The ZX Spectrum Extended Universe

[PeteProdge]

The 'total number of ZX Spectrums produced' thread and the seemingly never-ending list of ZX Spectrum clones on Wikipedia have got me thinking about what can be considered Spectrums.

I mean, there is some snobbishness about the Spectrums made when Alan Sugar bought the range. The Sam Coupe isn't a Sinclair product but it sure did get acres of press from the Speccy mags, it felt like a revival (before it spectacularly floundered). And of course, in recent years, the Sir-Clive-sanctioned-but-universally-despised hand-held versions are a hot potato - are they really a ZX Spectrum or not?

For the absolutely hardcore purist, I guess only the original 16K and 48K Spectrums will do, and that 48K Plus is the start of the descent. Not that I've ever come across anyone like that, but I do think that the matter may have to be somewhat solved by awarding points out of 10 for 'officialness', if that's a thing.

So, 10 out of 10 for:
ZX Spectrum 16K
ZX Spectrum 48K

9 out of 10:
ZX Spectrum 48K+
ZX Spectrum 128K (Investrónica - Spain)
ZX Spectrum 128K (UK)

8 out of 10:
Timex Sinclair 2068
Timex Sinclair 2048
Timex Computer 2048
ZX Spectrum +2
ZX Spectrum +3
ZX Spectrum +2A
ZX Spectrum +2B

7 out of 10:
Inves Spectrum +
Sam Coupe

And then you have all those hordes of clones. I'm willing to argue for Russia's Scorpion and Pentagon here, because although they're unofficial, they are at least astonishingly good (a sensible progression of where technology was headed) and widely prolific. It's no wonder they're supported by so many Spectrum emulators.

Then you have the Spectrum Next, which, with its new multicoloured games is a bit like seeing an Atari ST or an Amiga for the first time. I'm pretty certain that it's a project given a blessing by Sir Clive Sinclair and it's all legal and above board, so yeah, I guess it's official and I do like it, but it's not quite a ZX Spectrum to me, I just get the same feeling as I do when I fire up Retropie on my Raspberry Pi - I can play all the old classics AND a world of new multicoloured delights from just one system!

So there's me putting the cat among the pigeons.

Any idea for what we put down at 1 out of 10? Or where the Sinclair ZX80/ZX81/QLs would go?

[PeterJ]

For me the 10/10 are the machines released by Sir Clive, so the 16K, 48K, 48K+, and 128K Toastrack. If I ever get invited onto Desert Island Disks, my luxury would be the 128K (Assuming of course I could have power and a monitor!).

A few years ago I reduced my collection but couldn't get rid of my 128K, although I do have a +3 which is a very good machine despite being made by Amstrad.

The ZX81 and ZX80 should be excluded here as they are the predecessors to the Spectrum. The QL was the successor so again should be excluded.

[p13z]

And of course, in recent years, the Sir-Clive-sanctioned-but-universally-despised hand-held versions are a hot potato - are they really a ZX Spectrum or not?

Universally despised?
I like my Vega, and I know others that do. I'd say having Chris Smith involved, being fully branded, and being endorsed by Clive, it feels like part of the Spectrum family.
As for the Vega+, I think a lot of folk liked the idea - enough to shell out money despite it seeming an unlikely prospect. But that clearly isn't a Spectrum, as it doesn't exist (afaik).
The Spectrum NEXT, with the branding and the folk on board also feels like it deserves to be a "real Spectrum" (though I've never played with one or have any intention to).

edit to say:
To sum up my view: If it is legally branded as a "Sincair ZX Spectrum" - then it is a proper ZX Spectrum. That is as official as it gets. Everyone can have an opinion, but it isn't going to count for much in comparison to that.

[Sol_HSA]

Since 48k+ is literally the same as 48k, I think they should be grouped together

As for the next, it's got soul. Whether one considers it a "real" spectrum or not is probably a matter of taste. I do.

[Turtle_Quality]

I'm chuffed with my Recreated Spectrum, I know it's only a bluetooth keyboard but it looks and feels exactly like my original 48K Spectrum.

