The way I see it, nowhere in this quote:

Quote:

MSX is Designed for Low-End Computer Markets The MSX specification was first introduced by Microsoft in June. It provides a standard hardware and software specification for low-end 8-bit microcomputers that ....

it says that MSX is short for MicroSoft Extended. It just says that the MSX spec was introduced by Microsoft, which makes sense, as Nishi worked for Microsoft Japan, right?

Now, if Nishi was closely involved with the development and design of the MSX computer, who are you to doubt him if he says that they came up with the three letters MSX first, and afterwards thought of what it stood for, which turned out to be "Machines with Software eXchangability"?

WHY would the man be lying.

This changes nothing about the facts we already know, and I do not see how this would in any way suggest that Nishi has not been telling the truth. Making up all kinds of conspiracy theories is nice and all but well...


~Grauw

p.s. I quite agree with HansO’s last paragraph, two messages ago. The reality probably isn’t black/white, but a mix, and somewhere inbetween.

[buzz]Nishi worked for ASCII Japan... I doubt Microsoft Japan and ASCII Japan are the same thing.[/buzz]

Quote:

[buzz]Nishi worked for ASCII Japan... I doubt Microsoft Japan and ASCII Japan are the same thing.[/buzz]

Do some searching, and find out what ASCII actually was

Quote:

Now, if Nishi was closely involved with the development and design of the MSX computer, who are you to doubt him if he says that they came up with the three letters MSX first, and afterwards thought of what it stood for, which turned out to be "Machines with Software eXchangability"?

Who are you to completely trust someone on his nice blue eyes? Especially since for year, MSX was known to be MicroSoft eXtended. But suddenly, almost 20 years later Nishi is telling otherwhise?

Quote:

WHY would the man be lying.

Why wouldn't he?

Fact is that before Nishi came with "his version", MSX has always been known to stand for MicroSoft eXtended. I don't see any reason to change this, just because Nishi says to. Especially since he has nothing to back it up, except for his own word.
Or do you have any docs from '83, '84, etc.. stating otherwise?

/me prefers to believe history a bit more then Mr Nishi.

Anybody remember history of DVD acronym that changed meaning
from Digital Video Disk to Digital Versatile Disk
when it became clear that it's going to be used not only for movies ?

It may be that MSX changed it's meaning the same way,
or even was meant to be "decyphered" in various ways from the beginning.

Quote:

[buzz]Nishi worked for ASCII Japan... I doubt Microsoft Japan and ASCII Japan are the same thing.[/buzz]

Indeed, Nishi worked for ASCII Japan, after he left Microsoft Japan. MSX was born in the time he worked for Microsoft. IIRC from his bio he worked first in the USA for Microsoft and helped to start Microsoft Japan. In those years Microsoft was a small company and not the dominant player in the enduser market as it is now. Their main income came from OEM licensing the Microsoft Basic interpreter for 6502 and Z80. So the extended Basic in the MSX was a standard product of Microsoft to add. In fact, the Spectravideo 318/328 already had the nearly equivalent Basic before MSX was born. The Disk basic extension was then also a quite standard OEM product of Microsoft. What Nishi did and was new to Microsoft then, was making the MSX concept as a whole a standard licensable product, including hardware specifcations and all the software. The creativity of Nishi did not include the creation of MSX, that was dome already by Spectravideo. He just put it together and sold the licenses to a large group of consumer electronic companies. And from then on Microsoft Japan developed the next generation MSX-2., as can be seen in MSX-2 documents still having Microsoft as copyright holder. And after that ASCII took over the development of MSX2+ and turboR.

And yes, ASCII and Microsoft are not the same thing. ASCII is now a publishing company and, until MSX Foundation started, held also the rights of MSX etc. Not a software company like Microsoft, though they did sell software products and even hardware products. So ASCII have Nishi and the MSX rights in common, not much more. I assume Microsoft Japan just disappeared and ASCII appeared. Ofcourse Microsoft build a strong presence in Japan later on.

Time for some nuances here: Microsoft Japan didn't disappear, it still exists. Afaik someone once told me the president of that firm is called 'East' (whereas Nishi means 'West')... can anyone confirm this ?

Apart from that... Nishi didn't 'work for ASCII', he was the founder and president (and later vice-president) of the firm. This firm already existed before Nishi started to work at Microsoft, which more or less lead to a lot of unclarity concerning who owned the copyrights and trademarks to the MSX computer system and what the letters actually meant. Personally, I'm comfortable with MicroSoft eXtended, Machines with Software eXchangeability and Matsushita Sony X.

Please also keep in mind this press-release is about MSX-DOS and not about the MSX computer system on the whole. Similar press releases from 1983 in Japan will most likely mention a lot more ASCII and a lot less Microsoft. I guess that, had MSX been a 100% MicroSoft product, Nishi would never have been able to move the copyrights to ASCII meaning we would never had the MSX2+ and turboR. Or MSX Revival

Quote:

Time for some nuances here: Microsoft Japan didn't disappear, it still exists.

