Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Remembering the Apple I

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the back-in-the-day dept.

Apple 153

harrymcc writes "This month marks the 35th anniversary of Apple--and the 35th anniversary of the Apple I, its first computer. It was a single-board computer that was unimaginably more rudimentary than any modern Mac — it didn't even come with a case and keyboard standard — but in its design, sales and marketing, we can see the beginnings of the Apple approach that continues to this day. I'm celebrating with a look at this significant machine."

cancel ×

153 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

ahh, the good ole days (4, Informative)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778320)

When Apple hardware was open. Apple ][ computers had their wiring diagram on the inside of the lid (which required no screws to open!). 8 slots, baby, *eight*, to fill with whatever you wanted. No voiding the warranty by opening it up, etc. I later went Amiga and didn't look back until recently. I got a nice ROM 03 Apple //gs on eBay, and even got a nice TransWarp GS card for it. Hot stuff! :)

Never was a fan of Macs. *shrug*

Re:ahh, the good ole days (2, Insightful)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778368)

When Apple hardware was open. Apple ][ computers had their wiring diagram on the inside of the lid (which required no screws to open!). 8 slots, baby, *eight*, to fill with whatever you wanted. No voiding the warranty by opening it up, etc. I later went Amiga and didn't look back until recently. I got a nice ROM 03 Apple //gs on eBay, and even got a nice TransWarp GS card for it. Hot stuff! :) Never was a fan of Macs. *shrug*

I've owned a few Macs over the years and some models had slots, easy opening cases, no warranty issues with 3rd party cards, etc. This is still true for towers.

Other Macs are sealed boxes. Just like the laptop PCs that represent the majority of the computer marketplace. As a nerd I have an affinity for things I can tweak but I have to admit this represents a minority opinion and that sealed boxes make sense for typical users (cost reductions, simplified supply chain, etc).

Re:ahh, the good ole days (3, Insightful)

mfnickster (182520) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778422)

I've owned a few Macs over the years and some models had slots, easy opening cases, no warranty issues with 3rd party cards, etc.

Yep, my first computer was a Power Mac 7500, with an outer case that slid off by pressing two buttons, and the power supply and drives tilted to the right to reveal the motherboard. Best case I ever worked with.

Funny, though, those 'open' Macs only appeared after Jobs was gone!

Re:ahh, the good ole days (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778472)

Funny, though, those 'open' Macs only appeared after Jobs was gone!

Yeah, and the NeXT didn't have any slots, nor did it use standard tech (TCP/IP, Postscript, ...) to interact with the world.

Oh, wait...

Re:ahh, the good ole days (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778494)

There was also the entire lines of PowerMac G3, G4s, G5s, and the current Mac Pros, that all have easy-open sides and standardized card slots.

But y'know, I'm sure there's a conspiracy somewhere.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (3, Insightful)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778516)

Funny, though, those 'open' Macs only appeared after Jobs was gone!

The tower form factor Power Macs (G3 and up) and the Mac Pros will open, have slots, etc. Jobs seems just fine with the models targeting "professionals" to be designed to be worked on by end users. Jobs' pre-Mac baby, the Lisa (1983), had slots IIRC. The Lisa was also targeted towards "professionals".

Re:ahh, the good ole days (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778698)

Funny, though, those 'open' Macs only appeared after Jobs was gone!

Easy to open, perhaps, but open in the sense that they are expandable where also during his "first aera" available.

angel'o'sphere

Re:ahh, the good ole days (2)

erice (13380) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778716)

Funny, though, those 'open' Macs only appeared after Jobs was gone!

Funny? I'm have trouble finding citation but, as I recall, one of the points of friction between Jobs and Scully at the time of Job's departure was over whether to open up the Macintosh. Jobs was against it. Despite putting slots in the NeXT cubes, I think he still prefers Macs be closed. The first Macs to show the Jobs influence after his return to Apple were the iMacs. Closed again.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778918)

The first Macs to show the Jobs influence after his return to Apple were the iMacs. Closed again.

