by Ian Matthews of June 10 2003 – Revised Nov 21, 2018

On this page:

  • Commodore 264 Family History
  • Commodore 264 Family Manuals & Magazine Articles
  • Commodore 264 Family Chronology
  • Commodore 264 Family Photo Gallery
  • Commodore 16 and Plus/4 Review Videos from 2018

Commodore 264 History:

jack-tramiel-commdore-264-364-last-photo-of-jack-at-commdoore-CES-Janaury-1984On January 13th 1984, just two days before his resignation as Commodore Business Machines‘ president, Jack Tramiel posed for photographers at the Consumer Electronics Show. He proudly held the latest Commodore home computers in his hands: the Commodore 264 and 364.  During development these machines were part of the “TED Series”.

As with almost everything at Commodore, development of this new concept machine with very limited specifications had been ordered by Jack Tramiel himself.  However, as the development cycle came to fruition it was clear that the engineers had developed a more powerful 64K computer that was right for the small office / home office market.  Only the hobbled Commodore C16 / 116 (which received limited release) was what Jack had originally requested.

The 264 series were very interesting concept machines; they were to be customized much like new cars are today (2003):

…”The key area we’re emphasizing in software for the Commodore 264 is productivity, covering such areas as household management, word processing, calculation, business accounting and education,” said Sig Hartmann, president of Commodore Software…

…The machine is truly a more business-oriented computer with its optional built-in “integrating” software and “screen window” capability. Imagine working with a word processor and data base or electronic spread sheet simultaneously on the screen. This allows writing on the word processor while viewing data from the data base or spread sheet (i.e., addresses, recipes, dates to remember, inventory control data, financial analysis data, etc.).

With “integrating” software, data can be exchanged from one program to the other. Data from the data base or spread sheet easily can be inserted into a document on the word processor.

“The Commodore 264 is the first personal computer offering a selection of productivity software built into the machine,” said Hartmann. “In other words, by choosing a Commodore 264 with a particular software package built i, you can tailor the computer to your own needs.

“If you use your computer to do mostly word processing, you can buy the Commodore 264 with professional word processing built in. If you need financial calculation, you can have a built-in electronic spreadsheet . . . plus . . . you can use standard software on cartridge, disk, or tape.”

The optional built-in software for the Commodore 264 also will be available on plug-in cartridge. For example, if the machine is purchased with a word processor built in and the owner later decides to purchase the electronic spread sheet, the spread sheet can be purchased on an add-on cartridge…

Compute! June 1984 – Click HERE for the complete text

commodore-264_ces1984_compute_apr84In 1983, a new hire named Bil Herd was given the  task of completing the project.  During a 2003 interview with Bill detailed the wacky process in which he became the project manager.  “TED as explained to me was to cost $49 and go up against Timex/Sinclair” (which sold for nearly $100 in 1983.)  I started in the middle of the 116’s phase of the TED development, there was a design but no PCB’s, no chips yet.  When I showed up they had me slated to work for Benny Pruden doing disk drive software but he was out that first week.  I wondered off to the hardware lab and had been exchanging information with the guy in charge of the TED who was about to leave, and by the time Benny got  back I was more or less in charge of the TED project.”  Herd said “In the days of $299 C64 this sounded like a good idea and we didn’t want to be compatible, at some level of rationalization, with C64 as this WAS a different, uber-cheap little (machine)”

Was the 264 The Evolution of the MAX Machine or the C64?


Commodore Max Machine product announcement October 1982

When you talk to Commodore people about the MAX Machine, they think of the stripped down Japanese C64 with bad keyboard that went into limited production.  However, Michael Tomczyk, former assistant to Jack Tramiel (and self described product manager) still has (in 2004) an early MAX Machine prototype and you will be surprised at the specifications.  Mr Tomczyk told us “It was a small black machine that was going to revolutionize the home computing field.  I had identified the four basic killer apps for home computing: word-processing, spreadsheets, database management, and graphics.  All four apps were built into the HARDWARE of the MAX, along with a terrific 256 word speaking vocabulary (I researched and selected the words myself).  We also planned to fix any bugs and provide software updates on a plug-in cartridge, a very elegant way to do upgrades that addressed the problem of having the software apps on chips in the motherboard.”  For more details on the MAX, click HERE for our prototype page.

