• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Design flaws in classic computers

Not sure about actual design flaws. The Osborne had issues with overheating also (no fans). My biggest pet peeve is moving the keys around on a keyboard. Not sure what drew people to put all our shifted number characters all around the keyboard but boy is that annoying when trying to write a program.

The biggest one (vintage and modern both) I run into is moving and reshaping the stupid Return/Enter, Backspace, and backslash key. For very commonly used keys I would think people wouldn't screw around with them but once and a while even today I'm on a keyboard that \ is near the shift or (just one keyboard I've seen) right of the shortened backspace key.
 
Keyboard connector at the back?

Keyboard connector at the back?

How about this. Not so much of a "flaw" as such but more in the department of "why do it this way?".

Putting the keyboard socket at the BACK of the machine?

Why not the FRONT? Not only does it make attachment easy, but you get more cable room to reposition the keyboard (like on your lap). How many times have you had to lift/move heavy machines to get at the connector, or scrabbled around blind trying to plug a keyboard in a socket you can't actually see?

One of the original IBM PC ads showed a businessman with the keyboard on his lap. Apparently this was one of the reasons why IBM decided not to have a built-in keyboard. It's a bet of a stretch to get one on your lap though, when that heavy cable is attached at the back, and it has to go around that huge box.

hehehe..I'm being a little facitious. I think I know exactly why most micros had them at the back. It probably came down to pure asthetics. It would break the clean lines of a computer, and so affect the visual appearence. Also, being hobbiests/collectors we tend to move computers around a lot. Unless you were a computer technician, micros largely sat on a desk and plugging/re-plugging the keyboard was not a frequent activity.

It still makes practical sense to have to connector at the front though. :)

Tez
 
barythrin said:
The biggest one (vintage and modern both) I run into is moving and reshaping the stupid Return/Enter, Backspace, and backslash key. For very commonly used keys I would think people wouldn't screw around with them but once and a while even today I'm on a keyboard that \ is near the shift or (just one keyboard I've seen) right of the shortened backspace key.
Click to expand...

Ergonomics is a whole 'nother category in itself.

A big pet peeve for me is the use of the backslash as a path separator in DOS and the problem that one can't reach it from the home keys (at least my right pinky won't stretch that far) on a standard PC keyboard. Another argument for *nix, I suppose...

The size of the screen on the Osborne (as well as the Mac) was a turn-off for me. When I saw the prototype of the O1 spread out on a table at Sorcim, I thought they were joking about the small CRT.

But then, early LCD displays didn't exactly make it easy on the user.
 
tezza said:
One of the original IBM PC ads showed a businessman with the keyboard on his lap. Apparently this was one of the reasons why IBM decided not to have a built-in keyboard. It's a bet of a stretch to get one on your lap though, when that heavy cable is attached at the back, and it has to go around that huge box.
Click to expand...
That's why they gave the AT keyboard a loooong 10-foot cord. :)
 
Chuck(G) said:
"Mass market" back in 1980 was a comparative term.
Click to expand...

The 'mass market' PMI MicroMate doesn't seem to get much attention either, but it also came with (optionally) 800Mb, 96-tpi drives.
If you really want an example of lots of storage on a 5.25" diskette at around the time of the C64, take a look at the Kaypro Robie, circa 1984. (Kaypro qualifies as a "mass market" machine, doesn't it?)
Click to expand...

Not sure 'bout the Robie, it never was very popular, hence, it's relative rarity today. I'm pretty sure it was the price (vs the IBM PC it was competing with) that scared off a lot of potential buyers.

--T
 
TandyMan100 said:
How about that annoying little red scroll thing in the middle of the IBM thinkpads? Always popping off. Liddle bugger.
Click to expand...

Scroll thing? Are you talking about the pointing stick, the only sensible pointing device ever? If you want annoying, what about the front & center touch pad? I hate 'em! Trouble is, they're touch sensitive! IOW, every time you touch it to move the cursor, it 'clicks' on sum'n you really didn't want to click on. That's annoying. And, placing it between the user and the keyboard means that you have to reach across it to type, resulting in a lot of 'accidental' touches, which have unpredictable consequences. Nothing like typing away, only to discover that the cursor has jumped to a different part of the document, and you then have to stop and move the last few sentences back to where they belong.

