|
By Ian Adamson and Richard Kennedy
|
|
|
Scamps and Scams: the ballad
of the MK 14
While the events
of the last chapter were gradually moving towards the day
when the NEB-Sinclair partnership became so fraught as to
be unworkable, in Cambridge activity was afoot that would
provide Sinclair with a corporate base on which to build a
new empire. Like many small businessmen, Sinclair had taken
the precaution of acquiring an off-the-shelf company, Ablesdeal
Ltd, which was set up in September 1973. The object of this
exercise was simply to have the capacity to start trading
without experiencing the delays of formal incorporation. The
first signs that Ablesdeal had ceased to be a precaution and
was beginning to be considered as a serious option was when
in February 1975 its name was changed to Westminster Mail
Order LTD and then again, in August of the same year, to Sinclair
Instruments. It was under this last name that the fledgling
Sinclair company launched the first of a range of products
that would come to include the world's bestselling line of
microcomputers.
The introduction of cheap home computers
into the UK is popularly regarded as the single most important
product of Clive Sinclair's innovative vision. However, a
careful examination of the facts surrounding the launch of
the ZX80, the forerunner of the incredibly successful ZX81
and the monumentally successful ZX Spectrum, reveals an unsung
hero of the microcomputer industry.
Today, Ian Williamson is a highly
paid executive with Leyland in Coventry, but back in the summer
of 1977 he was one of the many electronics undergraduates
whose talents were promoted and marketed by Cambridge Consultants.
At the time Williamson first crossed paths with Clive Sinclair,
the young electronics engineer was exhibiting all the symptoms
of a die-hard enthusiast. Although his work with CCL centred
around the solution of the day-to-day problems presented by
the company's clients, Williamson could hardly fail but be
influenced by the entrepreneurial environment in which he
worked. Since he was in daily contact with men such as Clive
Sinclair and Chris Curry, it would have been difficult for
someone of Williamson's talents to escape the conclusion that
there was money to be made from the new technologies. Furthermore,
like any electronics enthusiast of the day, Ian made it his
business to keep abreast of developments in the States, and
it was in the US hobbyist magazines that Williamson noted
a market trend that so far remained unexploited in the UK.
At the risk of sounding melodramatic, the implications of
this modest observation would transform the face of consumer
electronics in this country for the best part of a decade.
In 1977, the US electronics magazines
were beginning to promote the earliest type of home computer
kits. These products were primarily directed at the electronics
enthusiasts who were bored with the construction of hi-fl-related
products and equipment that simply promoted an incestuous
exploration of the hobby itself (multimeters, oscilloscopes,
etc.). Although calculator and digital-watch kits initially
offered a way around this impasse, Williamson suspected that
computer kits held the promise of an entirely new market.
The intellectual challenge of a new technical practice, especially
one like computing, which came with a built-in mystique, would
almost certainly prove irresistible to even the most laded
obsessive.
Williamson had noted that garage entrepreneurs
were importing US computer kits into Britain, but realized
that relatively high prices ensured that the technology remained
in the hands of institutions and the very well-heeled hobbyist.
In 1977, simple kits offering an unknown quantity for around
£200 were hardly likely to constitute an impulse buy.
The young engineer decided that the key to transforming a
specialist fetish into a product for the electronics enthusiast
depended on whether or not anyone could bring the price of
such kits to below the magic £100 mark.
In the early days of the home-computing
industry, the progress of the technology took its lead from
the world of hobbyist electronics. Developments and innovations
tended to be passed on in a spirit of camaraderie from one
enthusiast to another in an environment endearingly devoid
of self-interest. It seems impossible to believe that such
an era existed when one considers the atmosphere of rabid
paranoia and obsessive secrecy that currently surrounds today's
microcomputer industry. But such was the climate during the
hacker's heyday and, consciously or not, the early pioneers
of the industry tended to adhere to the US micro guru Denis
Allison's manifesto, 'Let's stand on each other's shoulders,
not on each other's toes...' This atmosphere of new-age idealism
goes some way towards explaining why Ian Williamson took what,
by today's standards, was the incredible step of delivering
the fruits of his brainwave into the eager hands of Clive
Sinclair and Chris Curry.
