But
really, what made the C64 so successful? The machine's rise to glory
may seem obvious today, but that's hindsight. In 1982, the C64 cost
$595 and looked like a VIC 20. Who was Commodore kidding? The reason
for the similarity was actually quite pragmatic -- to speed up
production of the first run, Commodore crammed all of the C64’s
components into VIC 20 cases (Commodore soon adopted the famous brown
“breadbox” case that most fans of the system remember).
“All we saw at our booth were Atari people with their mouths
dropping open, saying, ‘How can you do that for $595?’” --
David A. Ziembicki, codesigner of the C-64
However,
internally the C64 varies significantly from the VIC 20. The C64 is
based on a MOS 6510 processor, with 64K of RAM standard. It can
display up to 40 columns and 25 lines of text with 16 colors
on-screen. Almost every program runs at a standard 320x200
resolution. Furthermore, game development is aided by built-in
“sprite” capabilities, which simplify and standardize the basic
graphic and animation routines used by most games. Perhaps more
impressive still is the C64’s sound output, powered by a
professional synthesizer chip called SID (Sound Interface Device).
SID enables three voices (channels) at nine octaves and four
waveforms -- enough power for serious electronic music. Like its
predecessor, the C64 could be plugged directly into a common
television set. This feature meant that the C64 could be marketed
not just by authorized computer dealers, but also by the countless
department and toy stores all across the country.
Perhaps
the best explanation for the C64’s unparalleled success was the
combination of talented engineering and executive management brought
to bear on the project. The C64 was designed by Robert Russell,
Robert Yannes, and David Ziembicki under the direction of the company
president, Jack Tramiel. Tramiel had long been working to vertically
integrate his computer company since the mid-1970s, with the most
significant purchase being MOS Technology, who produced Commodore’s
microchips.
The vertical integration meant that Commodore could
acquire critical components at cost, driving prices much lower than
the prices paid by Commodore’s competition -- each unit had an
estimated production cost of only $135. As a result, the C-64
steadily dropped in price after its release; a few months after sales began, it was available for $400 at Kmart stores
nationwide. In a bold move for market domination, Commodore offered
customers a $100 rebate if they traded in their old videogame console
or computer. For many videogame console owners, this promotion meant
that they could acquire a full-featured computer for only $300 at a
time when comparable machines began in the thousand-dollar range. A
later price drop to $200 drove companies like Texas Instruments
(TI-99/4A) clean out of the industry.
William
Shatner continued to offer his endorsement to Commodore, starring in
a number of ads that again asked consumers why they were buying game
consoles when they could afford a computer. But no one was fooled -- the
C64 was first and foremost a games machine, and a damn good one.
Like Atari’s popular 2600 Video Computer System (VCS) game console,
the C64 had a huge and rapidly expanding game library, and was even
compatible with most Atari joysticks and other peripherals. Chances
were, if you couldn't play it on your C64, it wasn't worth playing
anyway. The C-64 was also fully programmable and supported a wide
range of productivity applications, features that made a difference
to parents shopping for Junior's gateway to college.
Although
the C64 had slots for games on cartridge and supported a "datasette"
tape drive, the medium of choice soon became the floppy disk. The
infamous Commodore 1541, a singe-sided, 170K 5.25" floppy drive
released in 1982, was by far the most common choice. The drive
features its own microprocessor, the MOS 6502, and even contains its
own operating system -- CBM DOS 2.6. It was also noisy, slow, prone to
overheating, and downright unreliable. At least it didn’t eat
crackers in bed.
What the hell people. Why put "ratings" with this article, but not on the Apple one? 3.0 and 3.5 on graphics and audio? Are you insane? Its capabilities were top notch at the time and programmers continually pushed its abilities via SOFTWARE HACKS. At one point there were even demos showcasing graphics at double the hardware resolution limit! The hardware 8 sprite limit was broken, with some programmers being able to display over 100!
The system even had some amazing music with digitized sound. (Something that the hardware was not designed to support, but programmers found a way. (Meanwhile the NES couldn't even do it!) Meanwhile, the Apple and IBM computers could only display monochrome, or if you could afford the graphics card, 8 really ugly colors .
And 17 million sold worldwide? Wrong! Initially they had 17 million in sales in North America when it was popular. It continued to sell. In its lifetime they sold over 30 million worldwide.
You can't say enough good things about the C64. I couldn't get one until the remodeled C64C. Same hardware, modern (at the time) look. Some of the best memories in my life are playing the Commodore. (Hey Taxi!)
The system even had some amazing music with digitized sound. (Something that the hardware was not designed to support, but programmers found a way. (Meanwhile the NES couldn't even do it!) Meanwhile, the Apple and IBM computers could only display monochrome, or if you could afford the graphics card, 8 really ugly colors .
And 17 million sold worldwide? Wrong! Initially they had 17 million in sales in North America when it was popular. It continued to sell. In its lifetime they sold over 30 million worldwide.