|
By Ian Adamson and Richard Kennedy
|
|
|
The Spectrum of Success
As we saw in the
last
chapter, the launch of the ZX81 initiated a computing
fever which swept the country. Although to outsiders its arrival
appeared as sudden and inexplicable as skateboards or breakdancing,
micro mania was subtly different from the run-of-the-mill
social fad. For a start, although the majority of enthusiasts
fell into the mid-teen to early twenties age group, a significant
number were of an age that generally manages to resist the
lure of more ephemeral fashions. An unusual number of parents
fell under the spell of the machines they bought for their
children. A less positive (and rarely mentioned) characteristic
of the boom was that its supporters were almost exclusively
male.
Unlike most teen-dominated
movements, it was difficult for the rest of the world to ignore
or disapprove of the computing obsession. Partly because of
its mystique and partly because of the support of the schools,
there was a vague but compelling pressure to encourage an
interest in computing. Although in the end most home microcomputers
were exclusively applied to running arcade games, they were
nevertheless regarded as inherently educational. Predictably,
this misapprehension was milked for all it was worth by the
manufacturers. Any parents without a micro in their home were
made to feel that they were impeding their children's future
employment prospects. Being shunned by the BBC may well have
been a blow to Sinclair's pride, but more important was the
loss of state sanction invaluable to the exploitation of the
'education' market.
While the ZX81 is undoubtedly the
best microcomputing product to have been marketed by Sinclair
Research, the ZX Spectrum is far and away the company's most
significant commercial success. More than any other product
it was responsible for establishing Sinclair's international
reputation and his popular image in the UK as figure-head
of the microcomputing revolution. Leaving long-term considerations
to one side for a moment, it should be stressed that the Spectrum's
launch was a beautifully orchestrated seduction of an already
eager market. By December 1981, sales of the ZX81 had hit
the 250,000 mark, providing Sinclair with easily the largest
microcomputer user base in the world. The conspicuous hordes
of enthusiasts clustered around the Sinclair machine in W.
H. Smith's, the elegiac tributes to the working man's boffin
in the popular press, all contributed to persuading those
without computers that the moment had come to move with the
times. In an industry too young and confused to enjoy any
meaningful traditions, veterans of the home-computer market
awaited the new Sinclair machine with the anticipation of
an annual festival. And Sinclair played his crowd like a master.
The phenomenal success of the ZX81
was a tough act to follow. Having given thousands of neophytes
a taste for computing, Sinclair's next task was to ensure
that they remained loyal to his product range. The new computerates
were already hungry for the colour graphics of Atari, Commodore
and Acorn; Clive knew he would have to come up with the goods
at a price they could afford. For those who had yet to take
the plunge, the company had to devise a marketing strategy
that broadened the appeal of the new product.
As a first stage in his effort to
expand the home-computer market, Sinclair devoted his attention
to improving the appearance of his new product. In spite of
attracting a Design Council award, the ZX81 wasn't much to
look at. According to marketing development manager John Rowland,
one of the biggest problems facing W. H. Smith when it started
selling the ZX81 was that of display. How do you promote 'a
lump of plastic shaped like a wedge of cheese' so that it
looks as if it's worth seventy quid? The ZX81's design was
still tethered to the hobbyist tradition and Sinclair was
determined that the Spectrum would make the leap into the
sleeker style of mainstream consumer electronics.
Rick Dickinson was Sinclair Research's
resident industrial designer and was responsible for the internal
and external appearance of all products since the ZX80. In
an interview he explained the type of concerns that informed
the Spectrum's design:
[The Spectrum] is
a step up-market and I was really trying hard for a super-smart
machine. It is not for quite the same amateur market. We
spent a great deal of time on [the keyboard]. It is the
only interface between the user and the product and it has
to be right. We were trying also to cram on more information
than anyone had ever done. I believe that form should follow
function.
(Sinclair User,
August 1982.)
