Total number of A8 units sold worldwide = ?

[high voltage]

Yes, as did many other companies, I already mentioned, Nintendo did, someone else here mentioned Apple did too, so your 'oh so honest sweet company' Commodore didn't? You are very naive.

Marketing versus stock reports... not the same thing. Didn't I mention not to trust marketing?

 

Lets see... if you falsify reports to stockholders:

SEC halts trading of your stock

your doors get locked and all files seized for an investigation

company officials involved are arrested

your creditors call in their loans

you get sued by your stockholders

your assets gets seized

everything gets liquidated

 

No way Commodore could perpetrate such a fraud for that many years.

 

If fanboys exaggerate sales on Wikipedia... yeah I can believe that... but not sales figures in stock reports.

 

You forgot one most important issue:

SEC is also a crime unit

creditors are in on the crime

and stockholders too, they are the worst actually

During the 70s/80s, USA was crime capital of the world, probably still is.

Why you think is was so easy for Nintendo to mess with the US law and nobody dared to question it.

Edited June 20, 2011 by high voltage

[oky2000]

Yes, as did many other companies, I already mentioned, Nintendo did, someone else here mentioned Apple did too, so your 'oh so honest sweet company' Commodore didn't? You are very naive.

Marketing versus stock reports... not the same thing. Didn't I mention not to trust marketing?

 

Lets see... if you falsify reports to stockholders:

SEC halts trading of your stock

your doors get locked and all files seized for an investigation

company officials involved are arrested

your creditors call in their loans

you get sued by your stockholders

your assets gets seized

everything gets liquidated

 

No way Commodore could perpetrate such a fraud for that many years.

 

If fanboys exaggerate sales on Wikipedia... yeah I can believe that... but not sales figures in stock reports.

 

You forgot one most important issue:

SEC is also a crime unit

creditors are in on the crime

and stockholders too, they are the worst actually

During the 70s/80s, USA was crime capital of the world, probably still is.

Why you think is was so easy for Nintendo to mess with the US law and nobody dared to question it.

 

Well then that is a loophole BUT if they lied about C64 why did they say Amiga only sold 11 million from 85-94? The published figures for 85-90 are quite underwhelming.

 

Please keep your minority rumors/factually unfounded comments/conspiracy theories to yourself and stay on topic, it's difficult to see the actual info asked for in the thread title.

[Rybags]

The problem with any company over/understating sales figures:

 

Under: you'd be putting a nail in the coffin because low figures would discourage 3rd party support for the machine and possibly deter new buyers.

 

Over: you'd have shareholders screaming "Where's the money!"

 

But if you're talking "in retrospect" then you could probably count on a quoted figure either being right or on the high side.

Personally, I'd think the Amiga would have outsold the ST overall, although the ST would have held a healthy early lead.

[carmel_andrews]

No figures to hand but i have heard it said and seen in print that the XL series was by far atari best selling a8 system (i am assuming the 800 rather then the 600/1200), followed possibly by the 400/800 and then the xe series (including the xegs/gm)

[+Philsan]

First of all, English is not my native language and with "market leader" I meant the number of a computer sold in one year and not market shares.

 

But speaking of market shares, this Time article is interesting

http://www.time.com/...,950786,00.html

because we can read that in September 1982 Tandy market share for low-priced computers was 10% and Atari 17% (I think this figure does not include 800).

Therefore I think in 1981 Atari sold more 400/800 than TRS-80 (unless in the first months of 1982 suddendly TRS-80 sales fell down and 400/800 sales rose).

Reimer's figures confirm that Atari 400/800 sales were #1 in 1981.

Regarding 1982, luckily it seems that we all agree that 400/800 were #1.

 

Only for information another Atari dedicated magazine was Antic.

I am not American so I am not aware of other magazines.

 

C64 sales dwarfed the Atari's in '83

The Atari wasn't the leader early on and it certainly wasn't after the intro of the C64.

One last word, James.

Why do you praise C64 in your replies in a topic about Atari sales, where C64 is correctly at #1, where someone writes something about Atari market leadership before C64 and where no one wrote that Atari is better than C64?