The Chips:

The 264 line is now frequently referred to as the TED series because it used MOS’s interesting new 7360 “Text EDitor” or “TED” chip. Designed in 1983 by MOS Technologies Dave Diorio, the 7501 / 8501 CPU was a modified and much faster version of the MOS 6502 from 1976. It ran at 1.76Mhz while earlier MOS 6502 derivatives used the PET, VIC-20 and C64 ran at just less than 1Mhz.  The difference between the 7501 and 8501 was they way they were produced but there is no performance or functionality changes.

Like the VIC-I chip used in the VIC-20, all of the TED series computers used both a graphics and sound chip.  It was capable of displaying 40×25 characters of text, 320×200 pixels of  graphics, in 128 colours (including 8 shades of gray) by displaying 16 colors each with 8 luminance settings.

While the TED could genuinely produce more colours the Commodore 64, importantly, it did not support “Sprite Graphics” which was one of the things that made the C64 so wonderful to work with.  TED’s used a two tone oscillators which produced two voices from its 7360 chip which gave you the option to hear “two tones”, or “one tone + one noise”

The Hardware:


Commodore CBM 1551 Floppy Disk Drive

On the plus side, Commodore 64 drives and printers were compatible because 264’s also used Commodores IEC Serial Bus.  Monitor and RF Modulator TV connectors were also the same on both products.  Even the standard Commodore 1531 ‘datasets’ originally designed for the VIC-20 and common to the C64 would connect to these new machines with the aid of an adapter.

264’s could be even upgraded to a substantial 80K of RAM, although I have never even heard of anyone even attempting this expansion.

Commodore completed design and started a small production run of 1551 floppy drives which transmitted data four times as fast as a notoriously slow Commodore 1541 floppy.  Its speed came from being connected to the Expansion Port rather than the more traditional Serial Port.


Commodore Plus/4 & C64 Expansion Ports

On the negative side, the 264/TED family had seemingly needless hardware complexities. Commodore produced only one joystick that would function on a 264.  The cartridge slot was brand new so C64 cartridges were mechanically incompatible.  To make this situation much worse, the 264, 364,TED, Plus/4 Series sold in very low volumes so developers did not spend their resources on them; there were only four cartridges ever produced for the 264 series.

The Software:

commodore-plus4_basic_screen_shotCommodore / Microsoft Basic 3.5 was a much improved version over its Basic 2.0 predecessor used in Commodore 64’s.  I am all but certain Commodore never released (even on prototype / demo machines) Basic 3.0 which has always puzzled me.  Perhaps they wanted to indicate that 3.5 was just a little bit less than the Basic 4.0 being used in much more expensive Commodore PET / CBM-II machines of the day.

Basic 3.5 came with 50 extra commands including such useful items as disk instructions like DSAVE, DLOAD.  A user could gain peripheral access using common sense syntax rather than the near hieroglyphics required on a C64.  Graphics commands like, CIRCLE and BOX made it much easier for developers to create on screen images without extensive use of memory PEEK’s and POKE’s that had been required in all previous Commodore computers.  Those commands brought Commodore up to snuff with the competition of the day.  Basic 3.5 was truly a major improvement.

None of the 264 line (116, 232, 264, 364) actually shipped with the custom software option that Commodore had promised.  Instead the Plus/4 was born when the 264 design was married to a ROM containing TRI-Micro’s “3 Plus 1” integrated software.  The original 232, 264 and  364 prototypes were plowed into landfills like so many other Commodore development machines.

“3 Plus 1” meant:

  • a Word Processor
  • a Spread Sheet
  • a Data-Base, and
  • a Graphing program

all in one easy to access package.  This software was installed on a ROM chip and the programs could be started by simply pressing one of four buttons located just above the main keyboard.  Integrated software allowed for “Windowing”, in which you could basically Copy and Paste (very limited) amounts of data between programs.  I have played with it extensively and thought it was pretty damn cool for its time.

To keep costs down, Commodore had to remove some of the original 3+1 features to make the program fit into a 32K ROM but Tri-Micro offered diskette-based upgrade called “Plus/Extra” which re-added features like double / triple-line spacing and print preview.

The idea was fantastic: putting what is today (2003) considered to be core software onto a ROM was almost revolutionary in 1984.  The ability to load frequently used programs almost instantly at the simple touch of a button must have seemed very attractive on paper.  The problem was quality.

