determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
There is a white or beige one then there is the black and chrome one? which first? and dates please? This is unfamiliar territory for me. but need to pay homage to these in a museum display here. looking for good hi res scans of adv. material etc. for display?? thanks ed# _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
Hi Ed Did you do any research on this at all? The beige one was later. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_TI-99/4A Bill Cosby was their spokesperson. I can scan the advertising stuff that I have, but I’m pretty sure that it is all online somewhere. > On 6 Sep 2017, at 4:00 pm, Ed via cctalk wrote: > > There is a white or beige one > > then there is the black and chrome one? > > which first? and dates please? > > This is unfamiliar territory for me. > but need to pay homage to these > in a museum display here. > > looking for good hi res scans of > adv. material etc. for display?? > > thanks ed# _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
In a message dated 9/5/2017 11:27:04 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, p...@mactec.com.au writes: Hi Ed Howdy! Did you do any research on this at all? Not a lot found a few conflicting things The beige one was later. Thanks - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_TI-99/4A Bill Cosby was their spokesperson. I can scan the advertising stuff that I have, but I’m pretty sure that it is all online somewhere. Good hi res scans appreciated Ed#.. Thanks ! > On 6 Sep 2017, at 4:00 pm, Ed via cctalk wrote: > > There is a white or beige one > > then there is the black and chrome one? > > which first? and dates please? > > This is unfamiliar territory for me. > but need to pay homage to these > in a museum display here. > > looking for good hi res scans of > adv. material etc. for display?? > > thanks ed# _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
Depends on if you're talking about the 99/4 or 99/4A. The 99/4 was black and silver and had a chiclet style keyboard and is rare. The 4A had a black and silver finish first, and then later switched to beige I imagine in an effort to curb costs since they were being undercut pretty badly by Commodore. There's a pretty good article about TI's home computers that I've been trying to find that lays out a pretty convincing argument for why the 4A was not successful in the market despite early success. Basically a costly recall of the power supplies wiped out a lot of their profits, and the system was too expensive due to the insistence of using as much in-house parts as possible even when there were much cheaper components available in the wider market, for example the CPU (Z80 or 6502). On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Ed via cctalk wrote: > There is a white or beige one > > then there is the black and chrome one? > > which first? and dates please? > > This is unfamiliar territory for me. > but need to pay homage to these > in a museum display here. > > looking for good hi res scans of > adv. material etc. for display?? > > thanks ed# _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org) >
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
On 6 September 2017 at 16:55, Geoffrey Oltmans via cctalk wrote: > There's a pretty good article about TI's home computers that I've been > trying to find that lays out a pretty convincing argument for why the 4A > was not successful in the market despite early success. https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-history/heroic-failures/the-texas-instruments-994-worlds-first-16bit-computer ...? Also see: http://www.dvorak.org/blog/whatever-happened-to-the-texas-instruments-home-computer/ A more positive, nostalgic look: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/27/community_builds_around_ti_99_4a/ There was a later successor model from another company, the Geneve 9640. A complete computer in its own right, it plugged into the 99/4A's Peripheral Expansion Box and totally replaced it. It shows what the machine could have been, if TI hadn't crippled it for fear of competing with its higher-end models. http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=1208&st=1 A bit more info including a scan of the product brochure: http://www.mainbyte.com/ti99/geneve/geneve.html -- Liam Proven • Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • Google Mail/Talk/Plus: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven • Skype/LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven UK: +44 7939-087884 • ČR/WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal: +420 702 829 053
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 6 September 2017 at 16:55, Geoffrey Oltmans via cctalk > wrote: > > > There's a pretty good article about TI's home computers that I've been > > trying to find that lays out a pretty convincing argument for why the 4A > > was not successful in the market despite early success. > > https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-history/heroic-failures/ > the-texas-instruments-994-worlds-first-16bit-computer > > ...? > That's a good article, but not the one I remember. The one I remember was about three pages long and mentioned the AC adapter recall in particular.
