Re: Did Commodore cheat with the quad density floppies?

On 1/9/19 2:54 PM, smf wrote:
> On 09/01/2019 10:13, Gerrit Heitsch wrote:
>>
>> Cheap alone doesn't cut it, you also have to be 'good enough'. Meaning 
>> not perfect, but the problems still present tolerable for what you get 
>> in return.
>>
> Right. Commodore sold C64's that caught fire, but it was good enough 
> because they had your money and it was just a box under a xmas tree for 
> the first few weeks.

Those were problems with some of the PSUs in USA as far as I remember. 
The C64 is still a good example of 'good enough'. You get a computer 
that can do a lot, just not in BASIC and the mass storage is very slow. 
But it was a complete computer for an affordable price.


>> Windows 3.x was in that 'good enough' category as well, at least for 
>> people who came from DOS. If you already knew AmigaOS or MacOS, you 
>> usually thought differently. :)
> 
> I used Windows before AmigaOS & I kept using both for years.
> 
> It wasn't until Amiga 3.1 and Windows 3.11 that I thought either were 
> good enough. Both required a lot of tweaking and extra software 
> installed.

That's part of the 'good enough'. After all, you kept using those OS 
even though they had some downsides and needed extra work and software. 
If they hadn't been 'good enough', you wouldn't have kept using them.


> Windows 95 was the first time there was a good out of the box experience.

Kinda... The Multitasking part still sucked mightily compared to AmigaOS 
and I still detest the windows design flaw where a hanging program keeps 
you from moving its window.

  Gerrit