 

EDIT

... Atari 17% (I think this figure does not include 800).

Edited June 20, 2011 by Philsan

[JamesD]

Yes, as did many other companies, I already mentioned, Nintendo did, someone else here mentioned Apple did too, so your 'oh so honest sweet company' Commodore didn't? You are very naive.

Marketing versus stock reports... not the same thing. Didn't I mention not to trust marketing?

 

Lets see... if you falsify reports to stockholders:

SEC halts trading of your stock

your doors get locked and all files seized for an investigation

company officials involved are arrested

your creditors call in their loans

you get sued by your stockholders

your assets gets seized

everything gets liquidated

 

No way Commodore could perpetrate such a fraud for that many years.

 

If fanboys exaggerate sales on Wikipedia... yeah I can believe that... but not sales figures in stock reports.

 

You forgot one most important issue:

SEC is also a crime unit

creditors are in on the crime

and stockholders too, they are the worst actually

During the 70s/80s, USA was crime capital of the world, probably still is.

Why you think is was so easy for Nintendo to mess with the US law and nobody dared to question it.

Anti-US/capitalist propaganda anyone?

 

Did you ever see a Nintendo stockholder report? No? Go figure.

 

I can see someone is begging to join my block list.

 

The problem with any company over/understating sales figures:

 

Under: you'd be putting a nail in the coffin because low figures would discourage 3rd party support for the machine and possibly deter new buyers.

 

Over: you'd have shareholders screaming "Where's the money!"

 

But if you're talking "in retrospect" then you could probably count on a quoted figure either being right or on the high side.

Personally, I'd think the Amiga would have outsold the ST overall, although the ST would have held a healthy early lead.

And the boldface text answers why the stockholders aren't in on it.

Stockholders are in it for the money and would be screaming for larger dividends and would be mad their stock wasn't going up.

 

As far as understating sales, a company might under estimate future sales but I don't think they would ever under report sales. It would be the dumbest business decision ever.

[JamesD]

First of all, English is not my native language and with "market leader" I meant the number of a computer sold in one year and not market shares.

The number of "a computer sold in one year"? Really?

So, are you talking about sales of the 400 or 800? For total sales are different XL an XE models separate too?

Yeah, like I didn't know that argument was coming. Count low and high end priced machines from one company but only high end machines from the other. How convenient.

 

Compatibility will be the next argument so I'll save you some time.

2 cartridge slots or 1?

Compatibility like the 1200?

2 joystick interfaces or 4?

Does everything that runs on the 400/800 run on later models? Does it run the same?

Does everything that runs on later models run on the 400/800?

Built in BASIC or a cart? Atari or aftermarket version?

Max memory of 48K, 64K, or 128K?

And lets not forget PAL or NTSC?

 

 

But speaking of market shares, this Time article is interesting

That same Time article you refer to mentions a sales total of 35,000 for all these computers in 1980... Radio Shack sold over 10,000 machines in the first month and a half after the intro of the TRS-80 in 1976. Even 350,000 would probably be low for all machines combined in '80. The article also states "Yankee Group estimates that Texas Instruments now has about 23% of the market for inexpensive home computers." and goes on to say 23% Commodore and 26% Timex.

Atari still wasn't the sales leader even if Radio Shack was only 10%... which was my point in the first place.

 

And if Radio Shack didn't announce sales numbers of the CoCo... how would they know RS only had 10% of the market even if they had all the other sales numbers?

[+Philsan]

First of all, English is not my native language and with "market leader" I meant the number of a computer sold in one year and not market shares.

The number of "a computer sold in one year"? Really?

So, are you talking about sales of the 400 or 800? For total sales are different XL an XE models separate too?

Yeah, like I didn't know that argument was coming. Count low and high end priced machines from one company but only high end machines from the other. How convenient.

 

Compatibility will be the next argument so I'll save you some time.

2 cartridge slots or 1?

Compatibility like the 1200?

2 joystick interfaces or 4?

Does everything that runs on the 400/800 run on later models? Does it run the same?

Does everything that runs on later models run on the 400/800?