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
* Black and chrome, chiclet keyboard - TI-99/4, the first TI home computer (1979). * Black and chrome, typewriter keyboard - TI-99/4A, the revised version of the above (1981). * Beige, typewriter keyboard - TI-99/4A, cost-reduced version of the above (1983). Manufactured for only a few months before discontinuation in late 1983.
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
> > * Beige, typewriter keyboard - TI-99/4A, cost-reduced version of the > above (1983). Manufactured for only a few months before > discontinuation in late 1983. > I'd double check that. I have found, at least in my experience, that the beige are more plentiful than what you'd expect if they only made them for a few months. I bet they were made for the last year or more of the run. I know there were more than one ROM variation within the beige as well. If could be the last ROM variation was produced for the last few months, but not all beige models. Check the ROM chip silkscreen date codes perhaps to confirm this. Bill
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 02:07:22PM -0400, william degnan via cctech wrote: >I'd double check that. I have found, at least in my experience, that the >beige are more plentiful than what you'd expect if they only made them for >a few months. I bet they were made for the last year or more of the run. Is it possible to retrofit the beige keyboard? I remember Radio Shack was dumping surplus beige TI-99/4A keyboards super cheap for a while there, so I was wondering if maybe people could've used them as repair parts? Also, was there ever a TI-99, TI-99/2, TI-99/3 etc.? The Bill Cosby TV ads were kind of embarrassing in retrospect ... but they were funny at the time. He didn't seem like much of a computer nerd. John Wilson D Bit
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/1344/Texas-Instruments-TI-99-4A/ has interesting knowledge of the serial for dating. I don't know if it was my newb brain/false memory but i thought I saw someone post a ti-99/2 prototype before (vcfed search can probably prove me right or wrong). But the models really were already stated as the 99/4 being the first and noticeable from chicklet keyboard and orange?/red keys on the bottom corners. Then i think they had an expansion system that my memory gets confused with the trs-80. I didn't realize it was a 16-bit system though. That's intriguing and worth some more reading to see what it did vs the competition. Original message From: John Wilson via cctalk Date: 9/6/17 1:57 PM (GMT-06:00) To: william degnan via cctech Subject: Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers. On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 02:07:22PM -0400, william degnan via cctech wrote: >I'd double check that. I have found, at least in my experience, that the >beige are more plentiful than what you'd expect if they only made them for >a few months. I bet they were made for the last year or more of the run. Is it possible to retrofit the beige keyboard? I remember Radio Shack was dumping surplus beige TI-99/4A keyboards super cheap for a while there, so I was wondering if maybe people could've used them as repair parts? Also, was there ever a TI-99, TI-99/2, TI-99/3 etc.? The Bill Cosby TV ads were kind of embarrassing in retrospect ... but they were funny at the time. He didn't seem like much of a computer nerd. John Wilson D Bit
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
On 7 September 2017 at 04:07, Sam O'nella via cctalk wrote: > I don't know if it was my newb brain/false memory but i thought I saw someone > post a ti-99/2 prototype before It was a thing: http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=267 Never made it onto retail sale, though. -- Liam Proven • Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • Google Mail/Talk/Plus: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven • Skype/LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven UK: +44 7939-087884 • ČR/WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal: +420 702 829 053
Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.
Thanks to all that provided on list and off list material on the TI 99/4 systems. It was very helpful. Still looking for some hi res ad art work... Thanks Ed# _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org) In a message dated 9/7/2017 5:24:45 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time, cctalk@classiccmp.org writes: On 7 September 2017 at 04:07, Sam O'nella via cctalk wrote: > I don't know if it was my newb brain/false memory but i thought I saw someone post a ti-99/2 prototype before It was a thing: http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=267 Never made it onto retail sale, though. -- Liam Proven • Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • Google Mail/Talk/Plus: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven • Skype/LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven UK: +44 7939-087884 • ČR/WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal: +420 702 829 053
Scavenging higher-end models (Was: Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.)