Nonsense! the early iMacs all had PCI, and all iMacs have USB, which was a royalty-free standard from the start. As far as the machine being open in the opensource meaning of the word, no Macintosh has been.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779268)

Funny, though, those 'open' Macs only appeared after Jobs was gone!

Funny? I'm have trouble finding citation but, as I recall, one of the points of friction between Jobs and Scully at the time of Job's departure was over whether to open up the Macintosh. Jobs was against it. Despite putting slots in the NeXT cubes, I think he still prefers Macs be closed. The first Macs to show the Jobs influence after his return to Apple were the iMacs. Closed again.

Jobs put slots in NeXT because he wanted to sell them in the real world to educational institutions and such not just to rabid fanbois.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (5, Interesting)

Spliffster (755587) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779540)

Funny, though, those 'open' Macs only appeared after Jobs was gone!

Funny? I'm have trouble finding citation but, as I recall, one of the points of friction between Jobs and Scully at the time of Job's departure was over whether to open up the Macintosh. Jobs was against it. Despite putting slots in the NeXT cubes, I think he still prefers Macs be closed. The first Macs to show the Jobs influence after his return to Apple were the iMacs. Closed again.

Here is a nice story told by Andy Hertzfeld (The main software developer for the macintosh's os) which clearly states that jobs did not want to have any expansion slots in the macintosh (funny read):

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Diagnostic_Port.txt [folklore.org]

Re:ahh, the good ole days (1)

bedouin (248624) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778784)

Macs have always had interesting third party upgrades. When I retired my original 800mhz Quicksilver it had a dual 1.8ghz CPU in it and a number of other modifications.

The upgrade market would let you keep many Macs going for 10 years with a minimal investment. Not sure how the Intel switch has affected that, though.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779574)

Funny, though, those 'open' Macs only appeared after Jobs was gone!

ISTR the pattern in the Scully years was pretty much the same as today - minimal internal expansion and screwed-tight cases for the low/middle-range desktop models c.f. clip-open access for the top-of-the-range (often tower) models with NuBus.

The Centris and early PowerMacs were not remarkably easy to get into, and the only expansion was an optional Ethernet card.

Also, remember that, to balance the lack of internal expansion, Apple have been pretty pro-active in pushing external expansion - first SCSI, then FireWire, then popularizing USB, now ThunderBolt...

Re:ahh, the good ole days (2)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778792)

(cost reductions).

This is Apple we're talking about.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (2)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778846)

(cost reductions)

This is Apple we're talking about.

Cost reductions not price reductions. Costs are what Apple pays for components, assembly, shipping, etc. :-)

Re:ahh, the good ole days (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778968)

I should have quoted more;

make sense for typical users (cost reductions)

Though I guess it may make sense in the sense that "We're consumers, it's only natural companies are screwing us".

Other good reasons for closing the box... (4, Interesting)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779430)

I have an affinity for things I can tweak but I have to admit this represents a minority opinion and that sealed boxes make sense for typical users (cost reductions, simplified supply chain, etc).

Of course there are other good reasons for "closing the box"... The original Mac, the first iMac and several models in between had built-in CRTs and the associated high-voltage circuitry, so you really, really didn't want users poking their fingers inside.

Most subsequent consumer Macs have been "small form factor" (and usually much smaller form-factor than competing SFF computers). If you make something as tiny as the Mac Mini or a slim as a modern iMac, you're gonna end up with "no user servicable parts inside". The advantage for Apple is that ultra-slim systems can sell for a premium *useful if you're trying to develop your own platform), rather than trying to compete in the low-margin mini-tower and boxy laptop market.

As you point out, Apple tower systems are still clip-open (swapping drives or adding memory to a Mac Pro is a breeze).