I had a lot of contacts around 1990 with Microsoft, even been in Seatle at the Microsoft campus, working on the Alpha version of Windows NT. MSX was already unknown in that period at Microsoft, the whole Basic interpreter past was a past business from the early 80ties. It suggests that Microsoft USA was hardly involved in MSX.
What they did tell me that the then again existing Microsoft Japan organisation had nothing to do with the 80ties version of Microsoft Japan: just a quite small Microsoft country sales and support organisation, without developers. Only products in Japan were the then current USA Microsoft products localised to Japan.

I dont know much about the past of ASCII Japan. I do see in all MSX-1 and MSX-2 documents the copyright notice MSX belonging to Microsoft. Only in later documents the copyright ASCII appears. And MSX Basic is still the property of Microsoft as we all know from the Revival struggles.

Very interesting, this discussion, really! I am learning much history here.

tfh: have you never wondered what "MicroSoft eXtended" was about? Microsoft extended... what? What did they extend? In the context of MSX-BASIC and MSX-DOS that suddenly starts to make sense.

I do believe it entirely possible that with the abbreviation ‘MSX’ in those two cases being known, especially with the lack of importance and clarity what the abbreviation of the ‘MSX’ as a system was about (as Nishi said, at the time they were mainly looking for a catchy acronym, and worried about what it actually meant as an afterthought), people took ‘MicroSoft eXtended’ for the meaning of the system, especially if they hear other people referring to it as such as well. If it in the end turns out to be some kind of ‘urban legend’, well, why not? That happens all the time.

Think about that ex-employee of Konami UK saying in the interview that the main bother for Konami at the time was the bootlegging pirates, and that the people at home copying games were of much less concern because it was only on an amateur level (and probably smaller scale than we think). Even though it was broadly assumed by many that home piracy necked MSX. Do you think he was lying as well?

Ye of little faith! ;p


~Grauw

Quote:

I guess that, had MSX been a 100% MicroSoft product, Nishi would never have been able to move the copyrights to ASCII meaning we would never had the MSX2+ and turboR. Or MSX Revival

I think MS was happy to bail out of 8-bit market in 1985, since the serious money wasn't there anymore. As of ASCII existing prior to (c) shift, I think it's true, since ASCII did publish several "launch" titles for MSX. One that I remember was Rise-Out.

BTW: How Nishi is better then I am in redefining history? So here is a new bit of information: MSX stands for "Most SeXy". No more arguments.

Nishi actually does have one plus in this, dhau: he's the MSX godfather

Remember your legends and sages

Quote:

Think about that ex-employee of Konami UK saying in the interview that the main bother for Konami at the time was the bootlegging pirates, and that the people at home copying games were of much less concern because it was only on an amateur level (and probably smaller scale than we think). Even though it was broadly assumed by many that home piracy necked MSX. Do you think he was lying as well?

Yes he was, MSX got necked because it got surpassed in functionality, adaptability and commercial interest by other systems. Love for the system as we all have is not of interest, hardware, and software production is ice-cold. Live with it.

Quote:

Nishi actually does have one plus in this, dhau: he's the MSX godfather Remember your legends and sages

No, Nishi SAYS he is the MSX Godfather, just like he gave the MSX abbreviation a new meaning. I think he's full of crap. He didn't come up with the system, Spectravideo did. He enhanced it and thought of a clever commercial policy to get wide support, and make tons of money. Never turn a businessman into a saint.

dhau: Most SeXy, eh?! I cannot argue that! ^_^

MrRudi: Ah, so you’re already calling him a liar for something he didn’t say. That’s quick judgement. The man never said that bootlegger piracy was the reason, the thing I mentioned was just about whether home piracy was an issue for Konami at the time, and perhaps the reason for the demise of MSX.

With regard to Spectravideo, maybe a lot of MSX was taken from Spectravideo (or say Colecovision or whatever), but then you disregard the successive models MSX2 and up. Also, at the time, most home computers were similar and used common components. Think Colecovision, Sega Master System (Z80, VDP derived from TMS9918, PSG, OPLL (FM-PAC)), etc. I also ran into some Spectravideo docs not too long ago - the I/O ports are all different, so at least it’s not a direct clone .

What Nishi did different though, Spectravideo was once again a computer by a single vendor, like Commodore, Atari, P2000, TI-99, etc etc etc. MSX was designed to be an interoperable standard (with software exchangability ;p). Whether it succeeded in that can be debated, but at least it was a ‘noble’ thought. He deserves credit for that, and saying he just copied everything from another system is too simplistic.


~Grauw

About Spectravideo:

As Nishi said in Tilburg: the MSX2 was supposed to have become the actual MSX. But it took too long before the V9938 chip (MSX-VIDEO) was ready. So, I can imagine they just took the Spectravideo stuff and enhanced/changed it to place it quickly in the market, to fill the gap (and keep the promises) until the real MSX (now dubbed MSX2) was ready.
As Grauw already said: many systems at that time were similar (Sega SG-1000, Spectravideo, Colecovision, etc.)

I can't be sure about this though, it's just a theory.

Quote:

the MSX2 was supposed to have become the actual MSX

I think it's a wishful thinking. The premium price for 128K VRAM would kill any new computer in 1983 on arrival. Even with MSX1, very few came out with 64K of RAM in 1983/84. Most came out with 32K or even 16K. RAM was just way to expensive.

Prices steadily went down through the 1983 and 1984, and so it became possible to go so high-end by the end of 1985. And I think in 1985 only few MSX2-s was released. Most of them came out another year later.