On Sep 6, 2017, at 10:45 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > It shows what the machine could have been, if TI hadn't crippled it > for fear of competing with its higher-end models. I have heard similar arguments repeatedly, in reference to systems from multiple different companies (DEC in particular, but also IBM, TI as above, etc.). It seems so short-sighted as to be almost improbable to me. Of *course* if a company can offer similar performance in a cheaper model, they should do that. The high-end customers will still pay premium for the slight extra performance, but the lower-end model will enable a whole cadre of users and developers which would otherwise have been priced away to the competition. Is this just 20/20 hindsight on my part, or are there factors I don’t understand in this decision? If it’s just internal company politics - high-end system group doesn’t want to get squeezed from below - the CEO’s job is to put a stop to that, I would think. - Mark
Re: Scavenging higher-end models (Was: Re: determing date on TI 99/4 computers.)
On 6 September 2017 at 20:46, Tapley, Mark wrote: > On Sep 6, 2017, at 10:45 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk > wrote: > >> It shows what the machine could have been, if TI hadn't crippled it >> for fear of competing with its higher-end models. > > I have heard similar arguments repeatedly, in reference to systems > from multiple different companies (DEC in particular, but also IBM, TI as > above, etc.). > > It seems so short-sighted as to be almost improbable to me. Of > *course* if a company can offer similar performance in a cheaper model, they > should do that. The high-end customers will still pay premium for the slight > extra performance, but the lower-end model will enable a whole cadre of users > and developers which would otherwise have been priced away to the competition. > > Is this just 20/20 hindsight on my part, or are there factors I don’t > understand in this decision? If it’s just internal company politics - > high-end system group doesn’t want to get squeezed from below - the CEO’s job > is to put a stop to that, I would think. If there is a general case to be made -- and it's a bit tricky -- then it's perhaps this: [1] Make the best system you can for a particular price-point. If hitting a particular price-point is going to mean horribly compromising the product, then you probably shouldn't be competing in that market. [2] Recognise that home computers are not business computers. What a home/leisure user wants is not the same as what a professional wants. Don't attempt to price-gouge the pros, don't attempt to fob home users off with second-rate rubbish. [3] If attempting to do both of these means that you have either type of product stomping all over the other, then you have failed to properly identify and differentiate your 2 separate markets. Examples... The Commodore VIC-20 and the Sinclair ZX-81 were both horribly compromised, lousily-specified toys, useless for anything serious. But at the time, that's all a budget home machine could do, and because the companies' rivals were not offering budget home machines -- they offered $1000+ pro-level kit -- the machines were huge successes. Both companies did successor models that were significantly better (the C64 and ZX Spectrum) and which sold very well. Then both companies lost the plot a bit and the successor models to _them_ were both rather poor. CBM fooled around with incompatible machines that didn't advance the SOTA much. Sinclair flailed and adapted an uninspiring Spanish model, the Spectrum 128, which failed to address one of the older model's most serious failings -- its poor graphics. This is doubly tragic as Timex _had_ addressed this in the TS2068. If Sinclair had adopted Timex' improved ULA, the Spectrum 128 would have been a significantly more competitive machine. (Another more niche tweak is that the Timex machine could page RAM in in place of the ROM, enabling it to run CP/M. The Sinclair model couldn't until years later with the Amstrad designed-and-built Spectrum +3.) TI was afraid its home computer would compete with its business machines, so it crippled it, leaving an uncompetitive product. But the business machines weren't competitive anyway, and weren't big sellers. Either it could have just made a more expensive but uncrippled TI99/4A -- with, say, 32 kB of 16-bit RAM directly attached to the CPU, a native-code BASIC interpreter instead of 2 different ones, and dumped the cartridge port and the PEB. It would have been considerably more expensive than the VIC-20 that it tried to compete with. The smarter choice would have been to embrace that and just go with it, IMHO. -- Liam Proven • Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • Google Mail/Talk/Plus: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven • Skype/LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven UK: +44 7939-087884 • ČR/WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal: +420 702 829 053