Greeting CoCoNutz, it has been a while. When I moved to Maine in 2017, I basically sold out of my CoCo collection, transferred my fan site to another person, and basically disappeared for a while.
That didn't mean I wanted to be gone forever. In fact, a few fellow 'nutz strongly encouraged me to stay on as a Facebook admin, participate in discussion, etc...
I'm sure some will accuse me of choosing sides after reading this. If so, all that does is put their reading comprehension skills into question.
When I first found out the good ol' CoCo still had a following, I was stunned. This was late 2005, and the main resources for information was Roger Taylor's coco3.com and the mailing list ran by Dennis. Another guy named Cris had a website, blog and forum as well.
Online resources were available, yet far from organized; Cloud-9 was one of the VERY few makers of new hardware devices; memory upgrades, hard disk adapters, MPI service and updates. Chris Hawkes had an S-video device and Roy Justus was the first to make a VGA adapter.
Needless to say, a lot has changed in thirteen years. There's more vendors doing hardware now - the most prolific of the new producers being Ed Snider. I know I'm skipping over some, but, this post would read like a novel if I touched on every single hardware developer out there.
On the software side, there were some very cool releases. Roger's Bejeweled clone, Jeweled. Sock Master stunned the entire retro world in 2007 with his release of the Donkey Kong emulator for the CoCo3 - then did it again a few years later with Donkey Kong Remix. Nick Marentes came back to the CoCo world with PopStar Pilot, and now Gunstar; and the Glen Hewlett transcode of Pac-Man recently has continued a slow but steady stream of impressive releases.
John Linville started a craze with his Fahrfall game. It was written specifically for the CoCo 1 or 2, and not the CoCo 3. Then he re-released it on his Game Master Cartridge, adding music and more SFX. This essentially started lots of discussion about sound add-ons. Ed Snider has implemented a sound chip in his Mega-Mini MPI as well, and Jim Brain has stated he has a project in development as well. The Mega-Mini and I think even a product announced by Jim spawned a lot of whining about wanting the addition of an RTC module. The seemingly never ending constant in many hardware projects seems to be a desire for design by committee.
The irony in all of this, regarding sound hardware, is the GMC seems to be the only available design that's actually having any software support (Fahrfall and a game under development by Steve Bamford). Truthfully though, the GMC isn't a sound card as much as it is a platform - maybe John will correct me if he disagrees. Much like you could get certain games on the Genesis and SNES with custom chips to boost those systems performance, the GMC adds much better sound capabilities to games or software. The caveat being, as a cart, the software must have a ROM onboard the cart, and be written to take advantage of the features. I'm unsure if a disk game can be written to utilize the hardware in the GMC as it's designed right now.
Historically speaking, most of the events/products mentioned above have the following in common: they all sparked very opinionated, and in some cases hatefully opinionated comments. To be honest, we're all fans of the CoCo, yet to an extent only rivaled in politics, we cannot seem to agree to disagree. Some feel the necessity to browbeat others into submission. It almost seems as though their lives are so miserable they have to make others feel bad just to feel good.
Lately there has been a LOT of not so pleasant discourse regarding similar products being dropped into the market. Rightly so, one question asked was about why there is so much duplication of existing products. Honestly, it does show a lack of imagination for coming up with something new. However, we are a free market capitalist society, so people really can make and sell what they want to.
Even in a free market society, it seems that fair competition and discussion of etiquette can sometimes be controversial. The CoCo universe is relatively small. When last I checked, it had about 4,000 followers on Facebook - yet active members seem to be a small percentage of that. In comparison, the Atariage group has more than 24,000 members, a Commodre 64 group has 88,000 members, one Amiga group has 22,000 members.
On two occasions I can remember, when CoCoFest! time was approaching, Mark Marlette released a chart comparing one of his products with a competing product. On both occasions, members of the insta-rage gang that hides out on the Facebook page went nuts. Why? In a free market society, you should expect product comparisons, and if yours comes in on the low end, you have a choice to make: improve it or accept the situation as is.