--T
 
tezza said:
Why not the FRONT?
<snippage>
It still makes practical sense to have to connector at the front though. :)

Tez
Click to expand...

My favorite vintage box is my UCI '386, which has the entire mainboard mounted backwards in the case, so everything is accessible, right at your fingertips, including the BigRedSwitch. Sweet!

--T
 
Hmm.. you sure you don't just have the system backwards? ;-) I've actually never though about that but yeah that is a dumb design to have all our most used ports on the back of a computer. I did always like the Amiga for that front/side accessibility, as inconsistent as it may be.
 
barythrin said:
Hmm.. you sure you don't just have the system backwards? ;-) I've actually never though about that but yeah that is a dumb design to have all our most used ports on the back of a computer. I did always like the Amiga for that front/side accessibility, as inconsistent as it may be.
Click to expand...

There were many systems that didn't require the user to open the case to add or change expansion cards--the edge connector was at the far end of the card. Made a lot of sense to me.

The problem with the PC card "bracket" is that if you're clumsy with a screwdriver or the back of the case is out of alignment with the motherboard, it's possible for a card to pop out (partially) of its slot.
 
TRS-80 model 3 & 4. Where the end of the video tube is. Putting the lid back on is a real adventure.
 
tezza said:
How about this. Not so much of a "flaw" as such but more in the department of "why do it this way?".

Putting the keyboard socket at the BACK of the machine?
Click to expand...

The Compaq Deskpro has the socket at the front. But a keyboard socket at the front isn't an unalloyed benefit; Sod's Law says that it'll be at just the right height and position that the keyboard will knock against the plug. That still leaves the side, though.
 
Early Kaypro design flaws.

Early Kaypro design flaws.

I will add my 2 cents to a good thread - I guess back then and even today, common sense isn't so common after all, in many cases!

Early Kaypros II, 4, 10, 16 - others? - kept the basic sturdy, rugged well designed aluminum case for a lot of models.

Some modifications were made for eventual hard drives, fans, ports, etc.

But they never put the switches on the front panel - you had to blindly feel your way to the back panel. They also weighed almost 30 pounds and were bulky, so moving them in a small office setting could be an effort compared to our lightweights today.

Micro Cornucopia showed how to put them on the front panel -

power - on / off

reset - needed for a cold book - could use control - C on keyboard for a warm boot - either required when you swapped disks and you swapped disks a lot back then, especially if you only had just the original 2 disk drives - top A for software and bottom B for your files - A could only hold one software package like word processing, spreadsheet, database, etc.

Brightness control for CRT - useful when light conditions changed during the day in an office - afterall, it was also only a 9" diagonal screen, so brightness could be much more important than with larger screens of today

Also, Micro Cornucopia knew for their upgrade to 5 MHz, the 2.5 / 5 MHz switch was needed on the front panel, since some programs did not work at 5 MHz.

So today we have a lot on the front panel, even USB's, besides the back panel.

Then of course the easily lost coiled keyboard cable - not really a telephone cable - Compaq solved that issue with their portable - if you lost the cable, you were dead in the water and could not use your system. You had to remove it on the Kaypro to pack it up for travel.

No flip down riser stand on the early models. You had to prop the case up on the back edge of the keyboard - CRASH!. Also very uncomfortable to use that way - you could not make full use of the coiled keyboard cable that extended 6 feet.

The famous sci / fi author Arthur C. Clarke [who died last year] is pictured back then using an early Kaypro propped up in this way on a cramped desk.

But "trial and error" led to some standards that we just take for granted today.

Just some random quick thoughts to think about.

Frank
 
Keyboard connector

Keyboard connector

tezza said:
Putting the keyboard socket at the BACK of the machine?

Why not the FRONT? Not only does it make attachment easy, but you get more cable room to reposition the keyboard (like on your lap). How many times have you had to lift/move heavy machines to get at the connector, or scrabbled around blind trying to plug a keyboard in a socket you can't actually see?
Click to expand...

The first PC I ever used (when I worked for Parcelforce during the late 80s) was the Compaq Deskpro and if I recall correctly, this had its keyboard connector (large 5 pin DIN type) on the front.

Paul.
 