As far as newcomers to computing were
concerned, Dickinson had done a great job. In spite of his
form-should-follow-function maxim, the outward appearance
of the Spectrum worked best as an abstraction. In the full-page
colour adverts, the machine effortlessly looked the part of
the consumer-electronics artifact. For those who didn't know
one end of a computer from the other, the mysterious words
and symbols in a multitude of colours were part and parcel
of the micro mystique. For those who thought they knew
one end of a computer from the other, the experience of defeat
when faced with the Spectrum's keyboard was less compelling.
Like so much that was wrong with the
Spectrum, its absurdly complex keyboard was the result of
shortsighted economies in product development. The adoption
of single-keystroke BASIC was a tolerable idiosyncrasy of
the early products that became a serious liability as the
range matured. As ZX BASIC was expanded, it became practically
impossible to display every keyword and symbol clearly on
an already cramped keyboard. This shortcoming was disastrous
for the beginners for whom the machine was intended. Even
the simplest operation became a major performance, as reviewers
were quick to point out:
The BASIC is still
programmed using the single-key technique which the ZX80
and ZX81 exploited but, and it is a big BUT, this has now
got to the point where it is rather silly. Because there
are so many functions crammed on to each key, generally
five, there are now two levels of Shift. In fact, to type
in some of the more commonly used BASIC commands takes more
keypresses than there are letters in the command!
(Computing Today,
August 1982.)
Fortunately for Sinclair, suspense
and anticipation blunted the critical faculties of the eager
millions. As the April 1982 launch date drew close, editorials
of the day took the tone of prayers to micro-computing's high
priest:
Let us hope firstly
that Clive Sinclair does launch a ZX82 and secondly, that
when he does it is not a replacement for the ZX81, as the
ZX81 was for the ZX80, but that he has carefully designed
his new computer to fill the gaping hole between the ZX81
and the BBC Microcomputer. Then ZX81 users, and all the
ZX81 support companies which have sprung up in the last
year, will have something to look forward to.
(Your Computer,
March 1982.)
Amen! As far as the converted were
concerned, Sinclair gave them the upgrade for which they were
waiting. A colour computer with 16K or 48K of RAM at £125
and £175 respectively. Owners of more sophisticated
micros could no longer sneer at the black and white blocks
that passed for graphics on the ZX81. As far as first-time
buyers were concerned, Sinclair could offer the first cogent
reason for introducing a micro into the home. The inclusion
of colour graphics allowed software houses to produce believable
reproductions of the shoot-'em-up games found in the arcades.
If you weren't interested in programming, then you could think
of your Spectrum as a home entertainment centre. The explosion
of games software that followed the Spectrum's launch was
to be a critical factor in the massive expansion of the microcomputer
market.
Unlike that of the ZX80 and ZX81,
the development of the ZX Spectrum was not completed in a
spirit of harmony and co-operation. From the outset, there
were disagreements between Nine Tiles and its clients about
how the project should be approached. According to Steven
Vickers, 'Clive's strategy of getting [the Spectrum] out fast
relied on making as few changes as possible to the ZX81.'
The software for the ZX80 had been specifically designed for
a machine with very little memory. The programmers felt that
a structure intended for a 1K system was inappropriate for
the processing requirements of a 16K or 48K Spectrum. With
the ZX81, Sinclair had made it clear that little of the ZX80
code should be rewritten but that instead the expansion modules
should simply be grafted on to the original base. The feeling
at Nine Tiles was that although this approach was tolerable
for the ZX81, such economies could be disastrous for the Spectrum.
They believed that the resultant software would flounder because
of the inadequacies of an inappropriate structure:
Certainly with the
Spectrum we wanted to rewrite the code, but there wasn't
the time and there definitely wasn't the resources. At every
point [in the development of the ZX range] Clive wanted
the maximum new facilities for the minimum money.
(Interview with John
Grant, 8 September 1985.)
Thus, although the Spectrum boasted
an impressive expansion of ZX BASIC, the new facilities were
impaired by their inefficient implementation. In short, the
execution of a Spectrum program was depressingly slow, as
the following reviewer's comments emphasize:
The BASIC is slow,
well, 'snail-like' would be a better description, and the
standard Benchmark results are given in Table 1. The last
test was done with a loop of 100 instead of 1000 as I thought
that you might like to read the review before the Christmas
holidays.