The latest case of this was when Mark compared his 2MB TRIAD+ board to the 2MB Boomerang board. Some of the chart info was incorrect - which wasn't Mark's fault since the updated information was not public knowledge - sorry but just because something is spoken about among the 18 or so Discord members that were chatting that night doesn't make it public.
Certain members of the Facebook group cried foul at just the creation of the chart. Others calmly, and others no so calmly, pointed out the discrepancy. Basically, some seemed to want free market capitalism, but, without giving producers a way to talk about and compare competing products. Perhaps next year, the CoCoFest! should have a WWE ring set up?
There's been discussion for a long time about projects, and selling products that compete. It's a gray area for sure, and opinions are strong. The general consensus for the two sides are as follows:
1. Anybody can sell anything they want, for whatever price they want.
2. Does it really help the CoCo Universe to have multiple products, with the same features, that serve the same purpose? And why not discuss and possibly collaborate if you're going to introduce a competing product?
Now group (1) is certainly free market capitalism - impossible to dispute that.
Group (2) type thoughts have been attacked as anti-competitive, I think someone even compared it to a violation of antitrust laws - which it's most certainly not.
Boisy Pitre wrote an article about it - the response was mixed. Certain people respected where it came from. Others compared it to trampling ideas, silencing others and claims of trying to control the market, all the way to being un-American.
But is it really? Looking at the size and potential market share of any device, sure, there's probably enough room in the CoCo-verse for competing memory upgrades. But doesn't that show, as I commented earlier, a lack of imagination?
Mark has had 512K memory upgrades for years - dating back to the late '90's. Few years ago, he produced a 512K SRAM upgrade - the TRIAD. At CoCoFest! 2018 Mark demonstrated a 2MB version of the TRIAD, and admitted he didn't like the design and was working on refining it. Shortly after, the 2MB Boomerang was released to the public. This might be considered a coincidence if it were not for the developer of the Boomerang attending the Fest - it would be surprising if he weren't aware of the Cloud-9's product. But, was it wrong or just good business strategy to be first to market? Since there have been several revisions of said product, the argument could go either way as to if being first to the market is a good thing or not.
The people in Group (2) would like to see some courtesy displayed to long time developers of both hardware and software. If you're working on a competing product, reach out to discuss it and see if there's a way to collaborate - ways to make an existing product better, or just to say 'hey, I have this idea on a new SRAM upgrade'. If there's room for collaboration, great. If not, nothing and nobody is trying to stop another from creating a widget or game. At least the attempt was made, and a little respect was shown, and likely earned.
If that's anti-competitive and anti-American, then I'll claim the development and quick release of the 2MB Boomerang is tantamount to corporate espionage. However, I would be just as incorrect - it was a window of opportunity that was taken. By bringing it to market, though, some expectations of product comparison should not be surprising. Hysterical rants brought on by product comparisons help nobody.
John Linville recently posted a video asking people to calm down, take a breath, and try to remember we're all fans of the CoCo. Not surprisingly he was attacked for it. Think about that a minute. The fact he took the time to make and post a video like that, I'm sure he did a little self reflection as well. Then to be attacked for it. Are those people even capable of self reflection?
Unfortunately, where I see all of this leading is to a fractured group. Those whom are first to attack, also seem to be the easiest to offend if they're called out. Once that happens, certain individuals get in rage mode, and any type of logical, rational discussion goes out the window. In some ways it's humorous, in others it's very, very sad.
We cannot even agree to disagree. There was a response to Boisy's article that took his exact format, and attempted a point by point rebuke, by changing paragraph wording to reflect their view. However, there was nothing serious about it, and ended up being nothing more than a pathetic mockery attempt. In fairness, there was some decent discussion on the topic as well.
However, mockery seems to be a tool being utilized by several people, and I'll admit I've done so as well - I'm not proud if it, but, at least I'm man enough to admit it. I'm also still capable of fighting the mockery or hysterics fires with like fire - I've raised five daughters and a son, trust me, I've seen hysterics and mockery. Let's not go there - try to be grown up, and not keyboard warriors.