The other thing is, the motive and opportunity for tinkering has reduced. In the 80s any self-respecting geek would have lost the lid of their computer and have all manner of internal expansion - even on systems that didn't support it there would be boards piggybacked on chips and flying wires soldered to pins on the motherboard. Not so easy on a modern multi-layer motherboard with surface-mount components. I haven't felt the need to go near a computer with a soldering iron in years... There's also less need - the main reason I ever went delving in a Mac (apart from memory and HD upgrades) was to fit ethernet cards - these days, you'll find at least one ethernet port (probably plus WiFi) built in to any half-decent board, and anything else can be fitted via USB. The only PC with an internal add-on card I have now is my MythTV box - and I'm planning to replace that with a smaller box + USB tuner (having found that there are few linux-supported PCIe tuners and that the most suitable dual tuner PCI card is actually a USB tuner stuck on a card with a PCI-USB bridge...)

Apple have also pushed external expansion - first SCSI, then Firewire, then the iMac pulled USB out of the doldrums, now they're pushing ThunderBolt...

Re:Other good reasons for closing the box... (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779708)

I think it is fair to say that Apple see servicing as a source of revenue for most of their devices, high end professional systems excepted.

To be fair they have got a lot better in the last few years. Until a few years ago MacBooks were a real pain to service, requiring you to remove the motherboard to swap the HDD if it failed. Newer models make common faults like the HDD much easier to change but there are still lots of difficult bits. MacBook keyboards that are part of the case come to mind. Some people argue that it is because that is the only way to make a thin and light notebook but other manufacturers can do it and still keep their machines very serviceable. Panasonic Dynabooks and Sony VAIOs come to mind, although Sony in particular charge silly money for parts (some black VAIO keyboards go for £180 on eBay, compared to an Acer one at £12).

It's an interesting business model. Most manufacturers want to avoid problems as much as possible to give the user a good experience and make them buy the same brand again, but Apple Think Different(tm). I can't decide if they just want to make money out of repairs or if they want to make the price so high you just go out and buy a new machine.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (-1, Flamebait)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778390)

That's what you get when you keep the glorified salesman rather than the technical genius.

ahh, the good ole money. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778448)

That's what you get when you keep the glorified salesman rather than the technical genius.

A successful company worth billions and a product others are still playing catchup with? Never mind NeXT with a computer ahead of it's time.

Re:ahh, the good ole money. (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778476)

A successful company [with] a product others are still playing catchup with?

Don't make me laugh. The only one playing catchup in the PC market today is Apple.

Re:ahh, the good ole money. (2)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778522)

Depends on how you measure success. Apple only has 10% of the PC market share in the US, true. BUt they have 95% of the $1000 and over PC market. Apple's margins, market cap and balance sheet scoff at your statement. All the way to the bank.

Re:ahh, the good ole money. (0)

arkenian (1560563) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778564)

95% of the over $1k PCs? Really? Do you have a citation for that, 'cuz I find it really really hard to believe. While I grant that PCs have gotten cheaper, $1k isn't THAT expensive, even these days...

Re:ahh, the good ole money. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778776)

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-has-91-share-of-premium-computer-market-research-firm-says-2009-7

Re:ahh, the good ole money. (0)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778648)

Riiight. Apple is the world's second-largest corporation. Microshaft is 3rd? That's the kind of "catchup" I can believe in .

Re:ahh, the good ole money. (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779252)

Riiight. Apple is the world's second-largest corporation. Microshaft is 3rd? That's the kind of "catchup" I can believe in .

I'm pretty sure that MS isn't 3rd. More like 5th [theonlineinvestor.com] . Chevron is right behind Apple.

Re:ahh, the good ole money. (1, Informative)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779240)

A successful company [with] a product others are still playing catchup with?

Don't make me laugh. The only one playing catchup in the PC market today is Apple.

Are you insane, or just Trolling?

Let's just examine Thunderbolt. Or howabout the Unibody construction? Still no? Howabout illuminated keyboards, Firewire Target Disk Mode (which is REALLY quite nice!)? Not there yet? I won't even go into the fact that Apple completely revolutionized the Smartphone, and broke the backs of the Cell carriers.

Then there's the Macbook Air. Not my cup of blood; but still revolutionary when it was released.

And then there's that whole tablet thing. No one even comes close to the battery life, number of apps, overall performance, oh, and price. And don't EVEN try to compare the iPad to the unmitigated shit that Android tablets are!