(Computing Today,
August 1982.)
Initially, the absence of competition
and an inexperienced market meant that the Spectrum's deficiencies
had little effect on its success. Had the machine been developed
as an interim product, then its shortcomings would have been
defensible. That Jan Jones was hired at the beginning of 1983
specifically to create a Spectrum Super BASIC suggests that
Sinclair may have taken Grant's concerns to heart. That the
Superspectrum was abandoned is a symptom of the complacency
that lost Research its market lead as the competition hit
back with superior products.
The stalwart Jim Westwood was conspicuously
absent during the development of the Spectrum's hardware.
The £5m. flat-screen investment programme initiated
at the beginning of 1981 had apparently brought the company
no closer to getting a product on the market. In desperation,
Westwood had been taken off the ZX range after the completion
of the ZX81 and dispatched to rescue the television. Into
Westwood's shoes stepped the admirably capable Richard Altwasser.
That the Spectrum reached the market more or less on schedule
is largely a result of the friendship that developed between
Vickers and Altwasser, with the latter serving as a buffer
between Nine Tiles and Sinclair Research. Having skimped on
the machine's software development, a decision seems to have
been taken to be a little more generous with the hardware.
A number of reviewers noted with satisfaction that, unlike
earlier machines, the micro's clock circuitry and display
were crystal controlled - a fact that contributed to the reliability
of the hardware. Others pointed to the tidy internal layout,
for which credit must go to the cooperative labours of Dickinson
and Altwasser.
The work on the Spectrum's software
took the best part of a year to complete. Although the straight
enhancements of ZX81 BASIC were relatively unproblematic,
the development of the code that was to handle the various
planned peripherals was impeded by the lack of working hardware.
After six months shunting between Research and Ferranti, Altwasser
finally managed to cobble together a prototype of the Spectrum
itself, and by Christmas Vickers had completed the bulk of
the software. From this point on the situation deteriorated.
The problems started in February 1982
with financial disagreements between Nine Tiles and Sinclair.
The Grants insist that for years Sinclair had been suggesting
the possibility of royalties on their work, and when it became
clear that these were not going to materialize, they decided
to put up their fees. For his part, Sinclair made it clear
that the company's rates were over the top. In a product development
impeded by bad feeling, the announcement by Vickers and Altwasser
that they were departing to form their own company couldn't
have come at a worse moment. (They went on to trade as Cantab,
which was to produce the ill-fated Jupiter Ace, a computer
featuring the Forth language.)
With Altwasser gone, for a while hardware
development drifted along at Research with no one at the helm.
In February, with the Spectrum's April launch looming and
still no sign of completed peripherals, it was decided to
produce the incomplete ROM for a limited release. Grant explains
the theory behind the strategy:
The original idea
was that Research were going to bring out the Spectrum with
an unfinished ROM. They were going to make just a very few.
They knew that before long ... they'd have the real ROM
and anyone who bought add-ons for an early machine would
be able to have an exchange ROM. Then it got to somewhere
around May or June and they'd sold 75,000 machines, all
with the old ROM. They came to the conclusion that the original
idea just wasn't going to be viable.
(Interview with John
Grant, 8 September 1985.)
Grant resolved this potentially disastrous
situation by coming up with the idea of a 'shadow' ROM that
sat on the add-on card and took over from the Spectrum's ROM
when the peripheral was called into use. This led to the absurd
situation in which the Spectrum's software was still being
developed more than three months after the machine's launch!
In effect, the resident Spectrum ROM was to remain incomplete.
Whereas the ROMs of the earlier ZX micros were crammed to
the hilt, that of the Spectrum boasts 1300 free bytes, which
had been reserved for the peripheral software.
Since the Spectrum was the last Sinclair
product on which the company was to work, this seems an appropriate
point to record the views of Nine Tiles on the Spectrum development.
