[Coladam] We're #3!

Rich Drushel rfd at cwru.edu
Tue Mar 20 16:13:49 EDT 2007

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, oltmansg at bellsouth.net wrote:

> It's amazing how many of the anecdotal evidence (much of it unfair) for
> how "bad" the ADAM was has perpetuated itself for so long. You hear the
> same old reasons every time.

	There are actually much worse reasons that would justify putting
the ADAM this high (or low), many technical (and business ethical) in
nature.  The "PC Week" people just didn't dig very far...or now have such
a dweebie non-tech audience that they didn't want to risk talking over their

	Same thing for the TI-99/4A:  the reasons given are nothing compared
to the real hassles of using (or developing for) that system.  But they
mentioned none of these.

	In 5 minutes, off the top of my head, I could write much more
damning stuff about the ADAM or the TI-99/4A...details if anyone is

	I own both of them, and I maintain that there is a great computer
in the ADAM, lots of power, flexibility...I believe that the "shipped dead
in the box" plus buggy software was the killer of the ADAM.  They needed
another 6-8 months...but Coleco execs would have gone to jail if they
didn't ship at Christmas 1983, after what they did to get the stock prices
up.  I think Neil Wick covered this very well 2 ADAMcons ago.


Richard F. Drushel, Ph.D.            | "They fell:  for Heaven to them no hope
Instructor and Executive Officer     |  imparts / Who hear not for the beating
Department of Biology, CWRU          |  of their hearts."
Cleveland, Ohio  44106-7080  U.S.A.  |         -- Edgar Allan Poe, "Al-Aaraaf"

More information about the Coladam mailing list