Talk:Commodore PET

message: There was a 3rd party add-on board called the "visible memory." It added 8K to the PET's memory and remapped the PET's own monitor to use it as a frame buffer. So instead of 40x25 8x8 characters, you had 320x200 addressable dots that could each be on or off. I know it existed because I owned one, although I can't find any reference to it on the modern Internet. Perhaps it went by another name as well? 208.50.99.146 (talk) 21:24, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graphics 

message: it would be really great to see a timeline of when each model was first available and sold, but i haven't been able to find anything that does that and am not comfortable editing wiki right now. help? 68.18.196.230 (talk) 19:49, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline 

message: The article indicates an effective transfer rate to the tape cassette of 750 baud.  But I recall that it took a little under three minutes to write out 8 kB, which would be 400–500 baud.  199.184.30.51 (talk) 13:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "Not every baud is a bit". Not every bit sent to the cassette deck represents a bit in memory, some of it is overhead. I don't know the details of the PET tape format but other tape formats have checksums and may even encode one  binary byte as two ASCII characters. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The PET tape format was a bespoke one and was as close as you could get to a 'digital' recording on an analogue tape (which is why the tapes could not be copied using two standard cassette machines).  The PET tape format recorded the data twice on the tape at an effective average of 1500 baud.  However the length of a '1' written to the tape was different to the length of a '0', thus the actual data rate varied with what was actually written.  As you note, there is a certain amount of 'housekeeping' data written to the tape as well, largely identifying the repeated blocks of data.  A real world data rate of 400-500 bits per second would be in the right ball park.  109.153.235.85 (talk) 16:19, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transfer rate to tape cassette 

message: The article claims that these machines were not sold as 'PET' in Europe as Philips already used the name PET.  These machines most certainly were sold in the UK (which is part of Europe) as the Commodore PET.  In fact virtually every computer museum here has at least one example.  Philips had a considerable presence in the UK, but there doesn't seem to have been a problem? 109.153.235.85 (talk) 11:56, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The September 1985 BYTE contains a column by Dick Pountain ( Seventh Anniversary of Microcomputing, page 385) which says, talking about the period around 1978: At over £1000, the Apple II was so expensive that the cheaper, all-in-one PET became the dominant machine in Britain, Germany and Scandinavia, keeping Commodore comfortably afloat during those lean years when Apple was cleaning up in the U.S. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Could that be a suitable cite to refute the above claim? 109.156.49.202 (talk) 11:06, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the dubious bit.  It would probably be hard to sell a computer called "PET" in the homeland of Joseph Pujol. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: See also the VIC 20 article; Commodore seems to sometimes bite the wax tadpole when choosing brand names. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Ah yes, the hazards of language.  It's always problematic selling products internationally.  Whatever your peddling, it turns out to be a rude word in one language or another! 109.156.49.202 (talk) 14:37, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

text: From the 3000 series onwards, they were sold as CBM <model number>. For the older, original 2001 at least mine has no trace of "PET" on the label, just "commodore    professional computer    2001 Series". --Buran Biggest Fan (talk) 19:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  European PETs 

message: The article claims that the SP900 (SuperPET) was sold only in Europe.
the SP9000, known as the SuperPET or MicroMainframe. This machine (only sold in Europe
I worked for "The Computer Shop of Abilene" of Abilene, Texas, and about 1981 we offered the SuperPET for sale along with the 4000 and 8000 series of CBMs.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.33.213.110 (talk) 14:34, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  SuperPET Sold in US 

message: How many of all PET's were sold by Commodore?  Does anyone have reference(s)?  Please add to the "unitssold" field of the infobox, similar to Commodore 64 and Commodore 128.  Thanks.  • Sbmeirow • Talk • 11:26, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Units Sold? 