Built in BASIC or a cart? Atari or aftermarket version?

Max memory of 48K, 64K, or 128K?

And lets not forget PAL or NTSC?

Are you always angry? Have you problems? Do you think people always attack you?

I wrote "a computer" not meaning a single computer but only to make it clear that I meant computers sold and not market shares.

I only tried to let understand my toughts because English is not my language.

I am not interested in fightings, I have better things to do.

[JamesD]

Are you always angry? Have you problems? Do you think people always attack you?

I wrote "a computer" not meaning a single computer but only to make it clear that I meant computers sold and not market shares.

I only tried to let understand my toughts because English is not my language.

I am not interested in fightings, I have better things to do.

Angry? Nope. Just think your argument is bogus.

 

Well... maybe my eyesight isn't as good as it used to be and I've gained a few pounds over the years.

 

Do I need to think people are attacking me to point out someone's argument is flawed or biased?

Say... is this the Chewbacca defense or something?

 

The 400 and 800 are different computers not "a computer".

Look, you are trying to twist everything in Atari's favor so you can say it was the market leader at some point and I am messing with you because it's a fanboy argument that never dies.

 

Frankly, there is conflicting information about sales numbers and we can't say one way or the other whether Atari was ever the sales leader, or what actual sales numbers were outside of possibly a couple years where stock reports or shareholder meetings are quoted in an article.

 

If you have better things to do then why do you keep pushing a position in an argument that nobody can honestly win?

I certainly don't know what the sales numbers were based on anything that has been presented here and I don't know how anyone else could since the data seems questionable or incomplete.

 

What I can tell you is that in December 1982, Atari's stock suddenly went through the roof... only to plummet in January to a point lower than it was in November. This tells me there was expectations of fantastic sales that never materialized.

When I look up Atari 1982 I find Pac Man, E.T., and most importantly... the new 5200. I think that explains the momentary jump. I really don't see any stock trends that might indicate computer sales were taking off at any point.

Link

 

If you compare that to Commodore you can clearly see a jump in sales took place since the stock price jumped and trailed off slowly over time.

Link

Edited June 20, 2011 by JamesD

[FastRobPlus]

Is there a single site on the web with sell through data on all consoles and home computers?

[JamesD]

Woops... replied instead of editing.

Edited June 20, 2011 by JamesD

[+Philsan]

The "a computer" was an error not a twisting, don't insist.

Perhaps we should use French or Italian to see if you make errors...

 

I am a fan boy?

I think a person who talks about C64 in a topic about Atari sales, where C64 is correctly at #1, where someone writes something about Atari market leadership before C64 and where no one wrote that Atari is better than C64 is the real fan boy!

C64 sales dwarfed the Atari's in '83

The Atari wasn't the leader early on and it certainly wasn't after the intro of the C64.

 

I only think that Atari 400/800 were the best selling computers in 1981 and 1982.

Nothing special or extravagant. Reiner (not a fan boy I suppose) has this opinion too.

In fact you agreed regarding year 1982.

If you don't agree regarding year 1981, no problem, but there's no need to be aggressive.

Perhaps shareholders or executives were not satisfied by sales but that doesn't prove that Atari sold less computers than another company.

 

BTW, interesting links.

[JamesD]

The "a computer" was an error not a twisting, don't insist.

Perhaps we should use French or Italian to see if you make errors...

 

I am a fan boy?

I think a person who talks about C64 in a topic about Atari sales, where C64 is correctly at #1, where someone writes something about Atari market leadership before C64 and where no one wrote that Atari is better than C64 is the real fan boy!

C64 sales dwarfed the Atari's in '83

The Atari wasn't the leader early on and it certainly wasn't after the intro of the C64.

A C64 fanboy without a C64? There's a first. I guess I do have one of those joystick C64s that I've fired up all of once or twice. And I think I have a 128D I tested after I bought it and put into storage... somewhere. But I do like the Plus/4 for some reason... does that count?

 

As for C64 vs Atari in '83... 1.5 million more C64s than Ataris according to Jeremy. Would Commodore sold more machines in '83 than Atari sold since it's introduction sound better than dwarfed?

