So, how could the SMC-777 have succeeded and be what the IBM 5150 was in our timeline?

I always hear the question asked about the MZ Series and TI-99 4A but never ol' SMC-777

Pulling a NEC with a 16-bit (8086) version with a couple of improvements called the SMC-888 would be a start.

>>11800664 (OP)
It couldn't have. The IBM PC and compatibles were the perfect storm. The only system that had a chance to compete was the PC-98 and those died because they were too expensive compared to PC clones. No Japanese company was going to become dominant in home computers, especially after Reagan put a tarrif on Japanese computers in 1987.

>>11800664 (OP)
>I always hear the question asked about the MZ series and TI-99/4A
As far as auditory hallucinations go, you could have worse ones. Still I'd recommend meds to suppress this to at least "how could the Odyssey 2" have won levels.

>>11800710
Sony had the market lead and the SMC-777 was released in 1983.
Problem was that Sony needed to release a 16-bit version (8086) of this computer on the same day as the SMC-777 with some other enchantments.
Plus this was a time where people would buy anything that was Japanese.

Of course NEC and IBM compatible cards (separate) would've helped the SMC-888, if that ever happened, which it needed to.

>>11800742
That would have only givwn them the lead in Japan and even then Windows 95 still would have made Sony irrelevant. The best they could have done was replace NEC, they could never have been the worldwide market leader.

>>11800839
Sony had the PlayStation by 1995, they wouldn't be irrelevant until 2017 with the Nintendo Switch.

Sony can be the worldwide leader.

>>11800896
Consoles have nothing to do with home computers you schizo. Sony computers would never be the market leader.

>>11800963
Yes they would.

bump

>bumping your own thread
>deleting the bump
Have some shame, dude.

>>11804047
I wasn't the one who bumped the thread to be frank.

>>11800664 (OP)
IBM PC-compatibles only won because of the "compatibles" part.
Real IBM-branded machines were expensive, required many IBM-branded spare parts and weren't available in as many configurations as their competition.
When other companies started producing IBM-compatibles it allowed for more innovation in the market like different form factors and expansion capabilities, newer technologies that could be adopted without IBM approval such as data storage formats, faster and/or cheaper parts from other manufacturers which were coming out at such a pace that your brand new computer was obsolete within six months
And thanks to the standardization of MS-DOS and its associated filesystems and programs, the newer new computer you got to replace that old new computer could be from an entirely different manufacturer and still run all your old programs and read your old files
Compare this to pre-IBM PC computers where data intercompatibility was a nightmare with fully proprietary storage interfaces and data formatted in such machine-specific ways that it's a pain in the ass to read even today

>>11800664 (OP)
funniest save x thread yet

>>11804983
No. This had a chance.

"How do we save X" threads should be a bannable offense

>>11805426
No, it's what the normies want.

>>11805442
Normalfags should leave

bump

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl1aoFbVHrw

If anyone wanted to know how a SMC-888 would've been made it would've been this (later models would not be brought up).

Releases on the same day as the SMC-777

CPU
Main CPU: 8.056MHz 8086, modded to septate the address and data busses.
Sub CPU: 8.056MHz 8087 modded to septate the address and data busses.
4.028MHz Z80 (for sound and SMC-777 backwards compatibility)
M5L8041

Ram
8086 Ram: 128KB, expandable to 1MB
Z80 Ram: 64KB
Graphics Ram: 64KB, expandable to 1MB
Color Ram: 8KB
Sprite Ram 32KB

Graphics (later models will have better graphics)
1 background layer.
1 window (locked screen/non scrolling) layer
256 32x32 15 color sprites, 64 sprites per line
4096 colors
46/47 colors on screen, 16 for the background layer, 15/16 for the window layer and 15 for the sprite layer
Supports 320x200, 320x240, 320x400, 320x480, 640x200, 640x240, 640x400 and 640x480, all progressive scan
Supports horizontal and vertical scrolling, as well as parallax scrolling, line and row scrolling, vertical and horizontal line scrolling, column scrolling and vertical and horizontal sprite flipping.
Supports transparency effects.