We should emphasize that Ian Williamson's
project, although inspired, was hardly fuelled by a heartfelt
desire to bring the wonders of technology to the masses. As
we shall see, philanthropists were pretty thin on the ground
in the Cambridge of the 1970s. In the summer of 1977, Williamson
had already made up his mind to quit Cambridge Consultants
LTD, and had been offered a secure and lucrative post at Leyland
Vehicles. In his spare time, he had developed the working
design for a cheap microcomputer, or more accurately a microprocessor
trainer, for which he saw a promising commercial future. The
machine was created from an imaginative mutation of components
found in a Sinclair calculator blended with a few others.
However, for Williamson the project seemed like a case of
bad timing, since the impending job with Leyland precluded
the possibility of marketing the product himself. Williamson
maintains that at the time the only way to make a success
of a new-wave consumer electronics product was by setting
up with one of the Cambridge cliques, impossible unless he
decided to pass up his move to Coventry. In the event, he
chose the safer of the two options and, given Sinclair Radionics'
association with Cambridge Consultants and the origin of the
prototype's components, it was natural that he should have
taken his idea to Chris Curry and Clive Sinclair, as well
as a couple of other Cambridge-based companies. Since everyone
was aware that Radionics was sinking fast, it was also understandable
that the veteran entrepreneurs should be approached by way
of their new commercial identity, then known as Sinclair Instruments.
As we have seen, in the autumn of
1977 Sinclair was preoccupied with the battle between Radionics
and the NEB, or rather between Clive and the short-sighted
bureaucrats. Sinclair's endgame tactics included the formulation
of corporate and commercial strategies that would ensure his
personal survival after what by now he regarded as his inevitable
departure. Certainly it was an open secret that Sinclair Instruments
was to serve as a corporate 'lifeboat' for Sinclair and those
loyal to his cause. Sinclair encouraged Chris Curry's departure
from the corporate mire that was Sinclair Radionics shortly
after the NEB took control, and from this point on his trusty
henchman was able to devote his full attention to the development
of the new enterprise. Thus, although he never officially
resigned from Radionics, the termination of relations between
Curry and the company presumably became clear to the NEB when
he borrowed some money and rented offices for the new company
in King's Parade, Cambridge. John Pemberton remembers the
new company as 'a hobby for Clive. Clive was operating it
and Chris Curry was dealing with the problems of it.' (Interview,
23 October 1985.)
It is important to remember that at
this time one of the main bones of contention between Sinclair
and his NEB partners centred around the latter's problems
in marketing the Microvision. The miniature television, even
in its early manifestations, can be regarded as one of a handful
of products whose development and public acceptance were (and
remained so until recently) critical to Sinclair's image of
himself as an innovator, new-wave entrepreneur and hi-tech
prophet. For Sinclair, the sole value of the shell that was
Sinclair Instruments was as a money-spinner that would generate
the R&D funding for the creation of the products that
would confound his critics. In effect, Sinclair Instruments
would continue the work of Radionics and its interim products
were simply the means to a well-defined end. Avoiding the
crippling burden of Radionics' debts and the galling position
of being ultimately under the control of others was one reason
why the new company became increasingly important for Sinclair.
The other associated motivation for wanting to get Sinclair
Instruments on the road is likely to have been the desire
to get the first computer products that fell within the beloved
consumer electronics ethos on to the market. Certainly the
NEB-funded Radionics computer project was directed towards
mainstream computing, of the Apple variety, rather than cut-price
consumerism, although doubtless valuable to Sinclair in terms
of the research and development knowledge it produced.
By the time Ian Williamson enters
our story, Chris Curry had initiated the first Sinclair Instruments
product, setting the company on its path towards a realization
of Sinclair's vision. In retrospect, given the company's lofty
aims, it's mildly depressing to record the form in which the
new age was heralded. The beast in question was known as the
Wrist Calculator and, when it appeared, boasted a design that
could charitably be described as an eyesore in black plastic.