 

I only think that Atari 400/800 were the best selling computers in 1981 and 1982.

Nothing special or extravagant. Reiner (not a fan boy I suppose) has this opinion too.

In fact you agreed regarding year 1982.

If you don't agree regarding year 1981, no problem, but there's no need to be aggressive.

Perhaps shareholders or executives were not satisfied by sales but that doesn't prove that Atari sold less computers than another company.

 

BTW, interesting links.

I agree Jeremy's numbers on that chart show Atari had the most sales in '82.

 

But if you read this article referenced by Jeremy's page you'll find this quote "Despite limitations in the VIC chip that could only display 22 columns of text, the colorful and inexpensive computer sold 600,000 units in 1982." Isn't that the number Atari had for 400 and 800 sales combined? His sales figures in that chart didn't include the VIC... oops. Still want to argue? The TI99/4a supposedly outsold the VIC three to one according to this. But I thought we had already said TI was the leader in '82 with the market share numbers from the Time article you referenced.

 

Now for '81. First of all this information contradicts Jeremy's numbers for Atari sales. "July 26, 1982: InfoWorld estimated between 250,000 and 300,000 Atari 400/800 computers had been sold to date." That doesn't quite jibe with 300,000 in that year alone and certainly contradicts his older numbers. And we don't know exactly where Jeremy got his numbers. Now, the VIC was announced in '80 but it was introduced in '81. It has 400 thousand in sales that had to take place in all of '81 and January '83 when the VIC topped 1 million in sales. That means the VIC outsold Atari in '81 unless the VIC had a ridiculous number of sales in Jan '83 which is highly doubtful. Over 100,000 in sales in January? No way.

 

At this point I think there is enough evidence to say the Atari was never the market leader for sales of a computer.

[JamesD]

Is there a single site on the web with sell through data on all consoles and home computers?

I've never seen consoles and home computer sales data together before. I think it's obvious we don't even have complete computer sales data anyway.

[JamesD]

I would have to take issue with that amiga 16 bit statement at least in the USA 1985 to 1989, Atari ST easily outsold Amiga 2-1, only Atari shipping to europe instead of the USa changed that.

Right or wrong, the market share numbers on Jeremy Reiner's chart show Amiga leading the ST in sales every year but '86 (a tie) and '87.

[atarian63]

The average Joe would barely consider the Atari 400 or 800 in 1980 or 1981. He'd choose or be recommended the TRS-80 and its userbase, distribution network and software support. The 400 or 800 were a bit too exotic, not serious enough compared to the competition and, anyway, clashed with Atari's other machine, the VCS, for gaming.

 

Small businesses, laboratories and schools also used Apple, TRS-80 and even Commodore PET computers, which probably helped. Atari, as a newcomer, was on its own and had much less presence. Unless you were a bit geeky or well-informed, the Atari was almost never the number one choice in the early days.

If for early days we consider 1979 and 1980, I can agree.

If we consider 1981 and 1982, I don't agree. If Compute! supported A8 platform strongly in 1981 and 1982, that means A8 had a big installed base.

Agreed, You almost never saw a PET anywhere (USA) or TRS unless you happened to be in radio shack. Maybe we are talking retail or consumer here. Atari was much much more visable, see a local Major retailer of the day (Sears) Montgomery ward etc. No TRS 80 or PET there.

All we had in our school was TRS-80s and Apples. I didn't even know anyone with an Atari computer until I was in college. For that matter I didn't know anyone with a Commodore until I was in college. It all depends on what was popular where you were from.

 

Compute supported the Atari because a lot of people with Ataris subscribed to it... and some of the key authors/editors owned Ataris.

As retailer for atari and others we never saw on lists from distributors CO Co or any tother trs items for sales. if it was such a large market software manufacturers would have made a big deal producing for it. As reality was though all you saw was Atari C64,Apple and PC, and the Tandy quasi pc rarely. If the real consumer world these were the major brands. No any Radio shack items. Not sold at kmart,walmart,sears etc. Just wasnt a big item to consumers.