It all comes down to this: If Apple is playing "catchup", why is it that every single other computing-device company can't COPY their products fast enough?

Re:ahh, the good ole days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778412)

I had one of the first Apple ][s. There was no wiring diagram on the lid.

The //gs was far, far removed from the Apple ][. You sir, are a poser.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (2)

shmlco (594907) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778502)

There was, however, an electrical diagram in the red book....

Re:ahh, the good ole days (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778526)

I had one of the first Apple ][s. There was no wiring diagram on the lid.

It was on the inside lid of my Apple //e (first version, not second with the numeric keypad).

The //gs was far, far removed from the Apple ][. You sir, are a poser.

True, but it was very compatible with the 8-bit Apple 2s. When assembling my 8 and 16-bit computer collection over the last couple of years, I went for computers I didn't have back in the day, rather than the ones I did. So, no 8-bit Apple ][ or //s, and no Amiga 500. But I do now have an Apple //gs, Amiga 1000, Tandy Coco 3, Tandy 102, Commodore 64 and 64C. I haven't yet got any 8-bit Ataris, but that'll come once I have more space.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779260)

It was on the inside lid of my Apple //e (first version, not second with the numeric keypad).

Sorry, I worked in a H.S. computer lab with a PILE of Apple //e computers.

Not ONE of them with a schematic on the lid.

wiring diagram on the inside of the lid ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778458)

Considering the size of the wiring diagramS for my Osbourne, I'm kinda doubting that. Also my ][e had no such info. Clarification please? Like was it a block diagram for the slots 'n' ports or suchlike?

Re:wiring diagram on the inside of the lid ? (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778520)

Considering the size of the wiring diagramS for my Osbourne, I'm kinda doubting that. Also my ][e had no such info. Clarification please? Like was it a block diagram for the slots 'n' ports or suchlike?

I have no idea - I couldn't then (and can't now) read wiring diagrams. *shrug* It was an Apple //e - the first version, not the later one with a numeric keypad.

Re:wiring diagram on the inside of the lid ? (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779272)

Considering the size of the wiring diagramS for my Osbourne, I'm kinda doubting that. Also my ][e had no such info. Clarification please? Like was it a block diagram for the slots 'n' ports or suchlike?

I have no idea - I couldn't then (and can't now) read wiring diagrams. *shrug* It was an Apple //e - the first version, not the later one with a numeric keypad.

Are you sure it wasn't a clone? There were NO Apple ][, ][+, //c, //e or IIgs computers with a schematic, block diagram, or anything else for that matter, on the lid, or anywhere else. Schematics were in the owner's manual (and I think that even disappeared with the //c or //e).

Re:wiring diagram on the inside of the lid ? (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779328)

Are you sure it wasn't a clone? There were NO Apple ][, ][+, //c, //e or IIgs computers with a schematic, block diagram, or anything else for that matter, on the lid, or anywhere else. Schematics were in the owner's manual (and I think that even disappeared with the //c or //e).

No, I'm sure it wasn't a clone, and who knows, I may be misremembering - I sold that thing in 1986 to buy an Amiga 500 (took that long to pay it off!). I don't know what else I would be thinking of - I certainly couldn't open my Amiga 500 (other than the little trap door in the bottom). *shrug* Who knows. I'm probably just getting senile. It's to the point where with my home projects, I want to check out even older tech than I once had - I want to get an old Altair 8800 or IMSAI 8080 to play with, and figure out how those monsters worked. Definitely before my time, but they look like a lot of fun. They are sadly expensive these days - so few are still working. :(

Re:wiring diagram on the inside of the lid ? (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779444)

Are you sure it wasn't a clone? There were NO Apple ][, ][+, //c, //e or IIgs computers with a schematic, block diagram, or anything else for that matter, on the lid, or anywhere else. Schematics were in the owner's manual (and I think that even disappeared with the //c or //e).