To be fair to John Pemberton, the moonlighting Radionics designer
who must take responsibility for the appearance of this unfortunate
creation, the calculator was rushed out at top speed and was
probably the best that could be done with the components at
hand. Sinclair Instruments was set up as a last-ditch sanctuary
for a desperate team whose futures depended on their ability
rapidly to generate a healthy cash flow from meagre resources.
A return to the earlier user base of the mail-order hobbyist
product, based on the Radionics calculator design experience,
was in order.
Curiously, in spite of its aesthetic
and technical shortcomings, the infamous Wrist Calculator
fulfilled its role admirably. Incredible though it might seem
today (an incredulity that one suspects must have been experienced
at the time by the calculator's creators), more than 10,000
kits were ordered by masochistic hobbyists from all parts
of the globe. Contemporary reviews of the kit suggest that
its construction demanded much the same dedication required
for the solution of a Rubik's Cube. It was extraordinarily
tricky to assemble and, once completed, there was only a fair
to middling chance of it working. John Pemberton recalled
that it was designed to 'minimal tolerances', which meant
that only if you were lucky enough to get a set of parts all
of which were at or below the mean size of the prototype's
components could you get it to fit within the case. So, against
the odds, Sinclair Instruments had kicked off to a profitable
start. By way of celebration, in July 1977 the company name
was changed yet again, this time to Science of Cambridge.
It seems unlikely that anyone would
have derived much of a sense of security from the knowledge
that his or her livelihood depended on the earning power of
a dodgy calculator. If the company was to have a future, its
dependents were going to have to come up with reliable and
innovative products. And, if the Wrist Calculator is anything
to go by, in the early days of Science of Cambridge good ideas
were pretty thin on the ground. A partial explanation for
this paucity of creative drive is that the Sinclair team had
come to rely on Clive to mastermind the direct ion of product
development. At this time, although Sinclair's heart may have
been with the new venture, his working day was devoted to
keeping track of events at Radionics as the company slipped
from his control. Constantly on the defensive and increasingly
forced to live with the consequences of other people's decisions
(a situation he has repeatedly described as intolerable),
Sinclair was hardly in any shape to fulfill his customary
role as tireless innovator. Furthermore, a year of substantial
state funding had encouraged him to think big when looking
to the future, and the decidedly limited financial resources
of Science of Cambridge would undoubtedly have cramped his
creative style. In short, at a time when the new company desperately
needed a breadwinning product, Sinclair's mind was still preoccupied
with the dreams of the past and distracted by the corporate
crises of a decidedly unpalatable present.
Away from the boardroom intrigues
and Titanic spirit that marked Sinclair's final year at Radionics,
Chris Curry was in a far better position to appraise the market
and make the kind of decisions that would secure a viable
future for Science of Cambridge. Thus, when Ian Williamson
turned up on his doorstep with the idea of marketing a cut-price
computer kit, Curry immediately saw a chance to jump ahead
of the competition in the world of hobbyist electronics, while
at the same time sticking with a market and a technology with
which the company was familiar. Curry has always insisted
that at the time Sinclair was totally uninterested in computers,
and it was only his own commitment to the project that finally
persuaded Clive to give Williamson the chance to put his theory
into practice. As we saw in the last chapter, this seems unlikely,
in the light of Sinclair's declared R & D objectives over
at Radionics.
Whether Sinclair was behind the project
or not, the fact of the matter is that soon after Williamson's
demonstration of his initial creation, Curry was sufficiently
impressed to provide the engineer with the necessary resources
for the construction of a prototype suitable for production
in terms of, surprisingly enough, defunct Radionics calculators.
Williamson recalls:
You see, they wanted
to do it on the cheap. They had a lot of redundant components
from obsolete Oxfords and Cambridges [Radionics' calculator
lines] and Curry wanted me to see if I could come up with
the same sort of thing as my prototype using different components.