These are summed up in this extract from a letter to Sinclair:
During the last year,
the project has been subject to abrupt changes in direction
and considerable effort has been wasted. For instance, the
way [the network] has been used has been changed several
times in March and April of this year. Software was completed
in April and we have not yet been told that there is any
hardware on which to test it. We feel that there is a need
for a more structured approach to the planning of the project
with the hard- and software design's timescales being agreed
beforehand by other members of the team.
(Letter from John
Grant to Clive Sinclair, 12 June 1982.)
Although it is easy to dismiss Grant's
comments as the fruits of resentment, it should be remembered
that Sinclair has levelled similar criticisms at the rest
of the computer industry.
Given Sinclair's track record and
the circumstances under which the Spectrum was developed,
it is difficult to believe that Grant's complaints are entirely
without foundation.
There's an ironic postscript to the
Sinclair-Nine Tiles saga. After the split with Research visitors
to Nine Tiles were puzzled by the sight of staff wistfully
toying with calculations involving multiples of 2.5 million.
The truth can now be told. It seems that at the end of 1984
Nigel Searle, then managing director of Sinclair Research,
found himself grappling with a legal problem in the Far East.
Pirate Spectrums were flooding the market and the company
was constructing a case that would enable it to sue for breach
of copyright. The only trouble was that no one seemed able
to lay hands on the document that established Sinclair's ownership
of the Spectrum's software. With a growing sense of dread,
it finally dawned on Searle and Sinclair that as far as anyone
could tell the company didn't actually hold the software copyright!
In the panic and bad feeling that marked the closing stages
of the micro's development, no one had got around to asking
Nine Tiles to sign over the appropriate pieces of paper. In
theory, John Grant's company may well own the software copyright
of the world's bestselling microcomputer, unit sales of which
have now passed the 2.5 million mark. It seems that the company
declined Sinclair's modest offer for the relevant documentation.
After all, almost anything multiplied by 2.5 million comes
to more than £5000, doesn't it? Anyway, the 1985 cash
crisis interfered with the resolution of this potentially
vexed issue, which was presumably sorted out in the course
of the sale to Amstrad of Sinclair's intellectual property
rights where they relate to computers in 1986.
Given the untidy conclusion to the
development programme, it was hardly surprising that supply
problems hit the Spectrum on an unprecedented scale. Following
the standard pattern for a Sinclair launch, purchase was at
first restricted to mail-order sales, but the company departed
from its usual advertising strategy by initially confining
its campaign to the pages of the computing publications. Nevertheless,
demand was enormous and although the micro was officially
launched in April 1982, it wasn't until June that the first
machines began to trickle into the hands of the customers.
Never prone to a sense of déja vu, Sinclair was once
again reported to have been 'utterly astonished' by demand
for his new product.
By July, Sinclair Research was sitting
on a backlog of 30,000 orders. Once production had got into
full swing at Timex Dundee, the manufacturer was pumping out
5000 units a week. Then, in mid-July, just as supply problems
were in sight of being resolved, Timex shut down their entire
plant for its three-week annual holiday. The backlog hit the
40,000 mark, and customers were told they could expect a wait
of anything up to twelve weeks. With memories of ZX81 delays
still fresh in their minds, the thousands who paid their money
and then waiting three months for delivery must have found
it difficult to escape the suspicion that they were forward-financing
Sinclair production. There were dark rumblings of dissent
in the computer journals and news of the crisis spread to
the national papers.
Applying a Band-Aid to the savaged
jugular of his PR, in September Sinclair published an open
letter in the computing press apologizing for the delays.
He offered money hack on demand to those who were fed up with
waiting, and a £10 voucher towards printer or printer
paper to those blessed with unnatural patience. However, as
far as the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) was concerned,
it was a case of too little, too late. For all the good it
did the customers, in October the organization upheld complaints
against Spectrum ads (which promised '28-day delivery') and
berated the company for the 'appalling delays' in fulfilling
orders.