In closing I'd like to say this: is all the infighting and hysterics worth it? Because you disagree with someone, does it make you feel better when you beat them into submission? This is a retro computing HOBBY. We're supposed to be having fun, not trying to neuter people with words. If all you have to offer is a combative personality, seek help. In all seriousness, if you're so much of an asshole that you have to browbeat and be condescending to others to feel good about yourself, SEEK HELP.
Finally, if you disagree with someone, debate the topic, don't insult or berate the person - you have no idea what the person is like in the real world. Just because you have differing opinions doesn't mean the other person is evil. That same person might pull you out of a burning car or building. You never know...
4 comments:
This is disappointingly similar to what's going on in some Amiga sites; sad to see it happen here.
I think competition is a great thing for the platform. Look at what's going on with the Apple // right now, with plenty of development going on and mutiple product choices, even in the same catagory. Forcing consolation of product development may only serve to discourage potential creators.
There’s a lot to unpack in your article, and I doubt my response will be worthy of approving, but it seems appropriate to share it with you, at least.
Your point about the growth (or at least the increase of folks wanting to participate in discussions, buy HW and SW, etc.) cannot be argued. CoCoFEST! 2015 barely filled half the main hall, while 2018 had to use both rooms, it had grown so much. As you note, there are many people producing HW and SW for the platform in the last few years.
Still, the additional people entering the space is causing friction. Regardless of how CoCo Crew members publicly speak about it, one cannot imagine it’s easy to start sharing the media spotlight with a newcomer like CoCoTALK! And, no doubt the same is true for Cloud-9. For years, they were the only HW game in town. Now, there are many more options to consider.
Just having more vendors changes the group dynamic. Before, having Mark Marlette on the CoCo Crew podcast could be seen as a public service. How else do folks learn about potential new products? Now, though, it can be seen as favoring the incumbent manufacturer at the expense of allowing equal time for other folks, like Ed Snider or Richard Lorbieski. The same can be true of CoCoTALK!, where Richard Lorbieski touts his new solutions, but Mark Marlette never appears. And, that lack of variety creates silos. Mark aligns with the podcast, because all of those folks are friends, while Richard would feel unwanted on the show. The reverse is true on CoCoTALK!, where I doubt Mark Marlette feels wanted.
Competition also changes how comments are viewed. Comments like “often imitated, but never duplicated” can not be seen in a light other than passive aggressive. The context is “someone else created this thing, and it appears to do what my thing does, but it doesn’t do it as well as my thing, and I want to point out the superiority of my thing”. If you notice, the nasty comments start right after that. Your article suggests we all just get along. That’s not bad advice, but what responsibility do we have to hold people accountable for such inflammatory statements and comments? And, if the group is indeed passionate, what do folks expect if someone starts a posting with such explosive statements? I think if people made such a statement in person, lots of people would challenge it in person.
I don’t think charts bothered people as much as the nature of some of the line items. As well, I think some people don’t want to see any semblance of competition, so any chart, no matter the topic or author, will be met with resistance. Since charts are a nice way to compare things, I think that group will ultimately lose and have to deal with the nature of competition and advertising. On the other hand, advertising of any kind upsets the “we are all just friends” spirit, so we should probably expect a certain amount of pushback. I can’t imaging Mark Marlette was surprised at the comments, and I have a feeling he hoped they would arrive, as it gave him more opportunity to share information on his product and the benefits it provides.
On the two sides of selling products, I suspect most of the concern is around the existing friendships and alliances, not the topic of selling products. If you, who has stated he has no dog in the fight, take the non-duplication position, people would either agree or debate the merits of the position with you. But, if you’re friends with the incumbent hardware manufacturer, people question the intent of the position. Are you asking for competition limits because your friend was impacted by recent competition, or do you genuinely feel it’s bad (or both)? At this point, the position becomes secondary to the intent, with many people assuming that the intent was to protect a friend’s business. It doesn’t make it right (in such a small group, where everyone is friends, how does one challenge a position without people assuming there are ulterior motives?), but it’s an issue.
