[vcf-midatlantic] chat GPT admits error - NRI 832 Predated and outsold the Kenbak 1

[David Gesswein]

Couldn't find previous in this thread. List search for 832 didn't even find
message replying to.

I googled NRI 832 to see what was being discussed and found your page.
https://www.vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=743

One caption says
Radio Electronics December 1970 National Radio Institute's ( NRI ) full-page advertisement for their Model 832 digital computer trainer. 
Picture above is dated 1971.

Another
The 1970 NRI Digital Computer Model 832 was a trainer kit that was developed in 1970 and sold for $504 US when first introduced. It pre-dates the similar Kenbak computer by many months. 

Which not sure if that matches below.


On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 08:59:48PM -0400, Bill Degnan via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
> Yes, that is correct. The NRI 832 computer was introduced in 1972, which
> was after the Kenbak-1 was introduced in 1971. However, the NRI 832 may
> have sold more units than the Kenbak-1, even though both computers had
> limited commercial success. The NRI 832 was marketed to hobbyists and
> electronics enthusiasts, while the Kenbak-1 was marketed more towards
> businesses and scientific institutions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> social at kennettclassic.com
> But you just said that the first NRI 832 was advertised before the Kenbak 1
> Yes, that is correct. I apologize for any confusion my previous responses
> may have caused. According to some sources, the NRI 832 computer was
> advertised in the September 1971 issue of Scientific American, which
> predates the introduction of the Kenbak-1 in 1971. Therefore, the NRI 832
> computer was introduced and advertised before the Kenbak-1.
> 
> Furthermore, some sources suggest that the NRI 832 computer may have sold
> more units than the Kenbak-1, even though both computers had limited
> commercial success. The NRI 832 was marketed to hobbyists and electronics
> enthusiasts, while the Kenbak-1 was marketed more towards businesses and
> scientific institutions. I apologize for any confusion my previous
> responses may have caused, and I hope this clears up any confusion.