Sound
Custom 16 channel WSG sound chip, AY-3-8910 based but in stereo (think Konami's SCC chip but more advance), IO busses removed in favor of a dedicated 18-Bit address bus, 256KB of sound ram.
External FM card sold separately (2X YM2151, releases in 1984).
AY-3-8910 (later YM2203/YM2608), also handles controllers due to being MSX compatible.
SN76496A, for SMC-777 backwards compatibility.

SMC-888 controllers have more buttons then their SMC-777 and MSX counterpart, namely 8 (6 action buttons (Cross, Circle, Square, Triangle, L, R, Select and Start).

Supports mice and lite pens.

Has a PC-88/98 and IBM compatible card to support their respected software.

Thoughts?

>thoughts
11 year old Fantendo poster tier.

>>11810381
No, far from it.

>>11810373
Crunching Anon's numbers here.
So let's just say $50 for those main CPUs. Don't know 8086 or slave CPU prices and non-clone Z80s are cheap anyway. The CPUs are the least of the worries here apart from it being massively annoying to work with.

RAM is expensive. That RAM config is ~$570 ($495 per 256KB). We'll be fair and pretend he got a bulk deal and that there is a massive upmark (there was, but Sony would still have to pay it). $470.

That VDP would be insanely costly. As an example we'll take a CAD card from 1984. It could manage 640x480 with 256 colours@60 for $2995. This does include the 320KB of VRAM it needed and the extra 8088, but not the special monitor (an extra $1300). Of course anon doesn't have that many colours on screen, but does want to have all those other neat things so the price is definitely comparable if in some odd world Sony decided to develop an insane graphics card for their metoo computer line. I'll be nice and throw in the NEC and IBM PC graphical compatibility in there with that price and set it at $2500. Program compatibility is another matter, not even accounting for NEC and IBM's litigious streaks.

Sound? We'll apply the same RAM price logic for $395. I see prices in 1984 in Britain for a 8910 at £12. I can't be arsed to come up with some cost picture for a custom 16-channel sound chip, so let's just go for 7 AY-3-8910 at $10 (bulk prices) for $70+$5 for the SN. So $470 for anon's sound.

The SMC-777 retailed at about $500 accounting for the exchange rate then. None of these numbers account for inflation. At least a $3000 jump to the next model is a bit much.

Now if you sold this as the hypothetical AnonWorks NEC and IBM AnalCavity Destroyer 3001 (+Multiplan), I'd be okay with it. It just isn't a Sony SMC-888. You've lost this shark.

>>11810420
Of course the ram won't be maxed out and the RGB video would be analog.

This is aiming at $1000-1500 depending on how many disk/hard drives are included.

>>11810434
Irrelevant gibberish. These are the prices you'll get. The AnalCavity Destroyer 3001 is going to be $3000+, hence the name. Just license a software suite as a pack-in as that's far more important.

You are now an IBM spreadsheet-em-up competitor whether you like it or not.

>>11810437
No, far from it, you have no idea what you're talking about.

>he's gone into nuh-uh mode
Boring. Should've just created a new thread on how to save the world from IBM using the AnalCavity Destroyer instead.

>>11810373
256KB of sound ram is the max amount of audio ram it supports, out of the box it's only 16KB.

>>11800715
TI-99/4A would've fared better if Texas Instruments hadn't virulently hated hobby programmers, and hadn't gotten jebaited into a price war with whatever shit Tramiel was peddling at Atari. It was a solid machine with a lot of potential, and a decent amount of expandability.

Quietly

>>11810451
>if Texas Instruments hadn't virulently hated hobby programmers

What was TI's beef? Was it just different types of nerds arguing with each other?

>>11805426
Same, I hate this fucking shit.
Reality only went one way, there is no point in this. Discuss the system not alternative realities.

>>11813334
Reality goes in multiple direction, we're in one of those directions.
This is on topic, it is not shit.

>>11813819
Non existent vidya isn’t retro

>>11813854
Yes, it is as it's 1980s vidya.