(continued)
I doubt people disagree on the idea of courtesy and respect (or, if they do, they hold a very weak position). Still, what does the group suggest if competition, not collaboration, was the intent all along? Boisy Pitre’s article suggests that folks should strive to collaborate and focus on different areas, but does that mean folks should resist someone who truly wants to compete? Does it mean that the competitive person is being disrespectful towards others? I think people are happy to promote courtesy and respect, but they are not willing to forbid someone going full competitive mode if they want. Yes, it may negatively impact the group, but it seems many want to keep that option open. That’s likely the true source of anger.
To me, it seems both sides struggle with the “agree to disagree” point. I see comments all the time by folks in Group 2 (from your article) complaining about project duplication and the general lack of project variation. The first few times, it’s news. Then, it’s just beating a dead horse. If the folks who keep producing the same things keep on doing it, as Ed Snider notes, they must be enjoying themselves. The initial concerned person has made their point, everyone knows where they stand, but everyone else has decided to allow and encourage this amount of duplication, so that’s the end of the discussion. Bringing it up over and over just looks like an unwillingness to accept it. And, after it moves into “terminated equine flogging” territory, other people get defensive, as if their point of view is not as important. Then, as you note, Group #1 complains back, which spurs Group #2 to engage, etc. At that point, there’s no chance to change someone’s mind. Like you note, everyone needs to agree to disagree on this point. Collaboration will happen, because it’s nice to work on things together (Ed and Gary Becker, John and Neil Blanchard), but it’s not always going to happen, no matter how many articles are written or how many postings or quips are made.
In case it is not clear, I do disagree with parts of your article. But, I agree that it’s OK for us to disagree. Maybe, if we all continue to communicate in a civil manner through our disagreement, the group benefits. I also think one should look at the positive aspects of recent events. It’s obvious that folks are passionate about this platform and how to move it forward.
To be completely fair, and I'm just getting around to looking at and approving these comments - I really didn't expect much in the way of feedback.
None of what I wrote was intended to disparage Ed, Mark, Richard, Jim, John - or anyone who is a developer of CoCo products. More of an observational state of the union, and their respective Budweiser Cheering Sections.
I'm not sure Boisy, John and others are upset over duplicative (is that even a word?) products, so much as they do not see the utility in it. I MIGHT be willing to go one step farther and ask if there's an overall lack of creativity with regards to come projects (CoCo3 RAM upgrades, for example). Granted, everyone has to start somewhere.
I've beat this particular horse to death, and maybe back to life - sound add-ons. There's several right now, maybe not as many as we had back in the CoCo hey-day, but when they aren't actually being supported in software, is there a point? The only one being utilized, and that is a very thin statement, is the Game Master Cartridge.
If I had to take the pulse of one group or the other - and I've been away from most CoCo groups for a while - I'd have to say none of the 'old guard' are truly anti-competitive with regards to new products. I am not speaking for them, and I have not spoken to any of them for almost a year; however, it's my guess they to would LOVE to see new products or software brought to market that show some creativity, thought, imagination.
Anyone can read up and design a RAM upgrade for a CoCo3 (I've got two different designs myself). But how about a new VGA/HDMI adapter? Better RAM upgrades for a CoCo1 (I know a few had been in the development stage, I lost track)? Replacement keyboards?
I guess some of the irony here is I'd seen comments about people being anti-competitive, yet some of those same people would get hot under the collar when discussing the CoCoSDC. How about a serious competitor to the CoCoSDC? Or an upgrade? A few people in the 'anti-competetive yelling group' commented that if Ed didn't do it, they wouldn't buy it. Huh? Made me wonder if they even realized Ed wasn't the original designer and builder of the SDC. That's not to take anything away from Ed - both he and Darren being able to work it out so it could continue to be produced is a blessing. There's just some hypocrisy somewhere...
"Often imitated, but never duplicated" - I could be wrong here, but was this ever applied to a product? I thought John had used this line in the podcast? Not to mention a line used by the genie in Aladdin. Even if John used it WRT to the podcast, it is in no way a hit on CoCoTalk - which is a live streaming video feed. That's my opinion, of course. One is a pre-recorded podcast, the other is live where anyone can join in. So, I fail to see where this is even an issue.
That's really about the only commentary I have. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, and some valid points have been brought up.
Post a Comment