No, I'm sure it wasn't a clone, and who knows, I may be misremembering - I sold that thing in 1986 to buy an Amiga 500 (took that long to pay it off!). I don't know what else I would be thinking of - I certainly couldn't open my Amiga 500 (other than the little trap door in the bottom). *shrug* Who knows. I'm probably just getting senile. It's to the point where with my home projects, I want to check out even older tech than I once had - I want to get an old Altair 8800 or IMSAI 8080 to play with, and figure out how those monsters worked. Definitely before my time, but they look like a lot of fun. They are sadly expensive these days - so few are still working. :(

Not as expensive as my Apple 1... ;-) I keep threatening to fix it up and sell it; but so far...

The problem with old S-100 bus systems would be getting one to WORK. They hardly worked reliably when they were new, let alone after al the timing gimick capacitors have aged for 40 years...

Re:wiring diagram on the inside of the lid ? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779378)

Considering the size of the wiring diagramS for my Osbourne, I'm kinda doubting that. Also my ][e had no such info. Clarification please? Like was it a block diagram for the slots 'n' ports or suchlike?

I have no idea - I couldn't then (and can't now) read wiring diagrams. *shrug* It was an Apple //e - the first version, not the later one with a numeric keypad.

We had Apple ][s at high school. I made a joystick for it by interfacing to an IC socket at the back of the motherboard. I don't recall where I got the information but I am certain it didn't come from google ;)

Re:ahh, the good ole days (3, Insightful)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779208)

Apple ][ computers had their wiring diagram on the inside of the lid

WTF are you smoking, and can I have some?

Apple ][ computers NEVER had a schematic (or anything else) on the inside of the lid. The schematic was in the "Red Book"; but not on the lid.

And I think I know from experience. Not only do I OWN an Apple 1; but the first Apple ][ I ever saw/programmed was s/n 0013 (!!!). It was part of the first production run. So old it didn't even have the "cooling slots" in the top!

And subsequently, I sold Apple ][s for a couple of years, and they didn't have a schematic on the lid, either...

I'm not sure what computer you are think of; but it is not an Apple ][.

Re:ahh, the good ole days (1)

georgesdev (1987622) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779250)

oh yes!
I remember on the Apple ][ you could copy the rom to ram memory, disassemble it, modify it and run it. We just had the standard software and documentation, no hacking tool, no forum of course, etc ....
That machine was really open back then!

Re:ahh, the good ole days (1)

astrosmash (3561) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779658)

Good old days? There is far, far more technical information and tools available to developers today then there ever was for the Apple II, and today's machines are far more expandable using widely available cross-platform industry standard interfaces, from the smallest MacBook Air to the Mac Pro.

first! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778324)

first!

Re:first! (1)

zanian (1621285) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778330)

first!

fail.

Re:first! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778374)

It's relevant, if you think about it...

Still around today (2)

asm2750 (1124425) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778366)

Replica I [brielcomputers.com]

Re:Still around today (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779278)

Replica I [brielcomputers.com]

Pfft!

I am the original owner of a REAL Apple 1, from 1976. The first computer I ever saw...

Yes but did it run Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778388)

Wait a minute when was Linux written? Never mind.

Re:Yes but did it run Linux? (1)

commlinx (1068272) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778400)

Wait a minute when was Linux written? Never mind.

Linux kernel 0.01 was released September 1991.

Re:Yes but did it run Linux? (1)

xploraiswakco (703340) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778592)

so while Apple is turning 35, Linux will be turning 20 later this year.

A machine ahead of its time (3, Informative)

NixieBunny (859050) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778404)

The other computers that could be purchased at that time had rows of LEDs and switches on their front panels, and they needed them. The Apple was quite sophisticated for a single board computer - Altair and IMSAI used that many ICs just to make a CPU chip talk to a bus.

Re:A machine ahead of its time (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779290)

The other computers that could be purchased at that time had rows of LEDs and switches on their front panels, and they needed them. The Apple was quite sophisticated for a single board computer - Altair and IMSAI used that many ICs just to make a CPU chip talk to a bus.

Those S-100 bus computers WERE all trying to be PDP-8 clones. The only one that wasn't was the Processor Technology SOL-20. Pretty slick for an S-100 bus system, actually.

