could be blamed on his non computer products. His company was bleeding money from R&Ding random electronics that failed at the market or even failed to reach the market. The ZX81 and Spectrum sold millions.
>I think there is a bare minimum specs that a computer should had.
RAM matters the most. ZX81 and VIC-20 were quite useless for anything aside from educational purposes due to the small capacity. Spectrum had a decent amount of RAM and a pretty good graphical capability. Faster bitmap than the Apple II and BBC Micro.
>Quite a subjective opinion isn't it? I think the original STN screen was its biggest flaw, it's such an awful screen even though most GB games were scrolling heavy. There's a ton of ghosting and playing it in a low light condition could damage your eyes.
I have a lot of nostalgia for the screen, I love it's look emulated with shaders. While I loved it's look, I also remember how much I hated it. Playing it in low light condition causes massive headaches. There is no optimal light situation for Game Boy. You could catch a good angle but even sun changing positions was an issue. Given you have to play it indoors there isn't a good solution either. Lambs also didn't work very good.
However, I don't think Nintendo lucked out. They did a great job creating games for handhelds. Game Boy games are very easy to pick up and play. Other devs didn't seem to understand they are creating games specifically for handhelds.
Sega designed the games for Game Gear yet many of them are unplayable because of screen size.
Even later on they didn't seem to learn it, many PSP games play like garbage PS2 ports. There's only handful of PSP games that feel a good fit for a handheld.
It was an interesting conversation. Thank you. I will look more into Speccy.
>GG and the Lynx were designed to be like boomboxes. It's not a terrible design, they were great for being played indoors next to a power socket or in a car ride at night.
Why bother at that point? Their screens were also quite bad and cause eye strain. I'm guessing a lot of people would mainly play them at evening so they would already be tired.
Lynx and Game Gear also used STN screens, they were blurry and ghost-y as well, but at least you didn't have to worry about lighting. Yeah they will strain your eyes but it's not bad as LED backlight, fluorescent light is easier to the eyes. Those early 2000s color cellphones will strain your eyes faster, and the gameboy. Of the 3, I think Lynx had the best screen. The modest framerate and small resolution worked better for STN screen. The 3D effect looks smoother on that screen too.
>They did a great job creating games for handhelds.
Yes, the gameboy lucked out simply by being a nintendo console. That gives them high budget games by default. The game gear had nothing much to offer but master system ports, and Atari could only secure license for ports of their arcade titles and some shovelwares.
It has the non-CMOS version of Z80 and no sprite hardware. I would say it's not as powerful, except for 3D games. Drawing individual frames on bitmap is faster than filling up the whole screen with tiles.
>All his computer products were quite successful before the decline of British electronics.
Didn't his company go bankrupt and bought by Amstrad in 1985 before decline of British electronics? There was also a terrible electronic car thing (Sinclair C5) that seems to be a massive failure.
>ZX Spectrum wasn't the cheapest computer back in the day. There were cheaper ones, but its capability and performance obliterated those below and within its price range.
It's one of the cheapest ones. Sure you could always build even cheaper products. I think there is a bare minimum specs that a computer should had.
>Speccy failed at everywhere other than UK
It was really successful in France, Spain, Portugal, India, South America, and Eastern Europe, although the last two mostly had illegal clones.
>Yokoi actually built good systems.
Such as the virtual boy.
>Speccy was known as shit everywhere
There wouldn't be high demand for it if it was actually shit.
NEC eventually started selling bog standard IBM PC compatibles, and even before that they could run bog standard windows software, so this would barely even matter.
But this is if the PC-8000/88/98 standard never happen.
The X1 was really expensive for what it is. The Spectrum was 1/6 the price and had much better gaming performance.
>Japan took the IBM's PC standard instead of NEC's PC-88/98
Impossible. The whole reason they didn't adopt it was because IBM's video options were totally unsuited to Japanese text. They basically switched to the American PC as soon as it could properly support Japanese.
CGA still supported 640x200, Japanese IBMs likely will have more VRam and a larger address/data bus for it's 6845 (likely a NEC clone thats 50 to 64 pins rather then 40) for their alphabet.
The fact that they didn't adopt the IBM standard back in 1981 is part of why Japan's bubble busted and why South Korea and Taiwan replaced Japan when it comes to tech.
mac takes over
Didn't the Mac have like a 30% market share in Japan at one time because it was the only Western computer that knew what to do with Kanji?
Conversely, I wonder if the Fujitsu FM8, FM7, and Sharp X1 could display characters could natively in their own text modes (ie graphics display does not count here) display non-Japanese, and non-hangul characters; not just Latin script characters, but also Hellenic, Cryllic, and Southeast Asian Brahmic Scripts? or did most of that require external support fro tape or loading from a Diskette?
what a fricking autistic thread. this the same queer that makes the "guys what if saturn/dreamcast did x so they wouldnt have failed" threads. holy shit. what a no pussy getting loser.
I have a wife and 2 kids, if theres anyone thats a virgin it is you.
But anyway, no, I'm not the guy who makes those threads.
>muh speccy is shit
>muh nobody uses speccy outside of a few die hards in england
yeah that’s why in 2023 it has one of the healthiest homebrew scenes of any retro gaming platform
That happened eventually. We would be missing some esoteric japanese systems but that's about it. They wouldn't have survived the internet era anyway.
But Japan needed to be IBM compatible since day one like with South Korea and Taiwan, that way no bubble bust.
The ZX Spectrum was more powerful than the Game Boy.