25th Anniversary of the Personal Computer" 4216

Of course, but still not relevant to the point.

Yes, it did.

They expected to built 100 or so machines. The Apple I. They had no reputation in the computer industry to protect. If they failed to deliver, maybe a few people would sue, and they'd pay back the money, and fold up their tent and go work somewhere else.

IBM expected to build (as I recall) about 250,000 machines. They had a considerable reputation to protect. If they failed to deliver they'd surely have been sued, perhaps even clbutt action style, and it would have influenced their ability to do business, especially in this market, considerably.

You're still trying to view historical decisions based on current knowledge. You can't apply hindsight to what was at the time unknown. Read Wozniak's storys about Apples inception. They quite expected to sell a small number of machines to some hobbiests then move on. As it happened, things work out pretty well and they moved on to the Apple II. I'd bet that if they'd seen, at that time, that there was a potential problem with delivery of the 6502, they might well have picked another processor. But, by then, the production lines were well established and the processor had two second sources. Safe as houses (in the electronic context anyway).

Most businesses fail, among other things because they can't find a way to do something fundamental.

Again, you're applying 2006 knowledge to 1976 decisions. Yes, it turned out that way. But they didn't know then that it would.

product,

Actually, we did. We'd already been paid up-front for the development phase, which we then didn't have to do. If we'd built the thing, they'd have been obligated to buy them. A contracted number and at a contracted price. Then dump them because there wasn't any market for them any more. So, we actually made a nice sum for doing nothing at all.

- Bill