[atarian63]

I would have to take issue with that amiga 16 bit statement at least in the USA 1985 to 1989, Atari ST easily outsold Amiga 2-1, only Atari shipping to europe instead of the USa changed that.

Right or wrong, the market share numbers on Jeremy Reiner's chart show Amiga leading the ST in sales every year but '86 (a tie) and '87.

Wonder were he got those bogus figures. Amiga didnt catch up till much later.Even software reflected it. being written for St then ported to Amiga , that changed around 89.Again had supply been available here in the USA it may not have changed. We sold amigas to people who wanted St's as we could not get them.

[JamesD]

As retailer for atari and others we never saw on lists from distributors CO Co or any tother trs items for sales. if it was such a large market software manufacturers would have made a big deal producing for it. As reality was though all you saw was Atari C64,Apple and PC, and the Tandy quasi pc rarely. If the real consumer world these were the major brands. No any Radio shack items. Not sold at kmart,walmart,sears etc. Just wasnt a big item to consumers.

Well, Radio Shack was weird.

They currently have about 4500 stores now but at their peak they may have had twice that. They closed all their stores in Canada and overseas during one recession or another. There were no BestBuy or CircuitCity retailers so they had a pretty good niche for many years.

 

Radio Shack didn't sell their computers through other retailers except for the TDP-100 (a rare CoCo) which lasted about 6 months since no major retailer would pick it up. Most big retailer stores would have had to compete with a local Radio Shack so they wouldn't exactly have an exclusive. That kinda precludes seeing them in KMart, Walmart, Sears, etc... but with that many stores and the small size of the stores they were in strip malls all over the place and in smaller towns where no big retailer existed.

 

Radio Shack didn't carry 3rd party software until the later half of the 80's at which point you could special order it from a catalog in every store.

That means many major software publishers pretty much avoided them until the catalog policy was introduced. That may partially explain why there was so much magazine support. You mail ordered everything that wasn't made by Radio Shack until the Shack instituted the internal order system... and then you still mail ordered but picked it up in the store. LOL

 

The CoCo did get titles from Activision, Datasoft, Disney, Imagic, Infocom, Lucasfilm, Sierra, Synapse, etc... but it was a reduced catalog for some companies and 99% of the TRS-80 software was probably from small companies you've never heard of. All major company titles were only sold through Radio Shack stores and the other companies via mailorder. If Radio Shack had instituted the order policy earlier you probably would have seen more support from publishers. FWIW, it resulted in a lot of arcade clones from those little companies and most big companies didn't bother suing them because they didn't directly compete. At the most a company was forced to change the name of a game. Funny thing, Microdeal ended up licensing a lot of titles from those little companies and sold it for the Dragon in Europe. Something Radio Shack should have done.

 

You can see where it would be difficult to make accurate estimates of sales for a Radio Shack computer if they don't release sales themselves. You don't have another retailer to call up and ask for sales info.

 

I do know Radio Shack's stock did this:

rose 62% in '76 (intro of TRS-80)

dropped 17% in '77 (probably a correction, production not keeping up with demand)

rose 56% in '78 (sales rise with production)

rose 15% in '79

rose 216% in '80 (intro of Model III and CoCo, 4 for 1 stock split)

rose 37% in '81 ('80 wasn't just speculation, there was a jump in profits)

rose another 50% in '82.

 

Profits were clearly rising after the intro of the III & CoCo. Since computers were the biggest ticket item RS sold they are the most likely cause of a jump in profits.

And if the sales of the Model III didn't drastically improve over the Model I, topped out at 300K, and dropped, something else had to be driving profits.

 

After the intro of the C64 in '83 stock did this:

dropped 15% '83

dropped 44% '84

rose 68% '85 (The Tandy 1000 came out in late '84)

 

I'm thinking slashed CoCo prices due to the price war cut profits in '83, and the Tandy 1000 had better profit margins. That would account for those numbers.

Link

[JamesD]

I would have to take issue with that amiga 16 bit statement at least in the USA 1985 to 1989, Atari ST easily outsold Amiga 2-1, only Atari shipping to europe instead of the USa changed that.

