[Coco] Re: [Color Computer] end of discussion!

[Kevin Diggs]

James the Animal Tamer wrote:

> 

> Tandy made CoCo1, an original computer.

> There was enough consumer demand so that making the CoCo II made sense 

> (just think, cutting off that aftermarket keyboard add-on at its 

> knees!).

> 

	Wasn't the deuce (aka CoCo 2) made solely to increase RS profits? It 
really wasn't an upgrade (except the keyboard). But I think they did a 
better job of designing it so they made more money (without sacrificing 
base performance/capabilities). My deuce has a lot of video noise. How 
do the unis do in that area?


> But apparently there wasn't enough demand for the CoCo II to justify 

> making a good 68000 successor.  I don't know why they made the CoCo 

> III -- there must have been someone who thought it'd be more profitable 

> than not making it.

> 

	I think someone else pointed out why there was no 68k successor to the 
tre:  cost of software (updated ROM, OS 68k). Because of Open Source, 
this reason no longer applies. I think that (early on anyway) the people 
that will be most interested in a new machine are also likely to be open 
source weenies.


> So far as the CoCo is concerned, it's largely moot now.  Pretty much 

> the only market for "successors" to the CoCo is the existing userbase 

> and nostalgia freaks like me.

> 

	I don't think I agree with this. I think an upgraded but still simple 
experimenters/hobbyist computer would sell ... well enough to be worth 
someones trouble.

					kevin

P.S.:  Glen made a point of calling Netscape a small company that was 
whinning about market share. This is wrong, right? Initially, didn't 
Netscape have all the market?

P.P.S.:  I think this goes to Neil M. Something needs to be done about 
replies to relay posts. My opinion. I should not have to join both 
lists. Can you not have a shadow member list or something?