Is there some secret, self-aware and ironic twist that elevates the repeating of Limmy jokes ad nauseum above doing it with Little Britain catchphrases or have certain people just not realised how tedious it is yet?
>It's difficult to really appreciate and describe how amazing the ZX81 was when it arrived.
In terms of bang for your buck, yes, it was. If the Interwebs are right, it sold for 69 quid at launch in 1981. While the Commodore C64, many times more powerful, retailed at £299.99 in 1982 (source: http://www.retro8bitcomputers.co.uk/Home/Computers ). The ZX-81 brought the world of computers into teenlad bedrooms up and down the country for the first time really, inspiring many to go on to a career in computing. £69 was attainable even if your parents were lower middle class, and it was enough to teach you how to program and operate an 8-bit home computer. You could even play simple games on it.
It did have its shortcomings, in that it was really a very rudimentary machine. You had two screen colours and 1K RAM and an atrocious rubber keyboard. If your parents were able to part with 300 quid to get you a C64, or even the VIC-20 before it, you were without question better off. Even the Dragon or the Acorn, which were more budget friendly, were more capable.
>>446198 >It did have its shortcomings, in that it was really a very rudimentary machine. You had two screen colours and 1K RAM and an atrocious rubber keyboard.
The ZX-81 was absolute dogshit, but a dogshit computer is better than no computer at all. The genius of it was making the absolute minimum computer and selling it at an irresistibly low price. Sinclair would have absolutely hated me for saying it, but he had a lot in common with Lord Sugar. They both recognised that, above all else, British people love a bargain.
The C5 has a tragicomic quality to it - the idea was fundamentally good, but it was just too far ahead of the technology. With modern lithium batteries, brushless motors and LED lighting, it'd be a genuinely useful commuter vehicle.
>With modern lithium batteries, brushless motors and LED lighting, it'd be a genuinely useful commuter vehicle.
There is apparently a dedicated C5 modding scene which has done everything to the C5 from modern electric motors and batteries to mounting a small jet engine to the back of it, thus achieving top speeds of up to 150 mph. Which seems massively dangerous for the flimsy kind of contraption the C5 still is at its core.
>>446201 I looks like a boxy velomobile which've never been popular in the UK. If it was motorbike shaped it would've lost what little appeal it had, you don't have to straddle the C5, and 50+cc motorbikes were already available aplenty. Now, if it resembled a BMW C1 that might've worked, but that's reliant on a bunch of developments to make it remotely practical.
>>446200 The ZX80 and ZX81 were steps along the way to Sinclair's goal of having a reasonably functional colour computer for under £100. The original ZX Spectrum was the result of that. Markedly better than the previous two, but still notably limited compared to others on the market. You can definitely see why Sugar went in. He had been building his business on the idea that cheap doesn't have to be crap, and the strides that Sinclair Research was making made it clear they were at some point going to be able to deliver something that fit that pattern in the home computer space, and that was borne out in the 1986 sale of those assets to Amstrad.
For the best part of three decades, Sir Clive really was years ahead of his time. Adjusted for inflation, that £100 price point is now £360, which is in the range of budget laptops.
>>446204 >the 1986 sale of those assets to Amstrad
I agree - there's a very strong link between Amstrad/Sugar and Sinclair at that time. I believe the Sinclair purchase actually taught Sugar a great deal about the technology market - a year later, he was producing very cheap word processors and very early PC clones, such as the one picture here, which is also the first PC I ever owned.
I guess you always get what you pay for. You can buy a cheap car, which will mean you will own a car, but just don't expect much for your limited amount of money.
You can always design products to a price point, and that was always a large part of Sugar's success. And it can help democratise the market for a product because you are making that type of product available to the masses who can't afford the more high-end variants. But in the end, it's not always a good idea to buy cheap, as a consumer. Even with a small budget.