Right or wrong, the market share numbers on Jeremy Reiner's chart show Amiga leading the ST in sales every year but '86 (a tie) and '87.

Wonder were he got those bogus figures. Amiga didnt catch up till much later.Even software reflected it. being written for St then ported to Amiga , that changed around 89.Again had supply been available here in the USA it may not have changed. We sold amigas to people who wanted St's as we could not get them.

And where did you get your sales figures?

I'm not seeing anything but your observations.

[+Philsan]

I agree Jeremy's numbers on that chart show Atari had the most sales in '82.

 

But if you read this article referenced by Jeremy's page you'll find this quote "Despite limitations in the VIC chip that could only display 22 columns of text, the colorful and inexpensive computer sold 600,000 units in 1982." Isn't that the number Atari had for 400 and 800 sales combined? His sales figures in that chart didn't include the VIC... oops. Still want to argue? The TI99/4a supposedly outsold the VIC three to one according to this. But I thought we had already said TI was the leader in '82 with the market share numbers from the Time article you referenced.

 

At this point I think there is enough evidence to say the Atari was never the market leader for sales of a computer.

Times article is about low-end computers; only computers under $400 are considered (so no Atari 800).

 

Regarding InfoWord link, if TI99/4a outsold VIC three to one we have found the leader of the market, TI99/4a!

In fact the article says that "by the end of 1982 TI99/4a was the top home computer in the USA".

I don't know.

 

It seems that sources are contradictory, IMO there is not enough evidence to say the Atari was never the market leader for sales of a computer.

 

It would be nice to hear the voice of computer enthusiasts in those years (1981-1982) to know their memories about sales.

For example, in 1984/85 in my country all my friends had a C64 apart me and another guy (Apple II); it's evident that in 1984/85 C64 was leader in my country (and obviously the rest of the word, perhaps not in UK).

But if the numbers are close people sensations cannot help us.

 

oops. Still want to argue

I will reply no more if you continue to write this aggressive sentences.

I am not writing things out of the word, sources are contradictory, so please stop it.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Philsan

[+wood_jl]

From this page (old comp.sys.atari.8bit post).....

 

Is Atari killing the 8-bit?

 

.....which is dated May 15, 1987, Atari's Neil Harris mentions the number of A8 computers sold......

 

he mass merchants, who sold the bulk of the

hundreds of thousands (not, unfortunately, millions) of Atari 8-bit

computers out there, are currently retreating from the computer business.

 

So if it was less than a million in 1987, with sales dropping steadily as the years passed to the end (1991? 1992?) then one can estimate 1 million, maybe a little more, but I don't see how it could be multiple millions, if Neil Harris' information was correct.

Keep in mind an off the cuff comment about hundreds of thousands might have been per year rather than total, and he was probably thinking they should have been selling millions of machines a year instead of Commodore.

 

This all comes down to who do you believe and where did the info come from. What is anecdotal and what is actual. Unless we could see sales figures in stock reports it's pretty hard to tell what is true.

 

This is true, his comment was pretty much "off the cuff." However, by 1987 - with the 16-bit generation being out for 2 years and the 8-bit generation being abandoned steadily - it doesn't seem likely that hundreds of thousands (let alone millions) of Atari8 computers would be sold per year. The accuracy of his statement is of course questionable, but more fitting with total sales than per year, at that point. Of course we don't really know and you're right it's hard to tell what's true! I wish it was millions per year.

[+wood_jl]

You forgot one most important issue:

SEC is also a crime unit

creditors are in on the crime

and stockholders too, they are the worst actually

During the 70s/80s, USA was crime capital of the world, probably still is.

Why you think is was so easy for Nintendo to mess with the US law and nobody dared to question it.

 

Do you have any data to back this claim? Seriously, I'd like to see it. All crimes? Violent crimes? Crimes-per-capita? Felonies? If you're going to make such a [seemingly] preposterous claim, surely you can be a little more specific, right? I mean, it is reasonable to expect that you would have some more details, or you wouldn't have posted that, correct?

 

Also, what country are you in, and how is the crime there?