(Telephone interview,
28 October 1985.)
Why it should be of any advantage
to Science of Cambridge to use the same components that formed
part of the defunct stock-in-trade of an entirely separate
and state-owned company is not apparent. Perhaps Sinclair
was going to bid for the crippled calculators from which recyclable
parts could be extracted, in line with his old scavenger inclinations,
or perhaps an unfortunate confusion had arisen concerning
who was working on what, and for whom. Some light is perhaps
shed on the state of affairs by Norman Hewett's comments when
asked if Chris Curry had been engaged on Radionics work during
his tenure:
While I was there,
I occasionally had an emissary come up from the stores and
places like that, saying Chris Curry is around again, at
the stores, and wanted to take out so-and-so. I said, 'Who
is this fellow?' and they'd say that he had worked for us.
My response was, 'So what's he doing in our stores then?
Tell him he's not welcome, and if he wants anything he must
come to see me.' As far as I know, he certainly wasn't working
for Sinclair Radionics LTD, but whether he was quietly working
with or for Clive and using Sinclair Radionics components
I don't know. He wasn't in our stores for his health! Certainly
Clive didn't give the impression that Curry was working
for Sinclair Radionics - he had no comment about my chucking
him out of the stores.
(Interview, 16 October
1985.)
Component source and ownership aside,
it's worth emphasizing that Williamson worked on the design
of the kit in his own time, and that the computer was never
intended as an item to be marketed by Cambridge Consultants.
Indeed, as far as one can tell, Williamson's employers knew
nothing of the project at the time; the idea was simply to
make a little pin money out of the Cambridge scene before
the move to Coventry. The engineer finally managed to cobble
together a working prototype, and judging from its inventor's
disarmingly modest description, it seems that the electronic
equivalent of a silk purse somehow emerged from a heap of
silicon junk whose equation to a sow's ear would constitute
an insult to pigs: 'I made the original prototype based around
a Sinclair Cambridge [calculator] that I bought in a shop
somewhere.' (Telephone interview, 28 October 1985.)
As we have seen, Williamson set about
his R & D with low cost as one of the central considerations
determining his design, which was further constrained by the
decision to limit the choice of components (other than the
microprocessor chip, and memory) to those which could be found
in existing Sinclair Radionics products. One of the most impressive
results of Williamson's labours was that he managed to create
a computer that accepted hexadecimal input entered via a standard
calculator keyboard. Without going into details, this involved
basing the machine's software around octal notation, which,
even today, the self-effacing Williamson concedes is an achievement
of which he is proud.
In retrospect, it's tempting to conclude
that ironically it was the chip choice that, despite the prototype's
imaginative design and, even by today's standards, extremely
clever software, explains why Ian Williamson's name is unlikely
to crop up in any account of the early development of microcomputing
in the U K. Like the American kits that provided Williamson
with the original inspiration for his project, the enterprising
engineer used what was known as a 'Scamp' chip (the National
SemiConductor MicroProcessor or National SC/MP) at the centre
of his system. Designed and originally marketed in the States,
this interesting little chip never really caught on with manufacturers
on either side of the Atlantic. However, if we assess Williamson's
choice of chip in the context of the era in which the product
was being developed, the wisdom of opting for a Scampbased
design soon becomes apparent. For a start, the chip already
had a proven track record as the centrepiece of comparable
US products and by the standards of the day was unusually
low-priced. In addition, the Scamp boasted an incredibly simple
architecture for an 8-bit microprocessor of the 1970s, and
thus for the novice was encouragingly easy to use and program.
In short, and in the words of a contemporary assessment of
the chip, 'For the homebrew enthusiast, the SC/MP is a good
choice.' (Byte, July 1978.)
It should be stressed that the machine
Williamson demonstrated to Curry would appear incredibly primitive
if placed alongside even the simplest of today's home computers.