But you are right; the Apple 1 was pretty much the first computer where you could sit down, flip on the power, and start computing!

Makes me wanna get my Apple 1 fired up again...

Re:A machine ahead of its time (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779670)

Indeed, computers back then didn't come with any kind of permanent storage. With the Altair you had to manually enter software byte by byte with the 8 switches on the front, one for each bit. To write software in BASIC you had to write it out by hand, convert it to binary, enter the BASIC interpreter manually and then finally enter the binary program manually.

People who grew up with computers in the 80s remember how dodgy audio tapes were for storing programs but compared to the Altair tape was a huge leap forward.

Yay new media! (2)

alexmogil (442209) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778440)

Article: 13 pages! Oh, good, some content!

10 words and a pic, NEXT. 13 words and a pic, NEXT. 10 words and a pic.

Close.

Re:Yay new media! (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778580)

To be fair, most of the images contain some text. Often the text in the images is denser than the text in the article.

Re:Boycott new media! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779326)

Fight back against these antisocial New Media types - never click Next Page when it is clear they could have put the entire thing on one page.

Apple 1 can be seen this spring .... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778444)

Early Apples will be on display at the Vintage Computer Festival East 7.0 [vintage.org] , May 14-15, in New Jersey.

Christian Louboutin Uk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778498)

Choose a good shoes is very important,we offer you lots of fashion Christian Louboutin Uk [discountlouboutin.co.uk] shoes,the shoes have a good quality,you can buy it in Christian Louboutin Outlet [discountlouboutin.co.uk] with lowest price,and it will give you a big surprise.Don't hesitate to come to Christian Louboutin Sale [discountlouboutin.co.uk] shop online!

My favorite Apple contribution to society is (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778538)

(heresay following, I may be wrong) At one point Steve Jobs said it is cool for 3rd party developers to make applications. This flew in the face of other corporations at the time like ATARI and IBM who were trying to say,"Only the hardware manufacturer had the right to make applications" The world would be a much darker place if only hardware manufacturers could make applications for so many reasons I don't feel the need to list them here. In fact... some of the corporations are trying to backtrack on this today that,"Only some companies can make applications on their hardware."

Re:My favorite Apple contribution to society is (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778614)

(heresay following, I may be wrong) At one point Steve Jobs said it is cool for 3rd party developers to make applications.

And followed it with "But we'll take 30%".

Re:My favorite Apple contribution to society is (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778824)

And decide which applications 3rd party developers can and cannot make.

Re:My favorite Apple contribution to society is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779840)

heresay following, I may be wrong

I like that word "heresay", presumably a portmanteau of "hearsay" and "heresy".

applefritter.com (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778558)

Tom rules. [applefritter.com]

keyboards... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778574)

And Apple still does not provide a keyboard standard. You have to pay to get one. At least it comes with the case.

Re:keyboards... (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778938)

And Apple still does not provide a keyboard standard.

Why does a date entry device need a banner?

Re:keyboards... (1)

YoshiDan (1834392) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779220)

Bull-fucking-shit. My iMac came with a keyboard. Mac pros come with a keyboard. The only computers that don't come with a keyboard is the mac mini.

Re:keyboards... (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779298)

And Apple still does not provide a keyboard standard. You have to pay to get one. At least it comes with the case.

The only Apple computer that doesn't come with a keyboard is the Mac mini.

Stop trolling, fucktard.

I'm celebrating (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778582)

By buying a new pc with interchanagable modular parts that can be upgraded however i wish from any mfg with the best price/preformance without those mfgs telling me what i can and can't do with the hardware and software that i bought. For half the price of an apple. Which incidentally now also uses that same exact hardware. But only if it has been blessed by his holyness The Jobs.

Apple ][ responsible for Bender (2)

frankmu (68782) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778586)

http://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/processors/the-truth-about-benders-brain [ieee.org] I didn't realize that Apple would be responsible for Bender's MOS 6502 brain. Apparently David X Cohen programmed assembly for the Apple ][ in high school.

