Thoughts on the Amstrad takeover

[Journeyman]

I got my first ever Speccy in August 1987, when I got a +2 for my 13th birthday. I'd been desperate for a computer for ages, having constantly badgered my parents for one. I wanted this particular one because I was familiar with the Sinclair brand, it seemed great value for money and an improvement on previous models, and had a huge range of software available. I hadn't really used a Spectrum before, though, and I didn't know much about what it could and couldn't do beforehand. In some ways I was delighted with it, in others it was a bit disappointing, but it was enough to make me very, very fond of the Spectrum. I didn't keep it long, but I've owned several Speccys since, those being a 128, another +2, a +2A and a couple of +3s.

Obviously, the +2 was the first Amstrad Spectrum, and it emerged not long after the takeover, which really was a low point in Sir Clive's career. Sinclair Research had run into absolutely dreadful problems by then, and I think it's fair to say that the Spectrum was an endangered species for a while. It seems to be the general consensus that the original rubber-key machines were fantastic when launched, but subsequent upgrades weren't good enough. The Spectrum + was only a very minor improvement, and although the 128 was decent, it still wasn't massively better and had a number of shortcomings (no joystick port being the main one). It's also fair to say, I think, that the 128 only came about because Investronica put up the cash, wanting a product to circumvent Spanish tax rules. If that hadn't happened, I don't think we'd have seen the 128 appear at all, and the Speccy might have died much earlier than it did.

It seems to me that the Amstrad takeover really did rescue a machine that was losing ground quickly and was in serious danger of being eclipsed by other machines. I know Sinclair purists turn their noses up at Amstrad Speccys, and they don't seem to be as highly regarded by collectors, but in my experience, I've become very fond of the grey case +2, and I'd dare to venture the opinion that it's the best Spectrum of the lot, for everyday use in 2022.

I get amazing picture quality on my modern telly, the tapedeck and joystick ports are useful, it's sturdily put together, and the keyboard is so much better than the earlier models. Amstrad positioned it as an entertainment machine, which is a recognition of the way software development had gone, but it was nice for programming and serious tasks too.

The +3, for all its problems, was impressive as well. I was quite blown away by the manual, with all the information on what the DOS could do. The +2A, though, still annoys me! I'd have felt quite short-changed if I'd owned one back in the day - it promised much, but the failure to launch the disk drive interface made it really crappy. All the incompatibility issues with none of the benefits, and it couldn't be used with Microdrives or any other disk systems. It was a shame that Amstrad pulled the plug on +3 manufacture quite early as well. I'm aware that enthusiasts have subsequently made the disk interface for the +2A, though.

Anyway, I'm waffling a bit here, but I think it's fair to say that Amstrad did look after the Spectrum pretty well for a good five years or so, and without that support there's no way you'd have still been able to get new games well into the nineties. A commercial life of around ten years was pretty impressive, and if that life had been shorter, I doubt the collecting and retro-gaming scene would be anywhere near as vibrant.

Let's be honest, Sinclair made a lot of mistakes, and his rather earnest mission for the Spectrum never really translated into how people used them. He sneered at gaming, even though most Spectrums were sold for that sole purpose, and then failed to develop the platform much beyond its original form. Amstrad actually did a good job of incremental improvement, and the build quality was much better as well.

Any thoughts on this? Was Amstrad's takeover a good or a bad thing? What other possibilities were there? What would have happened if Maxwell's injection of cash had come about? Let's discuss.

[zxbruno]

I can't find it right now, but I saw some words by Sir Alan Sugar which may have been copied from the book "The Amstrad Story". In it he describes how he had the grey +2 ready to produce even before the takeover was certain. I can't remember everything he stated, but I think there was also some weird timing, trying to balance negotiations with vacationing in Florida with the wife. Someone correct me if I'm misremembering.

No one can deny how gorgeous the Sinclair Spectrums are, but I wouldn't call the Amstrad Spectrums ugly. They we're bulky and cheaply made, but not ugly. All my friend's Spectrums were missing one or more datacorder keys. I, somehow, managed to avoid breaking mine and still have it. The grey +2 was my first computer. I was thankful for not having to deal with external tape recorders and leads, or messing around with the volume. Between 1988 and 1992 I acquired all Spectrum models, and had more than one of the grey +2, +2A, +2B and +3. Also had the Timex TC2048 and TC2068. I also agree the keyboard was an upgrade, compared to previous models.