Given the backlog of orders for the
Spectrum, it was clearly important to sustain ZX81 sales,
particularly since it was the only Sinclair microcomputer
making a showing in the retail outlets. Sinclair was convinced
that, 'The ZX81 will continue to be ideal for the person who
wants the lowest possible entry cost into computing.' To prove
his point, at the Spectrum's launch he knocked down the price
of the ZX81's RAM pack from £49.95 to £29.95,
although the price of the ZX Printer was raised to £59.95.
Far from cutting back on manufacture of the old machine, the
company boldly announced that its ZX81 production target for
the end of the year was 150,000 units per month. Despite the
delays many first-time buyers chose to hold out for the Spectrum
and there was a significant slump in sales of the ZX81. To
counter this trend, Research signed up Prism Microproducts
to wholesale the machine, extended high-street sales to include
the Boots chain and cut the price of the ZX81 to £49.95.
In the frenzy and frustration of the
months following the Spectrum's launch, Sinclair received
solace and/or encouragement from an unexpected source. Caught
by the wave of micro mania that was sweeping the country,
the progressive forces of the Conservative government decided
to step up their contribution to the hi-tech revolution. Fired
by the success of the Micros for Secondary Schools campaign,
the Department of Industry (DI) committed a further £9m.
with the intention of putting at least one computer in every
primary school. Just as pre-production machines were being
readied for the reviewers, the Spectrum and ZX81 were tested
by the DI to see if they qualified for a place in the programme.
In July 1982, Margaret Thatcher announced
details of the scheme to the nation and revealed the products
that had been deemed educationally sound - the Sinclair Spectrum
48K, the BBC Model B with disk interface and the Research
Machines Link 480Z. With more than 27,000 institutions expected
to take part in the scheme, Sinclair Research felt that there
was cause for celebration. On hearing the news, a spokesman
made it clear that the company believed it could knock the
competition out of the running: 'We're very pleased about
it. We hope that being the cheapest in the scheme, we will
be able to outsell the other manufacturers.' Ironically, although
Sinclair has been extremely successful in getting his machines
into institutions all over the world, the company managed
to secure only a paltry 2 per cent of the U K education market.
Among the reasons given by British teachers are that the Spectrum's
size makes it too easy to steal and that the machine is simply
too fragile to withstand the battering it could expect from
hordes of pre-teens.
Sinclair Research had by now established
a market dominance in the UK that would be the envy of a multinational.
Continuing production delays had inhibited Sinclair's effective
exploitation of the 1982-3 Christmas market, but by the spring
of 1983 supply finally fell into step with demand. In February,
Sinclair contracted Prism to handle wholesale trade of the
Spectrum, and extended his assault on the high street to include
the Boots, John Menzies and Curry chains At the beginning
of the year, the Sinclair machine looked unstoppable. Clive
had sold off 10% of his personal shareholding, which valued
the company at around £136m., of which Clive Sinclair
still owned 85 per cent. The company's triumphant computer
division moved into spacious new offices in Willis Road, Cambridge,
and in March Nigel Searle was appointed managing director
of the Advance Products Division, which at this time meant
that he was responsible for the development of any non-computing
product. By the end of March, Sinclair Research had sold 200,000
Spectrums, and was announcing a £13.8m. profit on a
turnover of £54.53m. A remarkable achievement for a
new company which employed a staff of only 55.
Although 1983 will undoubtedly go
down in history as the halcyon days of Sinclair Research,
it would be remiss to pass over this period without reference
to the occasional problem. For example, in March the company
discovered that an entire shipment of Spectrum power-packs
was faulty. It seems that 14,000 units were capable of flooring
their owners with an electric shock. A massive recall operation
was initiated in an attempt to replace the defectives before
a hacker bit the dust. Fortunately, none of the Spectrum fraternity
came to harm. As if to compensate Sinclair for an unexpected
headache, fate delivered him the Guardian's Young Businessman
of the Year Award (at the age of 44).