If you're looking for a "1" on your scale of 1-10, I would nominate this atrocity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amstrad_E-mailer

[zup]

Nah, I think this scale is wrong. My proposals:

- Spectrum 48k+ should be 10, earlier spectrum should be 9. The keyboard vastly improves usability.
- Spanish spectrum 128k should be a point above the english one, because it was the original 128k and included the "calculator keyboard".
- Spectrum +2A/B/+3 should be below the original +2, because they broke compatibility...
- ...but the original +2 should be punished for being grey.
- Sam Coupé should not be on this list. Just because is a whole different beast.
- Also, it's strange that Inves Spectrum + are included on this list. AFAIK Inves Spectrum + was probably the first unofficial spectrum clone (they launched a redesigned Spectrum because Sinclair won't allow them to sell more original Spectrums), so if you include the Inves you should probably include every other clone (note that the same applies to Sam Coupé, being a development unrelated to Sinclair).

[Turtle_Quality]

so if you include the Inves you should probably include every other clone (note that the same applies to Sam Coupé, being a development unrelated to Sinclair).

Alan Miles and Bruce Gordon both worked for Sinclair prior to MGT

And I loved my rubber keyboard, much preferred that to the feel of the toastrack keyboard or 48+

As my manager charmingly pointed out to me many years ago, opinions are like arseholes... everyone's got one

[PeteProdge]

Nah, I think this scale is wrong. My proposals:
- Spectrum 48k+ should be 10, earlier spectrum should be 9. The keyboard vastly improves usability.

I'm definitely with you on this view. I'll whisper it quietly, because it's heresy round these parts, but the rubber keyboard Speccies are awful to use and I regard them as an embarrassment. Alan Sugar was right to mock them as "a pregnant calculator".

(I can't get on with anything but a desktop-style keyboard. With laptops, I use them with a proper USB keyboard, I can't stand the built-in ones.)

However, the rubber keyboard Speccies are seen as the authentic versions, and always cited in pop culture nostalgia. It's quite a common view that all ZX Spectrums came with rubber keys and you had to hook them up to a tape deck. And the game loading took half an hour (yeah, I know this is wrong, you know is wrong, but that's the public perception of the ZX Spectrum experience).

My scaling isn't about my favourite Spectrum (which is the grey +2), but what's perceived as properly authentic.

- Spectrum +2A/B/+3 should be below the original +2, because they broke compatibility...

Aw yeah, I was a bit gutted to have to replace my dead +2 with a +2A. Sound was a bit muffled and yeah, the minor compatibility issues irked me. Still, it was better than nothing.

- ...but the original +2 should be punished for being grey.

Ah yes, I much prefer the look of the +2A (including the more robust tape deck). Stick the innards of a grey +2 into a black +2A shell and yeah, that's a perfect Speccy for me. (Ooh, give it a Multiface 128 too, pretty please.)

Sam Coupé should not be on this list. Just because is a whole different beast.

Well, it has to cater for the clones, even the unofficial ones. It was regarded as the 'Super Speccy', even if it fell short of that aspiration in practice. There was a hope in the late 80s that it would properly succeed the Amstrad lineage and be seen to be on the same playing field as the Amiga and ST, but, er, how naive we were!

Also, it's strange that Inves Spectrum + are included on this list. AFAIK Inves Spectrum + was probably the first unofficial spectrum clone (they launched a redesigned Spectrum because Sinclair won't allow them to sell more original Spectrums)

At the time it was very murky as to whether it was official or unofficial. A very long and protracted court battle concluded it was unofficial. That shows you just what a very grey area it was. It's probably the 'closest to official' out of all the unofficial clones.

so if you include the Inves you should probably include every other clone

Yep, that's the idea.

[1024MAK]

Oh dear, this is like opening a can of worms…

First off, are we talking about a Sinclair universe, and if so, while Sinclair Research Ltd was the owner of the Sinclair computers (owned and under the control of Sir Clive Sinclair) (including the earlier companies)?

Or as above but also including the time period when Amstrad owned the Sinclair computer brand (that is ZX Spectrums), if so are we including the other Sinclair branded computers that Amstrad released?

Yes, it’s messy…

If we are only including ZX Spectrum computers, are we including compatibles (clones) or just actual real clones (same or very, very similar PCB, same chip types etc.).