I think the reason the Spectrum lasted as long as it did in Europe was because of Amstrad. Here in the U.S. we weren't so lucky.

[Matt_B]

I'd go with the Sinclair machines for industrial design (RIP Rick Dickinson) but the Amstrad ones for the engineering.

They're a lot better built and more reliable, especially today. The datacorder is definitely the weak point in the design, but if you're still using one these days you've probably got some other gizmo for the purposes of loading games.

[WhatHoSnorkers]

I had a grey +2 and loved it. The Datacorder was so much better than loading on the ZX81 with Ear and Mic leads and volumes and that.

I did some programming on it too, in 48K mode. It's still weird that I did that, because the +2 went with the "let's not bother labelling the keywords much as people don't program on it really" approach!

Fantastic machine, and some great games on the 128K.

[StooB]

It seems to me that the Amstrad takeover really did rescue a machine that was losing ground quickly and was in serious danger of being eclipsed by other machines.

Amstrad rescued Sinclair not the Spectrum. The Spectrum wasn't in danger of anything and certainly wasn't "losing ground". Maxwell and Sugar wouldn't have been interested if there was any risk involved.

[Rorthron]

Amstrad certainly kept the Spectrum alive. The manufacturing and financial management were better, and the packaging more user friendly (if much less attractive).

However, I think you very much overstate Amstrad's contribution. You rightly dismiss the Spectrum+, which just repackaged existing hardware in an improved physical format, as "a very minor improvement". However, you seem to regard the +2, which just repackaged existing hardware in an improved physical format, as more significant. I don't think that view is defensible. Spectrum users already had tape recorders and frankly superior joystick interfaces. Bundling them in one box added very little.

In contrast, the 128K Spectrum did improve the computing hardware substantially with extra memory and improved sound. It was probably the biggest step forward in Spectrum hardware after the initial launch. It may have had flaws, but they were flaws Amstrad did little to address.

Amstrad's only significant contribution to the hardware was to add its disk drive. That was certainly a positive, but the paucity of +3 disks suggests it didn't have much impact. Amstrad made no effort to add more memory, better graphics and sound or a faster CPU. Compare the improvements made to the MSX platform over the same time.

Amstrad did eke some more life out of the Spectrum, and I can understand why you might like their devices, but Spectrums were stranded on 1984 hardware for the rest of their existence. Amstrad's contributions were much more modest than Sinclair's.

[Rorthron]

Incidentally, does anyone have any evidence for the widely-held view that Clive Sinclair disapproved of the Spectrum being used for games? The fictional Sir Clive in Micro Men is portrayed that way, but I am unaware of the real Sir Clive ever saying anything like that.

[PeteProdge]

To be quite honest, I've never liked the rubber-keyed Speccies (and Alan Sugar is on record as referring to them as a "pregnant calculator"). Although I wanted a computer as soon as the 'home micro' became A Thing in the early 80s, I'm glad I entered computer ownership in 1987 (well, mainly through sheer poverty really), the 128K +2 is the the best Spectrum of them all. Rubber-keyed Speccies are like a novelty pencil case. The 48K+ or the 128 would have delighted me.

Yeah, the weak keys on the +2's tape deck were the downside. I think I ended up computerless for a week each time I took my Speccy into Northampton's Comp-U-Serv for the datacorder button repairs on the rewind button. I could of course dip my index finger into the gap and press in the (normally hidden) mechanism, but each time you'd scrape the skin just below your fingernail on a 'shelf' of metal, sometimes even bleeding from it. If only you could have taken the +2A's datacorder (oh yes, Amstrad learnt from their mistake and made these to be properly robust) and 'transplanted' that into the +2.

Let's be honest, the notoriously game-o-phobic Sir Clive Sinclair wasn't much of a businessman and as much as toes curl at what Alan Sugar is these days, it's Amstrad that breathed new life into the Speccy. People want games, that's that. Sir Clive got the pricing right but the marketing very wrong. The QL was a nice idea on paper - an affordable serious computer with significantly better tech specs than a Spectrum. It's just that the QL was fudged.

[Journeyman]

Amstrad rescued Sinclair not the Spectrum. The Spectrum wasn't in danger of anything and certainly wasn't "losing ground". Maxwell and Sugar wouldn't have been interested if there was any risk involved.

Actually, no - he specifically rescued the Spectrum, not Sinclair. He realised the Spectrum was the only Sinclair intellectual property with any future in it, which is why he paid only for the trademarks and technology, refusing to purchase Sinclair Research as a company.

[Journeyman]

I can't find it right now, but I saw some words by Sir Alan Sugar which may have been copied from the book "The Amstrad Story". In it he describes how he had the grey +2 ready to produce even before the takeover was certain. I can't remember everything he stated, but I think there was also some weird timing, trying to balance negotiations with vacationing in Florida with the wife. Someone correct me if I'm misremembering.

I was in a bookshop recently and read those bits of the book - they were very interesting. Alan Sugar is not someone I like or admire, but back then at least, he had a knack for getting the right people to develop the right products, which he sold at very good value for money. He's never been an inventor, he always outsourced all that stuff. He just saw a golden opportunity to seize a huge part of the UK computer market and took it.

He clearly didn't like Sir Clive Sinclair at all, although I don't think I'm unfair in saying that his eccentricities, stubbornly held ideas and personality made him very hard to work with. Amstrad only stepped in because he'd made so many mistakes.

[Journeyman]

Incidentally, does anyone have any evidence for the widely-held view that Clive Sinclair disapproved of the Spectrum being used for games? The fictional Sir Clive in Micro Men is portrayed that way, but I am unaware of the real Sir Clive ever saying anything like that.

I think the best evidence is all of Sinclair's publicity and catalogues up to about early 1985 or so. All of them pitch the Spectrum as a general purpose computer with a lot of scientific and educational uses. I'd also say the QL is a big indication -.it's widely considered true that Sinclair was angry the Spectrum wasn't taken more seriously. The only post-takeover machine he ever released was the Z88 as well - try gaming on that!

[Rorthron]

I think the best evidence is all of Sinclair's publicity and catalogues up to about early 1985 or so. All of them pitch the Spectrum as a general purpose computer with a lot of scientific and educational uses. I'd also say the QL is a big indication.... The only post-takeover machine he ever released was the Z88 as well - try gaming on that!

Fair points, but it certainly doesn't indicate that Clive Sinclair was "notoriously game-o-phobic", especially as Sinclair published large numbers of games from the Spectrum's beginning. It's also true that most machines of the era were marketed as serious computers.

It's widely considered true that Sinclair was angry the Spectrum wasn't taken more seriously.

"Widely considered" doesn't equate to "true"! I have a strong suspicion this view has become widely held since the "Jet Set ****ing Willy" line in Micro Men, and has very little basis in fact.

[Journeyman]

Amstrad certainly kept the Spectrum alive. The manufacturing and financial management were better, and the packaging more user friendly (if much less attractive).

However, I think you very much overstate Amstrad's contribution. You rightly dismiss the Spectrum+, which just repackaged existing hardware in an improved physical format, as "a very minor improvement". However, you seem to regard the +2, which just repackaged existing hardware in an improved physical format, as more significant. I don't think that view is defensible. Spectrum users already had tape recorders and frankly superior joystick interfaces. Bundling them in one box added very little.

Actually, I think it added rather a lot, and you might be underestimating what it did for Spectrum sales and software development. Up until that point, the 128 had only sold in very small numbers. The +2 convinced software developers that the 128 platform had a future and more games followed. It sold in impressive numbers and was clearly very popular.

Amstrad's only significant contribution to the hardware was to add its disk drive. That was certainly a positive, but the paucity of +3 disks suggests it didn't have much impact. Amstrad made no effort to add more memory, better graphics and sound or a faster CPU. Compare the improvements made to the MSX platform over the same time.

Yeah, given the scale of the changes to hardware, it's a shame the +3 wasn't more capable, although I suppose there's a limit to what could have been done, and the ST/Amiga were available by then. I remember the biggest criticism of the +3 on launch was the price - it didn't seem like particularly great value for money compared to a 16-bit machine.

[StooB]

Actually, no - he specifically rescued the Spectrum, not Sinclair. He realised the Spectrum was the only Sinclair intellectual property with any future in it, which is why he paid only for the trademarks and technology, refusing to purchase Sinclair Research as a company.

Sinclair Research would have gone into liquidation without the sale. The sale included all of Sinclair's computer products including the QL. The Spectrum had a 40% market share at the time so was not in need of "rescuing".

[Rorthron]

Actually, I think it added rather a lot, and you might be underestimating what it did for Spectrum sales and software development. Up until that point, the 128 had only sold in very small numbers. The +2 convinced software developers that the 128 platform had a future and more games followed. It sold in impressive numbers and was clearly very popular.

It may have been popular, but I really don't see how you can say it added a lot to the hardware platform (which was the issue I raised). It added a joystick interface of an inferior sort to those already widely available and widely used, a tape recorder, which was ubiquitous, anyway, and a better keyboard. That's it.

[PeterJ]

I've a Toastrack and a +3. I admire Sugar for what he has achieved in the world of business, but I don't have any love for the Amstrad Spectrums.

Yes, it's lovely to have a proper keyboard and a disk drive along with better build quality, but in my eyes it's not a Spectrum. The Toastrack is the one I show to my friends and dust with great care every week.

The +2 models just remind me of those cheap Amstrad Hi-fi systems!

I would really love an eLeMeNt, but won't have a +2 in the house!

[Journeyman]

It may have been popular, but I really don't see how you can say it added a lot to the hardware platform (which was the issue I raised). It added a joystick interface of an inferior sort to those already widely available and widely used, a tape recorder, which was ubiquitous, anyway, and a better keyboard. That's it.

I'm of the opinion it was greater than the sum of the parts.

[Journeyman]

Sinclair Research would have gone into liquidation without the sale. The sale included all of Sinclair's computer products including the QL. The Spectrum had a 40% market share at the time so was not in need of "rescuing".

But...if Sinclair Research had folded, the Spectrum would have died with it, and although the sale included the QL, Amstrad had no intention of doing doing anything with it, immediately discontinuing it.

Sugar realised that the Spectrum was actually in real danger of ceasing production, and that a lot of companies' fortunes were tied up in it.

[TMD2003]

I noticed @Matt_B mentioned "engineering" and "Amstrad" in the same sentence. Those are two words I never thought I'd see together, and neither would I associate Amstrad with "build quality" any more than I would a 1970s Ford (British Leyland, on the other hand, is a discussion for another day... and probably another forum). Thing is, of the five Spectrums I have, all of which are Amstrad models, the only one that's not held up well is the +3 I bought much later than the others as a job lot with some discs. The Z80 on one of my +2Bs was dodgy, so it was swapped with the one on this +3, so now the +2B is in damn near perfect order and the spare +3 is... less so. The TAPE/SOUND socket is knackered, the RGB socket is hit-and-miss, so I've barely used it. But it will be a fine test bed for the sound fix if I ever want to try that.

One "engineering" improvement I will mention in Amstrad's favour is changing the flimsy 9V barrel plug of the +2 for a 12V supply and a chunky DIN plug on the +3 - power cuts were an absolute scourge on my +2 and I'd usually fix the cable to the desk with a huge blob of Blu-Tak with a drop loop to keep it as secure as possible. No such trouble on the black-case models, though it did mean altering a Kempston joystick interface with an improvised Dremel, so that it would fit round the plug.

Controversial Jacques is going to stick his neck on the line and say that...

...in this day and age of TZXDuinos and Goteks, a +3 with the sound fixed is the model to have. I barely notice any difference in sound between a +2 and a supposedly-fixed-out-of-the-box +2B, as long as the TAPE/SOUND socket is working it's a lot less of a faff to connect to the Duino than with a tape adapter, and the Gotek is a useful addition not available to tape-based models. What's not to like, other than those odd few compatibility issues?

[StooB]

But...if Sinclair Research had folded, the Spectrum would have died with it.

Products don't die when the companies that make them go under. If Sinclair Research had folded then Maxwell or Sugar (or anyone who wanted to make some easy money) would have bought the rights from the receivers, probably for a lot less than Sinclair had sold them for.

[StooB]

I think the best evidence is all of Sinclair's publicity and catalogues up to about early 1985 or so. All of them pitch the Spectrum as a general purpose computer with a lot of scientific and educational uses. I'd also say the QL is a big indication -.it's widely considered true that Sinclair was angry the Spectrum wasn't taken more seriously. The only post-takeover machine he ever released was the Z88 as well - try gaming on that!

In October 1984, Sinclair paid £100,000 for Bandersnatch to be made for the QL with an option on Psyclape. "Ideal for the type of QL user we envisage" said Alison Maguire, Sinclair Software Manager. Doesn't sound very "game-o-phobic".

https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/page.ph ... 650&page=5

[TMD2003]

I've a Toastrack and a +3. I admire Sugar for what he has achieved in the world of business...

The +2 models just remind me of those cheap Amstrad Hi-fi systems!

I even explicitly mentioned it in the intro to +D Blue Peter - say what you like about Lord Yes Sir Alan "You're Fired!" Sugar as a person, but his business methods were spot on for the time. Amstrad's products were lambasted by gadget/tech reviewers at the time, but they weren't meant for that market. The working classes want something they can't afford, along comes a Cockney wideboy who started out scrubbing beetroot in his dad's greengrocer shop, who says "I'll flog you any old tat for a damson under three hats", with the promise it'll work just well enough that the untrained layman can't tell the difference between "proper" (Japanese and later Korean) brands and Amstrad "cheaply made with off the shelf components" tat, and just long enough so that by the time the Amstrad product breaks, Sony and LG's "proper" products have come down in price enough to be affordable themselves. So now, throughout the 1980s, the working classes can afford their first VCR, their first computer (the CPC464), their first CD player, their first satellite TV system, and by that stage we're into the 1990s. Never mind that this approach took the kind of businessman who knew he had to tread on a lot of toes to get that result and didn't care whose toes or how hard - see also some bloke in 'MURICA with nylon hair - but you have to admit, it worked.

For a decade, anyway. We don't mention the "em@iler", or what happened next...

[Journeyman]

In October 1984, Sinclair paid £100,000 for Bandersnatch to be made for the QL with an option on Psyclape. "Ideal for the type of QL user we envisage" said Alison Maguire, Sinclair Software Manager. Doesn't sound very "game-o-phobic".

https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/page.ph ... 650&page=5

I didn't know that. Did it ever see the light of day?

[Journeyman]

I even explicitly mentioned it in the intro to +D Blue Peter - say what you like about Lord Yes Sir Alan "You're Fired!" Sugar as a person, but his business methods were spot on for the time. Amstrad's products were lambasted by gadget/tech reviewers at the time, but they weren't meant for that market. The working classes want something they can't afford, along comes a Cockney wideboy who started out scrubbing beetroot in his dad's greengrocer shop, who says "I'll flog you any old tat for a damson under three hats", with the promise it'll work just well enough that the untrained layman can't tell the difference between "proper" (Japanese and later Korean) brands and Amstrad "cheaply made with off the shelf components" tat, and just long enough so that by the time the Amstrad product breaks, Sony and LG's "proper" products have come down in price enough to be affordable themselves. So now, throughout the 1980s, the working classes can afford their first VCR, their first computer (the CPC464), their first CD player, their first satellite TV system, and by that stage we're into the 1990s. Never mind that this approach took the kind of businessman who knew he had to tread on a lot of toes to get that result and didn't care whose toes or how hard - see also some bloke in 'MURICA with nylon hair - but you have to admit, it worked.

For a decade, anyway. We don't mention the "em@iler", or what happened next...

That's an interesting summary of things - Amstrad's consumer electronics and computers do feel very of their time, and very much fit in with the aspirational vibe of the Thatcher years. There was an image of the ideal 80s living room, and it's exactly the sort of thing that would have had an Amstrad hi-fi in it, sitting on a chrome and smoked glass unit of some kind!

Like you say, the quality wasn't the best but generally his products were engineered well enough to last reasonably well, and if you weren't a tech-head you'd be happy.

I think one of the most interesting products Amstrad made was the NC100, which is actually still useful today, and rather well-designed, even if it does feel a bit tacky compared to the Z88.

[PaddyC13]

Personally I believe Amstrad pulled off a master stroke with the Spectrum. For a relatively small investment they acquired a machine that no doubt made them millions. The new keyboard addressed one of the biggest complaints about the original Spectrums and no doubt cost Amstrad very little given their extensive manufacturing contacts in the Far East.

As for developing the Spectrum further, this was not what Amstrad was about - they were not a computer company. Lord Sugar’s approach was to take previous generation consumer electronics, repackage them so they were cost less to make, appeared more user friendly and great value for money. Look at most of Amstrad’s products and you will see this approach. The 3” disk drive sums this up nicely.

The times the company sort of deviated from the above approach was when they hit problems e.g. CPC+, PCW16, many of their later X86 PCs. Technical innovation was not Amstrad’s strong point.

Having said that, I do wonder why Amstrad did not have a go with an updated QL. Similar approach to the +3. Add a decent keyboard, tidy up the hardware and firmware, slap on a 3” disk, provide one of their colour TV monitors, expand the RAM to 512K and boom you have a QL+. They could have even packaged the QL as per the PCW especially as it came with the Psion business packages. That could have been an interesting machine…

Kind regards

Paddy