Another hardware problem precipitated
crisis and correspondence in the autumn. Minor chip-tampering
prior to the release of the Issue 3 Spectrum proved to have
radical consequences for the user. It seems that in August
1983 Research introduced a new chip into the machine's design
which changed the entry point for the Spectrum's cassette-loaded
programs. So what? Well, as a result of this minor change,
a significant percentage of commercial software for the Spectrum
simply wouldn't run on the Issue 3. Sinclair Research pointed
the finger at the 'unprofessional programming practices' of
the software houses. Software companies complained that Sinclair
hadn't bothered to offer advance warning of the change. The
computer press made a mountain out of a molehill, and offered
untested suggestions as to how the Issue 3 problem could be
circumvented. In the end, it seems the crisis simply disappeared
of its own accord.
In May, Sinclair Research initiated
a series of price cuts which are worthy of note simply because
they exemplify an approach to marketing that has proved extremely
effective for the company. At the height of the Spectrum's
popularity, Sinclair reduced its price - £99.95 for
16K, £129.95 for 48K and cut the prices of both the
ZX81 and the ZX Printer to £39.95. The effect of this
move was to secure and extend Sinclair's market lead and panic
the competition. While most companies reduce prices when their
products are in steep decline, Sinclair tends to discount
shortly after sales have peaked. The advantage of his approach
is that vacillating consumers are drawn into the fold while
the product's promotion retains a commercial urgency, and
the costings of the competition are thrown into utter disarray.
Before moving on to discuss the next
major Sinclair product development, it seems sensible to depart
from our chronological sequence to record the company's efforts
to extend the commercial life of its most popular product
in the face of increasingly sophisticated competition. As
we have seen, the long-term appeal of the Spectrum was significantly
constrained by the economies imposed on its development. Although
the machine's sluggish software and dubious hardware were
no impediment to success as long as the machine stood alone
in the market, the first sight of organized competition forced
Sinclair to rely on the cheapness of the machine to provide
the main thrust of his promotional strategy.
For an interim development that sought
to exploit the paucity of product in a hungry market the Spectrum's
quick-'n'-dirty development was both appropriate and necessary.
Had the company followed through with its original plans and
completed the development of a medium-price advanced colour
micro, there was a good chance that such a SuperSpectrum would
have replicated its forerunner's success and ensured domination
of a new section of the market. Ironically, it was the Spectrum's
apparently unstoppable success that convinced Sir Clive that
the creation of a SuperSpectrum was unnecessary. In spite
of its relatively advanced stage of development, the project
was abandoned.
By the middle of 1984, the Spectrum
was looking tired; Sinclair Research had no product to satisfy
a growing section of the market, and the only indication of
the company's future in microcomputing came in the shape of
the multiply flawed QL. At this stage, the full-scale development
of an appropriate product seemed out of the question. In June
1984, the company pondered its options and concluded that
the lightning development of a stop-gap product seemed to
offer the simplest, most economic solution to its dilemma.
The result of these deliberations was eventually marketed
as the Spectrum +.
Once one has explained why the Spectrum
+ was produced, it's difficult to know what else to say about
the machine. Rumours of a Spectrum upgrade began to circulate
in September 1984 and, encouraged by the company's elaborate
denials of such a development, the computer press made a meal
of building on its own speculations. To everyone's surprise,
the Spectrum + was never actually launched, but simply became
available in October, priced at £179.95. The machine's
sudden appearance infuriated the chainstores, since most had
already stocked up for Christmas with standard Spectrums.
However, a presumably forewarned W. H. Smith was able to take
advantage of its privileged position as the leading Sinclair
stockist by making the most of seasonal sales of the new product.
The reality of the Spectrum + caused
its own problems for reviewers who had got so much mileage
out of speculation. How much could you say about a standard
Spectrum 48K with a new keyboard? Most writers opted to be
out front about their disappointment. The general consensus
seemed to be that the machine looked like a sawn-off QL, and
that considering the price rise the minimal improvements simply
were not good enough:
Sinclair Research
could have taken a bit more time and effort to produce a
machine it's worth upgrading to. Of course Sinclair Research
couldn't do a very enhanced Spectrum (say, with CP/M ability)
as the product would more than likely knock spots off the
QL. So what we get instead is a rather limp marketing ploy
and a return to old Spectrum prices. And while I'm on this
tack, you'll notice that the idea of a 16K colour computer
for under £100 has been quietly dismissed.