If we are including ZX Spectrum compatibles, should all systems that can run ZX Spectrum software be included (this effectively means both hardware like FPGA chips, hardware specially built that can translate and hence run ZX Spectrum software (fast microcontrollers and single board computers or systems on a chip) and emulator programs that run on general purpose computers (PCs, browsers etc.).

See, I told you it will get messy…

So the Sinclair world goes like this (where products were made by a company owned by Sir Clive Sinclair):

• Science of Cambridge Limited - June 1978 - MK14 microcomputer kit launched.
• Science of Cambridge Limited - February 1980 - ZX80 launched.
• Science of Cambridge Limited was then renamed Sinclair Computers Limited.
• Sinclair Computers Limited renamed Sinclair Research Limited.
• Sinclair Research Limited - March 1981 - ZX81 launched.
• Sinclair Research Limited - April 1982 - ZX Spectrum launched.
• Sinclair Research Limited - 1984 - QL launched.
• Sinclair Research Limited - April 1986 - Sinclair trademark and computer business sold to Amstrad
• Cambridge Computer Limited - February 1987 - Z88 launched.

Obviously after April 1986 Amstrad produced official ZX Spectrum computers. And obviously various companies produced official computers under license, some of which were exactly the same (or very, very nearly the same) as a U.K. specification Sinclair computer, while others were only partially compatible.

And then, there there the countless ‘clones’, again some are fully compatible (by this, I mean that 99.5% of software written for a Issue 3 48K ZX Spectrum will run without problems), while others are not.

I don’t think this topic should be about personal preferences, that’s fully covered in other topics.

Mark

[Pobulous]

A 128K in a rubber key form factor would be a 10/10 for me.

For playing games, the rubber keys felt superior over other keyboards to me, and were better than the joystick options of the day.
A lot of handheld games of the time had mushy rubber buttons, too.

The keys in the + model and later feel shifted to the right and I struggle to hit the correct keys. Who thought the delete key should go there?

[Alcoholics Anonymous]

- Also, it's strange that Inves Spectrum + are included on this list. AFAIK Inves Spectrum + was probably the first unofficial spectrum clone (they launched a redesigned Spectrum because Sinclair won't allow them to sell more original Spectrums), so if you include the Inves you should probably include every other clone (note that the same applies to Sam Coupé, being a development unrelated to Sinclair).

I don't think that is the case. It was the Spanish government that decided to apply taxes on imported computers with 64K or less memory in order to encourage domestic computer production. The response from Amstrad was to add a useless 8K chip to its computer (I'm not very familiar with Amstrads so can't say more) and the response from Investronica, which was importing Spectrums, was to go to Sinclair with a plan to build something with more than 64K. I recall reading it was Investronica who wanted 128K and an AY chip. Sinclair designed the 128K Investronica and Investronica built it with Spanish language features in the ROM. This was the original 128K computer which was not made available in the UK until a year+ later so that existing stock of 48Ks would have time to sell off. There were several problems in the Investronica 128K that were solved in the Sinclair 128K launch. Without Investronica, there may never have been a 128K Spectrum and likely the Spectrum brand would have died much sooner. Looking back at history, it was clear Sinclair was done with the Spectrum at the 48K and microdrives. The next step was the QL.

I'm not sure if I would include the Sam as a Spectrum. It was quite a different computer, as any Sam user will be quick to point out, and only mostly compatible with 48K programs in a time when 128K was standard. My opinion is that in order to be called a Spectrum (clone), the architecture has to be designed and intended to run all Spectrum programs and to use all hardware peripherals even if compatibility doesn't quite make it to 100%. Does 48K software compatibility make the Sam a 48K spectrum clone? It doesn't quite fit that -- hardware compatibility wasn't there -- and It's still different in my mind because the makers didn't call it a spectrum clon). The Memotech 512 could run 48K spectrum games and so could the Elan Enterprise. They were definitely not Spectrum clones. In all Spectrum clones you can identify the essential parts of the original machines, ie the ula and z80, as prominent characteristics of the architecture.

[Mpk]

In this Universe, will all the Spectrums eventually team up to finally defeat the evil Commodore?