The word processor would only handle an embarrassingly small 99 lines of text!  The Graphing program was quite limited and really only useful as an extension of the Spread Sheet.  The database or “File Manager” as Commodore promoted it, was slow and not useful for anything more complex that recipes.  But most problematic was the overall quality of the software code; it was terribly unstable and just not ‘ready for prime time’.

The Models:

There were many different TED, Plus/4, 264 Models to choose from:

ModelPictureMemoryIntegrated SoftwareKeyboardCasePriceReleasedNotes
116Commodore-C11616KNoneRuberized ChicletBlack 264 Wedge£99Limited Release in Europe OnlyOnly mild success in Germany after significant price discounting  Only 12K available to Basic  No ACIA (MOS 6551 chip)  Early models did not even have a SHIFT LOCK
C16Commoodre-c16_starter_pack16KNoneVIC20 C64 StyleBlack VIC20 C64 Case99Moderate Release in North America OnlyNo RS-232 port | no arrow keys Only 12K available to Basic No ACIA (MOS 6551 chip) Intended as a replacement for the VIC-20 which had been discontinued months earlier
Portable 116None16KNone??n/aPrototypeShown briefly at the January 1984 CES
232Commodore-23232KCustom OrderStandardBlack 264 Wedgen/aPrototype
264commodore_26464KCustom OrderStandardBlack 264 Wedgen/aPrototypeRebranded the Plus/4 and put into production
Plus/4Commodore-Plus_464K3 Plus 1StandardBlack 264 Wedge299Moderate Release in North America and UKSimply a rebadged 264 with integrated 3+1 software
V364Commodore-v36464KCustom OrderStandardBlack 264 Wedgen/aPrototype19 Key Number Pad Integrated 250 Word “Magic Voice” AKA: V364, CV364 and 364V Likely never produced because engineers thought Magic Voice was a flawed “toy” program

The Retail Environment:

The c16, 116 and Plus/4 were sold through department stores, just like its predecessors.  Because these products were competing for floor space with the massively successful Commodore 64, they did not receive the same scale distribution scale.

What Went Wrong?

In the end, the 264 family became a shining symbol of Commodore’s mismanagement after their visionary Jack Tramiel quit. The TED series products were ill-conceived, half engineered, and then plowed into landfills.  One thing Commodore did well with the “TED” series was to colour them black, so they were correctly dressed for their own funerals.

There were five primary factors working against these machines:

1 – Very Poor Timing

They C64 was unexpectedly selling faster than Commodore could make them.  This lead to two serious problems:

  1. Commodore’s weak management was not keen to introduce what might be serious competition for its star C64 even if the two products were targeted at slightly different markets
  2. Commodore had no unused factory capacity to build the machines.  Irving Gould said “…the 264, this new microcomputer is planned to be introduced in a year and time when our capacity permits both a continuing increase in Commodore 64 production as well as large-scale production of the 264” Compute June 1984 . Commodore had a strict rule about maintaining their vertical integration so contracting out more capacity would not have even been discussed.

2 – Incompatibility

The hodge podge of peripherals used on the 264 was needlessly confusing.   Many believe that Commodore was simply trying to squeeze customers into buying new devices but others point out that in addition to wanting to use smaller connectors for space reasons, electronic standards were getting tough to meet with the old connectors.

The rapidly increasing amount of software for the C64 would not function on a 264 because they used slightly different processors with different memory addressing schemes.  Only the most simple software coded in BASIC would function on both systems.

3 – Reduction in Key Functions

Relative to the then hugely popular Commodore 64, the 264 family did not support Sprite Graphics and only supported two voice sound.  The C16, 116 and 232 models had just 16K and 32K of memory respectively.  These machines were excellent upgrades for the 5K VIC-20 but the VIC had been discontinued for a reason.

4 – Multi-configuration Problems

Because Commodore waffled on how to handle custom software ROM’s precious ‘time to market’ was extended and dealers became frustrated.   “…The fact the 264 can be purchased in different configurations is another sore spot with market analysts.  They believe this feature will force retailers to stock various versions of the system, overloading their inventories.  It is unknown how Commodore will handle this problem…” Compute June 1984.  In the end Commodore resolved the problem by not offering custom software ROMs at all.  The Plus/4 was produced with TRI-Micro’s 3 PLUS 1 ROMs only and C16 / 116 had nothing!