The Coleco Adam... Absolutely full of problems! The worst one was the computer would erase data on any cassette you left in the machine when you turned it on and off. Not all Coleco Adams had this problem. The first one I had was fine. The second one wiped out quite a few of my tapes.

The printer / power cable on that thing was awful. There's a huge freakin' cable connected to a 9 pin female connector - one of those ones made entirely out of soft plastic. The thing wouldn't stay in the connector worth a damn because of the thick cable attached to it. They tried putting some sort of supports on the sides of the connector which DIDN'T help. So you'd be sitting there working on something, and everything you've worked on would suddenly get wiped because of the flakey connection.

Speaking of the printer/power cable... if your printer happens to die, your entire computer is dead because the printer is what powered the whole thing.

Other than all of that, great computer :)


The Timex Sinclair / ZX81's issues with the 16K RAM pack. Getting that stupid thing to stay connected was a whole lot of joy. It ranks up there with the Coleco printer/power cable. And even though the membrane keyboard was intentional, I would like to think of it as a design flaw. I had the overlay with the rubber buttons which just made the keyboard worse.

The power supply is my biggest beef with the C-64. I've had lots of them die on me. Then when you try to open it to fix it, you find that the entire thing is filled with glue which makes repair impossible.
 
TandyMan100 said:
How about that annoying little red scroll thing in the middle of the IBM thinkpads? Always popping off. Liddle bugger.
Click to expand...

I actually like the trackpoint on Thinkpads - I find it much more useful than these d@mn touchpads, which I find too jumpy and unreliable. I'll taker any day a tracking device where the pointer actually stops moving when you stop touching it. With capacitive touchpads I find that the mouse pointer jumps wildly on the screen and clicks at random even when I don't touch them.

Another design flaw: the original ZX Spectrum rubber keyboard.
 
Cost of production and possible sales price should be taken in consideration when deciding what is a design flaw and what is not. I'm no fan of the Speccy keyboard either but can realize Sir Clive did all in his power to cut costs and make a really cheap computer. Anything more complex and it had become more expensive to build and thus sell.

Depending on your cultural preferences (i.e. if you lived in North America or Europe), you may or may not understand this dilemma to get products as cheap as possible instead of producing something of higher quality. Jack Tramiel at least did, as he saw the ZX Spectrum sold very well in the UK and rest of Europe. Although the C64 also was rather successful on most markets, his motive was to produce a very cheap Commodore with rubber keyboard for the cost-sensitive European market. Officially this was one of the main reasons behind the TED project which over a year later emerged as C16, Plus/4 and C116 (rubber!). By late 1984 however, there really no longer was a market for a new, quite incompatible computer no matter how cheap it was.
 
Kaput!

Kaput!

The biggest design flaw in the commodore and atari computers was they taylored to much to kids and games and lacked a serious 80 column display ability.

Commodore 64 the biggest selling toy computer ever made, imo much better than the Apple ii's except for the IIGS, to bad Commodore is kaput and Apple isn't..

Atari - another toy computer that lacked any serious consideration and lacked the department store appeal the Commodore 64 had, like Commodore, Atari also kaput.
 
there's a major design flaw in my XT clone. it's too slow. maybe it's not a "flaw" it might just be a "feature".
 
Dunno about Atari, but remember Commodore already had a line of business computers, the PETs which came in both 40 and later 80 column versions. At one moment in time they considered a Color PET but scrapped that idea in favour for an affordable home computer, the VIC-20 although it has rather low resolution. Commodore continued to produce business computers in the lesser known CBM-II line which was contemporary and even included some parts found in the C64. Possibly they could have gone a middle way and made the C64 yet more business like while still sporting colourful, somewhat high resolution graphics and the SID chip. Again it is a matter of cost. Also I suppose marketing is much more difficult if you have a product that is neither or both of two different things. Commodore tried to market the C64 towards smaller companies but probably only a small fraction were used for business purposes.

If home computers (toys) is considered a huge mistake in computing history, one can only begin to wonder why even IBM decided to downsize their PC into PCjr, pretty much designed to be a home computer alternative. In any case, I can't imagine a whole computer can be considered a design fault. Rather it would be a management fault to decide to build an affordable home/gaming computer at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top