Readers familiar with the units by which a computer's memory
is measured will be amused to learn that the commercial implementation
of Williamson's idea proudly boasted 256 bytes of RAM (random-access
memory)! For the uninitiated, suffice it to say that today's
home micros specify memory size in units of just over 1000
bytes (K), and that no self-respecting hobbyist would even
consider a product offering less than 49,152 bytes (48K) of
memory.
Following the example of the designers
of the US computer kits, Williamson deliberately restricted
his machine's capabilities in an effort to keep down the price.
It is quite clear that this early micro was never intended
to be much more than an educational aid. Certainly Williamson's
book about the machine emphasized its value as a tool for
learning about the way microprocessors work, and never claimed
that it offered a computing power that was of any practical
use.
Chris Curry realized that if Science
of Cambridge was to reap the advantages of launching a promising
product into a virgin market, he was going to have to move
fast. Williamson's prototype had already been seen by a number
of other companies, and there was always the chance that someone
else would have the guts to snap up a new idea. Curry and
Sinclair agreed that it was time to formalize an agreement
with Williamson. Sinclair arranged a hotel conference with
the engineer and contractual conditions were discussed and
agreed. Science of Cambridge would license Williamson's design,
for which the company would pay a flat fee of £5000.
The inventor would also receive royalty payments according
to the number of units sold. Shortly after his meeting with
Sinclair, Williamson received a contract detailing the licensing
deal he had agreed at the meeting. This he signed and returned
to the King's Parade offices. All that was required for the
deal to be formalized was for Williamson to receive a copy
of the contract bearing Sinclair's signature. It never arrived.
Williamson's project has been chronicled
in detail in an attempt to clarify the circumstances in which
his prototype was produced and to facilitate an informed assessment
of subsequent developments. By now the reader should be able
to appreciate that Williamson was essentially selling an idea
whose commercial value was bolstered by the existence of a
working design based around an American chip. The fact that
the prototype made use of Sinclair components is almost irrelevant,
apart from showing yet again Sinclair's recycling instincts
and the fact that they were almost certainly the cheapest
available components. Considering the relationship that existed
between the two companies, Williamson is hardly likely to
have argued that it was of any benefit to Science of Cambridge
that the production of his machine required the purchase of
components that might possibly be held in quantity by Sinclair
Radionics. He was selling an idea for a product whose economic
and technical viability was confirmed by the prototypes he
built and demonstrated. Clearly any company that decided to
market Williamson's design would first take the precaution
of costing each of the product's components, and at the same
time shop around for cheaper alternatives. Obviously, if a
selective substitution of components could reduce production
costs, it would be acceptable for the manufacturer to request
the designer to make any reasonable modifications required
by the inclusion of the new components. Such situations are
common enough to merit a standard clause in most licensing
agreements.
Such considerations hardly seemed
relevant in the case of Williamson's machine. There were only
two elements of the hardware design whose replacement would
effectively invalidate the brilliant software that established
the uniqueness of Williamson's work. The first of these was
the Scamp chip itself, which defined the machine's limitations
and the way in which it could be programmed. The replacement
of this chip would effectively mean the creation of an entirely
different machine tailored to the idiosyncrasies of a new
microprocessor. The second hardware feature on which the rest
of the design depended was the inclusion of a standard calculator
keyboard for the communication of hexadecimal input. As we
have already mentioned, Williamson laboured over almost insurmountable
problems in his determination to use an existing keyboard
in his design. Ever conscious of production costs, he reasoned
that a unique keyboard would require a unique production process.
It would surely be cheaper to take advantage of an existing
process that was churning out what could become a dual-purpose
component. So a software design based around octal notation
was eventually programmed on to the ROM (read-only memory)
chips, which allowed hexadecimal instructions to be communicated
via a standard Radionics calculator keyboard. Any decision
to change the keyboard would mean the design of an entirely
new input/output (I/O) program.