5 – Quality Problems

Although this would not be known to new consumers in 1984/5, the 264 series frequently had problems with its TED video / audio chip and sometimes the MOS 7501 CPU.  If your TED does not boot, one of these two chips is likely the cause.  Unfortunately there are precious few spare parts and most people simply scavenge chips from other 264 series machines.

I have yet to find a single review of the 116 keyboard that states it was anything better than abysmal to use.  Apparently it was exceptionally soft and almost impossible to “touch type” on.  To make matters worse, very early models did not even have a SHIFT LOCK key.

As a final critical issue, the main sales pitch for the PLUS/4 was the 4 pieces of software but Commodore’s port of the TRI-Micro’s 3 Plus 1 software is best described as barely stable.

Commodore 264 Plus/4 Summary:

In 2005 Bil Herd told, “After Jack left the layers of middle management had their way, from the God awful software, to the price, to even making it talk. (It was a real pleasure to meet the guys who did the TI Speak and Spell which was truly revolutionary in those days, I had a lot of respect for them and got along well).  So I guess the TED project was badly engineered as stated on your site, but I can say the engineering itself was good”

Most observers, believe that 264 machines (not the 116’s) performed at an acceptable level for their day, but the TED’s did fail in the marketplace.  If that failure has to be attributed to a single factor, it was the lack of software compatibility with the Commodore 64.  Commodore stated that in excess of 90% of C64 software could be easily ported to the 264, but why would developers put in that effort for a computer with such poor sales and why would consumers want to buy their C64 applications again?

Given the option of a Plus/4 and a C64, which would you buy?

Commodore 264 Plus/4 Magazine Articles:

Commodore 264 Plus/4 Manuals:

Commodore 264 Plus/4 Videos:

Plus/4, 128 & Prototypes by Bil Hurd & Dave HaynieInterview200536:00 12MB 9MB 54MB
Commodore Plus/4 Sold at Toys-R-UsTV19850:27 .4MB .3MB .8MB
Commodore Plus/4 LiquidationTV19862:00 31MB




Commodore 264 Family Chronology:


  • January 13th – Commodore shows off prototype 264 and 364 at CES and indicates they should be in production by June
  • January – Rumors of the cheaper 16K model abound at CES but no product is shown
  • April – Irving Gould says that the C64 line is taking most of Commodore’s capacity and that the 264 line will not be produced until in can be done in volume
  • June – Commodore announces and shows off the Commodore 16 at the summer CES as “The Learning Machine”
  • June – Commodore announces the 264 will be renamed PLUS/4 and will ship exclusively with Tri-Micro’s “3 Plus 1” integrated software package
  • December – The 16K version called the Commodore 116 is for sale (at least in Germany) and had been apparently designed in Japan as a hacked down 264 rather than a built up C16, the year previous.


  • September – Plus/4 was in full liquidation were selling for a mere $79
  • In its short life Commodore had manufactured approximately 400,000 Plus/4’s, of which only about 150,000 were sold in the United States.  Presuming half as many in Canada and Mexico, leaves about 175,000 or so sold in Europe and Australia ( )

Commodore C16, 116, 264, 364, Plus/4 Photo Gallery

NOTE: would like to thank Bil Herd, [email protected][email protected][email protected]  and  [email protected]. all which were very helpful in providing information and / or graphics for this page 🙂   

Commodore 16 and Plus/4 Videos From 2018



Jon Fukumoto · March 14, 2023 at 10:12 am

Unfortunately for Commodore, when Jack Tramiel was pushed out, it was the beginning of the end. The Plus/4 was a failure in the United States and was derided as the Minus 60. It wasn’t compatible with the best selling Commodore 64 and I did see a Plus/4 and I didn’t like the feel of the keyboard itself. It’s too bad that the company lost direction when Tramiel left.

Jordan Stile · March 18, 2019 at 1:22 am

I honestly think the commodore is the pioneer of computers. As they have contributed significantly to the progress of computers over the course of history.

Abdul Rahman · July 29, 2014 at 8:57 am

Thanks for this information helped me to learn a more about Commodore.

A History of Commodore’s 8-bit Computers | Low End Mac · October 13, 2016 at 5:29 pm

[…] KIM-1, Commodore PET, Commodore VIC-20, Commodore 64, Commodore Plus/4, Commodore 128, […]

Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *