[Coladam] We're #3!

Bob rslopsema at sbcglobal.net
Wed Mar 21 11:03:21 EDT 2007


I AGREE with you Geoff.  I came on the ADAM scene in 1989, and all the 
ADAM's I have used, aquired, purchased, or otherwise had my hands on, worked 
very well.  Of course, I have had some of late (last 2-3 years) have a video 
chip failure, but that is about it.  I would have to say the ADAM was one 
tough little computer, including the printer (although noisy).  What happens 
when a company overextends it's ability to produce, or wants to get a jump 
on a market segment, is that they get caught with their "pants down" as 
Coleco did with the  "hurry up production - bring it to market idea".  BTW, 
I have some new in the box Revision 80 examples and they are fine.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Geoff Oltmans" <oltmansg at bellsouth.net>
To: "Rich Drushel" <rfd at cwru.edu>
Cc: "Adam Coleco" <coladam at adamcon.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: [Coladam] We're #3!


> I'd agree with that. The problem with the ADAM was that they had delays in 
> production and development and shipped it to market anyway. Microsoft did 
> the same thing with the Xbox 360 when it was introduced. I suppose that 
> Coleco would have gotten hammered just as bad if they hadn't tried to ship 
> in time for Christmas. I haven't seen too many flakey ADAMs, but maybe I'm 
> just lucky since I never had one brand-new and all the DOA ones were 
> either replaced or chucked in the trash.




More information about the Coladam mailing list