Williamson sat around waiting for
the contract that was never sent. Finally, he received a phone
call from an uncharacteristically edgy Curry. With a profusion
of apologies, Christopher gallantly faced up to his responsibilities
as the spokesperson for Science of Cambridge, and informed
Williamson that the deal was off unless he was prepared to
modify his original design. The engineer made it clear that
he was prepared to consider any reasonable changes that Sinclair
and Curry deemed necessary. It was explained that the calculator
keyboard was to be replaced by one that made use of an economical
membrane design, and that Williamson's I/O software would
have to be modified accordingly. Williamson explained why
such changes were impossible since they demolished the foundations
on which the machine had been designed.
Science of Cambridge had changed its
plans in the light of an offer from National Semiconductors
(NS), the firm that manufactured the Scamp chip at the heart
of Williamson's design. With a thoroughness to tempt tedium,
we have established that because of the circumstances in which
it was produced, Williamson's prototype made use of components
that originated from a variety of sources but which, for the
most part, were unexceptional enough to be replaceable when
necessity demanded the application of a little creative substitution.
When Curry approached National Semiconductors to negotiate
the purchase of the first batch of Scamp chips, the Americans
turned round and made the latent millionaire an offer he couldn't
refuse. They offered to redesign the kit for the Brits free
of charge. The idea was that the capabilities of Williamson's
prototype would be realized in a product built exclusively
from National Semiconductor chips.
Such a deal made obvious business
sense to both parties. The Americans would be able to sell
a product that would succeed only to the extent to which it
was used - which in the case of the Scamp chip was hardly
at all. In addition, although the primitive microprocessor
had turned out to be a lost cause with the folks back home,
there was a chance that it might catch on in Britain if adopted
by high-profile whizzkids like the boys at Science of Cambridge.
Finally, a redesigned product which made exclusive use of
National Semiconductor components multiplied the original
unit sales offered by the Williamson design by the number
of components required in the NS design. All it would cost
NS was the price of a new design.
The final National
kit used the same processor, the same instruction set if
you like, the same display and had the same memory size.
Apart from that the hardware design was not similar because
National tailored it to the products they had available.
They already sold kits over here and in the US. You have
to remember that my idea had been to make it as cheap as
possible - right down to using a Cambridge [calculator]
keyboard.
(Ian Williamson,
Interview, 29 October 1985.)
The attraction of the NS deal for
Sinclair's company should be obvious. The logistics of manufacturing
a product that requires components from a variety of sources
are often unworkably complex. As the Sinclair team had learned
from bitter experience, it needed only a single source to
foul up and the entire production process could be brought
to a standstill. Although delays in fulfilling orders were
by now regarded as almost a defining quality of any Sinclair
operation, any situation that diminished the risks of such
difficulties would have been embraced with enthusiasm. It
would clearly be easier to control the supply of components
from a single source than attempt to plan production according
to predictions concerning the reliability or otherwise of
a large number of small suppliers. It would be reasonable
to assume that the NS deal also provided Curry with an opportunity
to negotiate a cut-price deal, since it could be argued that
Science of Cambridge would be purchasing a large part of the
American company's range in the kind of quantities that justified
job-lot rates. Finally, Chris Curry has something of a reputation
for his ability to bank the fruits of a competitor's weakness,
and is unlikely to have pulled his punches when negotiating
a deal that centred on a chip he knew National Semiconductors
was desperate to promote in the UK.
As far as Science of Cambridge was
concerned, the NS offer provided the company with an irresistible
opportunity to make a fast and unusually respectable return
on a relatively modest outlay. The only thing standing in
the way of a straightforward deal was Ian Williamson. At this
stage in the proceedings it would have been tempting to push
to the back of the mind the fact that it was Williamson who
had initiated the project and brought it to fruition.
From the security of life near the
top of a national institution, Ian Williamson clearly feels
that he can afford to be generous when looking back on his
life in the Cambridge of the 1970s. These days he's sufficiently
sanguine to be able to dismiss his experiences as a young
inventor and aspiring entrepreneur as simply the first of
many tough lessons that make up a commercial education. It's
clear that Williamson has never regretted his decision to
forsake the life of the inventor, which under the circumstances
is hardly surprising.
Williamson insists that when Sinclair
backed off from the deal they had agreed in favour of the
NS option, his bitterness was primarily directed at the American
company rather than the management of Science of Cambridge:
I was never particularly
pissed off with Clive. If anything I think I was pissed
off with National Semiconductors. You see, considering what
NS were offering and the state of the company [Science of
Cambridge] at the time, they [Sinclair/ Curry] were faced
with an offer they couldn't really refuse. I was pissed
off with NS for having the sense to offer Sinclair a design
which only used components which could be ordered from one
place.
(Interview, 29 October
1985.)
In June 1978 Science of Cambridge
launched a microcomputer kit based around the National SC/MP
chip. The machine was marketed as the MK 14, and the features
it offered were identical to those of the prototype Ian Williamson
had demonstrated to Chris Curry the previous summer. In the
words of Williamson, the launch of the machine and the familiar
post-natal depression that followed bore all the hallmarks
of a 'typical Sinclair flop'. An inability to fulfill the
first batch of orders inspired by the launch was, as usual,
compounded by the effects of the extravagant advertising campaign
by which it was preceded. Science of Cambridge had instructed
National Semiconductors to produce a mere 2000 sets of components
for the launch of the machine. It seems likely that this conservative
launch stock was partly a reflection of the financial plight
of the new company, and partly an indication of Sinclair's
doubts about the potential of the home-computer market. In
any case, the punters' donations flowed in to fill the corporate
coffers, but little in the way of product flowed out of the
company's doors. In the age-old tradition of a Sinclair launch,
supply immediately collapsed from the shock of attracting
an encouraging level of public interest. Anyway, the first
2000 MK 14 kits were no sooner packed than dispatched, after
which eager customers were invited to kick their heels while
the NS manufacturing machine was brought back to life, funded
by the punters yet again.
In its short, sweet life as the UK's
first cheap computer kit, the MK 14 design was sold into
between 10,000 and 15,000 homes. The rights of the manual
Williamson had written for his machine were bought by Science
of Cambridge and the book included as part of the MK 14 package.
It is clear that the company's principals were less than comfortable
about Williamson's reward for his labours and enterprise,
since Sinclair felt obliged to fork out the princely sum of
£2000 for the right to use the engineer's documentation.
The unexpected success of the MK 14
directly influenced product development at both Radionics
and Science of Cambridge. At the former, it stimulated the
development and design work on a more sophisticated home computer,
a decision that, many years later, resulted in the appearance
of the ill-fated NewBrain, and rather sooner, the ZX80. The
Science of Cambridge follow-through was considerably more
modest. The company churned out a small range of products
that enabled the hobbyist to upgrade the basic MK 14. There
was the VDU Module (£33.75), which enabled sixteen lines
of thirty-two characters to be displayed on a UHF television.
To this was added the Cassette Interface Module (which allowed
programmers to save programs to magnetic tape), the Prom Programmer,
and a power supply to drive the expanded system.
According to the first editor of Personal
Computer World magazine, Dave Tebbutt, the success of
the MK 14 was one of the major inspirations behind the decision
to launch the UK's first home computing magazine. It was undoubtedly
also a contributory factor in Chris Curry setting up Acorn
Computers some time in 1978, thus continuing the entrepreneurial
splintering that his mentor Sinclair had taught him. Indeed
the first Acorn product, the System 75, was remarkably akin
to an enhanced MK 14.
There was a more direct sense in which
the MK 14 hinted at the shape of things to come. The early
hobbyist who cobbled together the complete MK 14 system had
before him the heart of the kit's legendary successor. The
Scamp was ditched and replaced by the Z80A chip; the easier
BASIC language replaced hexadecimal numeric code and provided
programmers with a less cumbersome method of communicating
with their machines. But such factors aside, in every expanded
MK 14 the essentials of a ZX80 lurked, waiting to take the
world by storm. Well, almost ...
|