[oky2000]

The average Joe would barely consider the Atari 400 or 800 in 1980 or 1981. He'd choose or be recommended the TRS-80 and its userbase, distribution network and software support. The 400 or 800 were a bit too exotic, not serious enough compared to the competition and, anyway, clashed with Atari's other machine, the VCS, for gaming.

 

Small businesses, laboratories and schools also used Apple, TRS-80 and even Commodore PET computers, which probably helped. Atari, as a newcomer, was on its own and had much less presence. Unless you were a bit geeky or well-informed, the Atari was almost never the number one choice in the early days.

If for early days we consider 1979 and 1980, I can agree.

If we consider 1981 and 1982, I don't agree. If Compute! supported A8 platform strongly in 1981 and 1982, that means A8 had a big installed base.

Agreed, You almost never saw a PET anywhere (USA) or TRS unless you happened to be in radio shack. Maybe we are talking retail or consumer here. Atari was much much more visable, see a local Major retailer of the day (Sears) Montgomery ward etc. No TRS 80 or PET there.

All we had in our school was TRS-80s and Apples. I didn't even know anyone with an Atari computer until I was in college. For that matter I didn't know anyone with a Commodore until I was in college. It all depends on what was popular where you were from.

 

Compute supported the Atari because a lot of people with Ataris subscribed to it... and some of the key authors/editors owned Ataris.

As retailer for atari and others we never saw on lists from distributors CO Co or any tother trs items for sales. if it was such a large market software manufacturers would have made a big deal producing for it. As reality was though all you saw was Atari C64,Apple and PC, and the Tandy quasi pc rarely. If the real consumer world these were the major brands. No any Radio shack items. Not sold at kmart,walmart,sears etc. Just wasnt a big item to consumers.

 

Except Tandy had 100s of retail outlets of their own. There were no TRS80s anywhere else except in their own stores even the UK where you could purchase stuff like ORIC1/Aquarius in high street stores.

[high voltage]

So if the 400 is a different computer, then of course the C128 is also different compared to C64.

 

Anyhow, we can all safely say that during its lifetime the C64 sold between 10.000 - 12.000 tops, anything more is just fantasy, some folk here might believe some selfmade chart from some Jeremy guy, maybe he posts on Wikipedia too. Doh...

Edited June 21, 2011 by high voltage

[high voltage]

I agree Jeremy's numbers on that chart show Atari had the most sales in '82.

 

But if you read this article referenced by Jeremy's page you'll find this quote "Despite limitations in the VIC chip that could only display 22 columns of text, the colorful and inexpensive computer sold 600,000 units in 1982." Isn't that the number Atari had for 400 and 800 sales combined? His sales figures in that chart didn't include the VIC... oops. Still want to argue? The TI99/4a supposedly outsold the VIC three to one according to this. But I thought we had already said TI was the leader in '82 with the market share numbers from the Time article you referenced.

 

At this point I think there is enough evidence to say the Atari was never the market leader for sales of a computer.

Times article is about low-end computers; only computers under $400 are considered (so no Atari 800).

 

Regarding InfoWord link, if TI99/4a outsold VIC three to one we have found the leader of the market, TI99/4a!

In fact the article says that "by the end of 1982 TI99/4a was the top home computer in the USA".

I don't know.

 

It seems that sources are contradictory, IMO there is not enough evidence to say the Atari was never the market leader for sales of a computer.

 

It would be nice to hear the voice of computer enthusiasts in those years (1981-1982) to know their memories about sales.

For example, in 1984/85 in my country all my friends had a C64 apart me and another guy (Apple II); it's evident that in 1984/85 C64 was leader in my country (and obviously the rest of the word, perhaps not in UK).

But if the numbers are close people sensations cannot help us.

 

oops. Still want to argue

I will reply no more if you continue to write this aggressive sentences.

I am not writing things out of the word, sources are contradictory, so please stop it.

 

 

He's Mr Right, others are not, it is always that case with him.

 

A challenge and he's like 'oooh I put you on my block list' tantrums.

 

Best to let go.

 

.

Edited June 21, 2011 by high voltage