Editing Commodore Plus/4 (section)

== Reception ==
[[File:plus4 closeout ad.jpg|thumb|The Plus/4 was sold at closeout sales through the computer press via ads similar to this one]]

The press mocked the Plus/4. ''[[Info (magazine)|INFO]]'' showed a photo of the new (competitor) computer with the caption "Is this a joke?"<ref name="info">{{cite news | url=https://archive.org/stream/info-magazine-10/Info_Issue_10_1986_May-Jun#page/n55/mode/2up | title= There's only one word for these prices: rip-off. | work=Info | date=May–June 1986 | access-date=6 October 2013 | pages=56}}</ref> and compared it to the [[Ford Edsel]] and to a dinosaur.<ref name="info1984">{{cite journal | url=https://archive.org/stream/info-magazine-05/Info_Issue_05#page/n59/mode/2up | title=Double Take | journal=INFO | year=1984 | issue=5 | pages=62}}</ref> ''[[Compute!'s Gazette]]'' compared the Plus/4 to "[[The Emperor's New Clothes]]".<ref name="lock198501">{{cite news | url=https://archive.org/stream/1985-01-computegazette/Compute_Gazette_Issue_19_1985_Jan#page/n7/mode/2up | title=The Editor's Notes | work=Compute!'s Gazette | date=January 1985 | access-date=6 July 2014 | author=Lock, Robert | pages=6}}</ref> Many predicted that it would quickly fail; ''INFO'' gave away its review unit in a [[sweepstakes]] for readers, promising that the computer was "Sure to become a collector's item!".<ref name="infosweeps1984">{{cite journal | url=https://archive.org/stream/info-magazine-05/Info_Issue_05#page/n85/mode/2up | title=Plus/4 Sweepstakes | journal=INFO | year=1984 | issue=5 | pages=88}}</ref> Even a defender of the machine acknowledged that the Plus/4 was expensive compared to the C64, and that the built-in applications' quality was poor.<ref name="evers198607">{{cite journal | url=https://archive.org/stream/transactor-magazines-v6-i01/trans_v6_i01#page/n57/mode/2up | title=The Plus 4 - A Quick Overview |author-link=Richard Evers | author=Evers, Richard | journal=[[The Transactor]] |date=July 1986 | volume=6 | issue=1 | pages=56–58}}</ref>

Computer dealers disliked Commodore's usual practice of introducing new computers incompatible with existing ones.<ref name="wierzbicki1983"/> Steve Leininger, the designer of the [[Tandy Corporation|Tandy]] [[TRS-80 Model I]], said in July 1984 that the new computer's incompatibility with C64 software "makes you wonder". He added "It's a little on the spooky side", unfavorably comparing the Plus/4 to the [[Apple IIc]]'s compatibility with the tens of thousands of [[Apple II]] software packages.<ref name="needle19840716">{{cite news | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yS4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA66 | title=Q&A: Steve Leininger | work=InfoWorld | date=1984-07-16 | access-date=1 January 2015 | author=Needle, David | pages=66}}</ref>

Another problem that kept the Plus/4 from selling was that even though the three machines (116, C16 and Plus/4) were all compatible with one another, developers tended to write programs for the [[Instruction selection#Lowest common denominator strategy|lowest common denominator]] in a computer family.  So as not to alienate buyers of the C116 and C16, which were intended to be the largest selling machines in this series, most software was designed to run in {{nowrap|16 KB}} and the extra memory on the Plus/4 was not as widely supported as it could have been. Also, most development for these machines was in the less-lucrative European markets. Major software developers in North America continued to focus instead on the huge C64 market. Plus/4 software development in North America was mostly the domain of obscure companies who sold products via [[mail order]], similar to other computers like the [[TRS-80 Color Computer|TRS-80 CoCo]] that did not have support from major developers.