message: The PET was not "the first personal computer sold to the public". One can trivially verify this by reading any of the hundreds of references in the various articles here on the Wiki, or even the Byte issue that is used in this one.
The PET was announced in January 1977. A prototype run of 100 units shipped to the press and similar users in October. This can be seen in the Byte reference found in this article. They note the production problems they were having. Volume shipments did not begin until December and most pre-orders were not filled until into 1978.
The TRS-80 began development in December 1976. It was announced on 3 August 1977 and began shipping in volume in September. They had already shipped 5000 by the start of December, and about 10000 by the end of the year.
The Apple II was announced at the West Coast Computer Faire on 16 April 1977. It went on sale on 5 June and the first shipments went out on 10 June. I cannot find a volume claim, however, but given the sales were ~$760,000 by the end of the year one can estimate it to be thousands.
So the PET wasn't even the first of the "1977 trinity" to reach the public. The only claim it might make here is that it was the first to be offered to be sold, as opposed to actually sold. But that is a rather less interesting claim.
But of course that is ignoring all of the other personal computers that were already available. This depends on the definition, but if we say that a personal computer is a machine that is sold to the public (as opposed to corporate or industrial accounts), is completely assembled, runs out-of-the-box (thus has something like an OS and/or language ROM to get it running as opposed to switching in a loader) and has a keyboard as opposed to an external terminal, then the MCM/70 of 1975 meets all of those requirements. Now one might also add the requirement for a build-in keyboard and display, but the MCM/70 had both of those as well. It also had a built-in cassette for storage and a display. There appears to be no definition by which the PET is a PC and the MCM is not.
But of course, that's not the definition of a PC, and I don't think there is anyone who would truly claim the Apple II is not a PC, although it would fail to be one in the definition above. So if one uses the broader definition of a machine that does not require a separate terminal for use, thereby eliminating the Altair and Micral N for instance, there are dozens upon dozens of such machines. For instance, the Sol-20 was complete with the exception of a display, which used a standard television, just like the Apple II. It shipped in December 1976. The Intercolor 8001 was for sale in February 1976, but became a complete computer as the Compucolor 8001 in December, when it added a built-in color CRT, a cassette system that had a disk-like file system, and BASIC in ROM. It began shipping in 1977. All of the major companies were selling such systems at that time, flip through the Byte linked above and you'll find dozens of examples, some with built-in CRTs and even floppy drives.
I am aware that this piece of lore is common on the Commodore web sites, helped in no small way by the claim being made by someone that worked at Commodore. It is also clearly counterfactual, and unless someone can offer any reason this claim should remain, it needs to be removed from the lede and likely reduced to a footnote "so-and-so claims". Maury Markowitz (talk) 02:33, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: To add to the problems, the references for the claim do not actually make that claim. One of them is Tomczyk, who got his first PET in 1979, years after these events. The reference can be found online (I'm not sure if it's copyvio or not so I won't link) and makes no claim about it being the first PC anywhere, go and google it yourself. The other reference is Bagnal, and I own a copy of that. Looking through the epub I cannot find any claim like this. Quite to the contrary, it notes "The Altair has come to be known as the first personal computer system in North America to herald the new microcomputer revolution". The only reference to the PET and "first" is "instigated Commodore’s first personal computer". So this source simply claims that the PET is Commodore's first personal computer. There is no support for this claim even in the supplied references. Maury Markowitz (talk) 03:17, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: And if that weren't enough, reference 16 is copying something I wrote. So I guess that makes me authoritative. Huh. Maury Markowitz (talk) 03:24, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: First personal computer

message: There most definitely was!
My school in London had 2 4008 machines and 1 4016. The 4008 machines most definitely had 8k RAM.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magnamus (talk • contribs) 15:56, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "There was no 8 KB 4000-series PET" 

message: I was reading the article and found a claim that the PETs have 4k character roms. The original 2001 series, the expanded 2001 (aka the 3000 series) and the 8000/4000/9000 have all 2k char roms. While the source is mentioned and it explicitely states "this gives a charrom size of 2k" 4k are still claimed. Additionally, I own four Commodore PETs: a 2001-8, a 3032 (aka 2001-32N) and two 8032 (with 64K expansions). The rom in the first generation of PETs is the 6540-010 (2k), while both the 3032 and 8032 use the 901447-10 (a 2316, also 2k).
Regards
Buran Biggest Fan (talk) 18:58, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong claims about character rom size