Sinclairs, Assemble!

[Mpk]

also including the time period when Amstrad owned the Sinclair computer brand (that is ZX Spectrums), if so are we including the other Sinclair branded computers that Amstrad released?

Mark

The Amstrad Spectrums surely count as bone fide Speccys - it would be weird to step out of your Tardis in 1992 and tell some kid that he doesn't have a real Spectrum, just because a different guy owns the company that made his beloved +3.

I wouldn't include the Sam Coupe. It can play speccy games maybe, but so can my Windows PC.

I would include the Next though, largely because it has the proper colours on, and I paid all that money for it.

[PeteProdge]

Oh dear, this is like opening a can of worms…
...
I don’t think this topic should be about personal preferences, that’s fully covered in other topics.

Oh, I know this was going to be a highly contentious issue when I started the thread. And yeah, everything in it is going to be subjective.

It's like asking a load of Doctor Fans what is and isn't 'canon', and what's good enough to be 'almost canon' and what's so awful it doesn't face a chance of fooling anyone.

For example, I really loved the suggestion that Amstrad's em@iler gets 1 out of 10, that had me stifling laughter in the office. Good call, too, it's properly awful.

[rastersoft]

- Also, it's strange that Inves Spectrum + are included on this list. AFAIK Inves Spectrum + was probably the first unofficial spectrum clone (they launched a redesigned Spectrum because Sinclair won't allow them to sell more original Spectrums), so if you include the Inves you should probably include every other clone (note that the same applies to Sam Coupé, being a development unrelated to Sinclair).

I don't think that is the case. It was the Spanish government that decided to apply taxes on imported computers with 64K or less memory in order to encourage domestic computer production. [...]

I think that you are mixing the "Sinclair Spectrum 128K" (which is a real Sinclair product, although originally built by Investronica) with the "Inves Spectrum+" (which is a 48K clone designed from scratch by Investronica after Sinclair was bought by Amstrad).

The Inves Spectrum+ even uses a completely diferent ULA with a completely different access to memory (there is neither contention, nor floating bus, for example).

[Jbizzel]

The ZX81 and ZX80 should be excluded here as they are the predecessors to the Spectrum. The QL was the successor so again should be excluded.

...and the Cambridge Z88, is that also considered a successor?

Is the closest thing to a real portable spectrum

[p13z]

...and the Cambridge Z88, is that also considered a successor?

Is the closest thing to a real portable spectrum

What about a 48k Speccy with a Sinclair TV80 and a PP10 battery?
The Speccy was always a portable computer
The above setup was lighter than most laptops, and works with a walkman too, if you want to get fancy.

[Nitrowing]

...and the Cambridge Z88, is that also considered a successor?

Is the closest thing to a real portable spectrum

What about a 48k Speccy with a Sinclair TV80 and a PP10 battery?
The Speccy was always a portable computer
The above setup was lighter than most laptops, and works with a walkman too, if you want to get fancy.

runs on 4 AA which are easier to get than the P500 6V lithium the FTV needs

[Jbizzel]

What about a 48k Speccy with a Sinclair TV80 and a PP10 battery?
The Speccy was always a portable computer
The above setup was lighter than most laptops, and works with a walkman too, if you want to get fancy.

runs on 4 AA which are easier to get than the P500 6V lithium the FTV needs

This isn't far off the original idea for the z88. It was to be a 2inch "flat" CRT but they went with a "Supertwist LCD" which was a wise decision, although Sinclair took some persuading.

[Cosmium]

For playing games, the rubber keys felt superior over other keyboards to me, and were better than the joystick options of the day.
A lot of handheld games of the time had mushy rubber buttons, too.

The keys in the + model and later feel shifted to the right and I struggle to hit the correct keys.

Definitely agree on this.

I excitedly made the jump from the 48K to the + via the upgrade kit when it became available, but was always a bit disappointed with the mushy keys and less accurate (for me) typing on the +.

Didn't really feel like progress, but at least the case looked more "professional"

[zx64]

In this Universe, will all the Spectrums eventually team up to finally defeat the evil Commodore?

Sinclairs, Assemble!

Attack of the clones?