(Your Spectrum,
December 1984.)
It was not as if the consumer was
being presented with a choice between the old and new machine,
since in an interview in Your Spectrum (December 1984)
Nigel Searle inadvertently let slip that the company intended
phasing out the standard Spectrum. To add insult to injury,
the new packaging for the computer seemed to owe more to economy
than any real attempt to improve an old product. A number
of reviewers noted that the keys of the so-called 'professional
keyboard' tended to fall off, and with the passing of time
the Spectrum + track record regarding quality control was
less than impressive. Statements from major retailers such
as Boots seemed to indicate that the putative upgrade was
more trouble than it was worth:
Return levels for
the Spectrum + are still high, according to a Boots spokesman.
'It seems to take one person to sell a computer and three
to deal with the complaints. The acceptable returns level
is 5 to 6 per cent. Returns are running at four or five
times that amount and 90 per cent of those faults are genuine.'
(Sinclair User,
September 1985.)
Far from breathing new life into an
old product, the release of the Spectrum + seems to have drawn
attention to the weaknesses of the old machine and reinforced
suspicions about the low standards of quality control at Sinclair
Research.
In view of its limitations, it's hardly
surprising that the Spectrum + turned out to be the answer
to no one's problems. Faced with rising debts, enormous stocks
of out-dated product, and little in the way of revenue to
finance developments for the future, in June 1985 Sir Clive
opened negotiations with Robert Maxwell in an effort to raise
some capital. When 'Cap'n Bob's' rescue package fell apart,
Sinclair finally put his name to a deal with Dixons that had
been pending for some while. The chainstore gained an enormous
volume of Sinclair stock, and Sir Clive a much-needed £10m.
of revenue.
If things weren't exactly looking
up for Sinclair Research, at least the situation wasn't getting
any worse. However, it seems that one of the drawbacks of
the deal with Dixons was that it meant that Sinclair could
not release any kind of new Spectrum upgrade until 1986. The
effect of this clause was that Research was unable to take
full advantage of another deal that it had recently finalized
with Investronica, the company's Spanish distributor. While
the Spectrum was on its way out in the UK, sales of the old
warhorse were going from strength to strength over in Spain,
although overall the micro-market was considerably less developed
than in Britain, and Research product faced little in the
way of competition. Presumably mindful of the consequences
of Sir Clive's complacency about the product's position in
the U K, Investronica decided to plough back some of its profits
into the development of a genuine Spectrum upgrade.
The Spectrum 128K is everything the
Spectrum + should have been. With its enlarged memory capacity,
a new sound chip, significantly improved keyboard with numeric
keypad and RS232 and video output facilities, the machine
looked distinctly competitive at around £175. Far too
competitive as far as Dixons was concerned. Sinclair Research
made it clear that only after stocks of the Spectrum + had
been significantly reduced would the Spanish development be
launched on the UK market.
The UK version of the 128K Spectrum
arrived in February 1986, priced at £179.95. It lacked
the numeric keypad of the Spanish model, this being an extra
£19.95 accessory for the unfortunate British enthusiast.
Criticized for its lack of a joystick port, and lacking also
the new software to take advantage of the extra memory, it
aroused little enthusiasm. As an upgrade it offered better
sound (played through the television loudspeaker) and the
annoying 'dot crawl' on the display was cured. It enabled
a VDU monitor to be connected and incorporated a non-standard
RS232 communications port. All this was a welcome improvement
on a dated machine, but it was launched at the wrong time
of the year for new sales and provided no compelling reasons
for the existing Spectrum user to upgrade and manifestly failed
to revitalize the Sinclair image, as either innovator or provider
of cheap machines.
|
|