Re:Apple ][ responsible for Bender (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779308)

http://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/processors/the-truth-about-benders-brain [ieee.org] I didn't realize that Apple would be responsible for Bender's MOS 6502 brain. Apparently David X Cohen programmed assembly for the Apple ][ in high school.

There are ALWAYS tons of Apple/Mac/6502 jokes and references in Futurama.

Re:Apple ][ responsible for Bender (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779466)

I had a different 6502 system. It came with a one page rundown of 6502 machine code. With that information I taught myself to hand assemble machine code. I doubt I could have done that on a Z80. The 6502 was a fantastic proto-RISC processor.

Kickass CPU (1)

Wolfling1 (1808594) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778596)

The 6502 processor was fast, clean and easy to program. My first assembly programs were on it. The assembly language was simpler and almost as fast as Z-80, and the apple BIOS permitted much more elegant control of the screen. It was so nice, it persisted into the Vic 20s, a much newer machine with a tidier construction and layout.

The 6502 was eventually surpassed by the 6809, which lead into the notorious 8088 and then x86 range.

None of them beat the 6502 for intuitive assembly code. It was almost as clean as the PDP-11.

Re:Kickass CPU (2)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778956)

The 6502 and 8088 are unrelated.
The 68000 in the Mac was PDP-11 like.

6502 was my first assembly language, 68000 my second and then I had the assembly language class at the university and we used the PDP-11. Afterwards I did x86 (16-bit). I expect that if I had started with x86 I would have hated assembly language like everyone else. For those of you thinking x86 is not so bad, let me guess, you started in the 32-bit era? :-)

Re:Kickass CPU (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779150)

The 6502 processor was fast, clean and easy to program. My first assembly programs were on it. The assembly language was simpler and almost as fast as Z-80, and the apple BIOS permitted much more elegant control of the screen. It was so nice, it persisted into the Vic 20s, a much newer machine with a tidier construction and layout. The 6502 was eventually surpassed by the 6809, which lead into the notorious 8088 and then x86 range. None of them beat the 6502 for intuitive assembly code. It was almost as clean as the PDP-11.

Not sure what you mean by surpassed. They are not related in any way. And since the 6502 was also used in the Commodore 64, the best-selling single personal computer model of all time (6510 was a 6502 with just additional IO ports integrated), it was't surpassed in sales or use before long into the growth of the x86 PC era.

Do agree that the 6502 was a nice and simple processor to program with assembly.

Re:Kickass CPU (2)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779334)

The 6502 processor was fast, clean and easy to program. My first assembly programs were on it. The assembly language was simpler and almost as fast as Z-80, and the apple BIOS permitted much more elegant control of the screen. It was so nice, it persisted into the Vic 20s, a much newer machine with a tidier construction and layout. The 6502 was eventually surpassed by the 6809, which lead into the notorious 8088 and then x86 range. None of them beat the 6502 for intuitive assembly code. It was almost as clean as the PDP-11.

Not sure what you mean by surpassed. They are not related in any way. And since the 6502 was also used in the Commodore 64, the best-selling single personal computer model of all time (6510 was a 6502 with just additional IO ports integrated), it was't surpassed in sales or use before long into the growth of the x86 PC era.

Do agree that the 6502 was a nice and simple processor to program with assembly.

What's amazing is that the 6502 core lives on in many custom and semi-custom microcontrollers. For example, a LOT of webcam controllers are actually 6502-based (with a BUNCH of specialized hardware around the core).

In fact, I read somewhere a few years ago, that the 6502 was actually the largest-selling CPU core in the world.

Too bad the 65816 never caught on. I actually have a 65802 (the 8-bit bus version of the 65816) in my Apple ][.

Re:Kickass CPU (1)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779322)

The 6502 processor was fast, clean and easy to program. My first assembly programs were on it. The assembly language was simpler and almost as fast as Z-80, and the apple BIOS permitted much more elegant control of the screen. It was so nice, it persisted into the Vic 20s, a much newer machine with a tidier construction and layout. The 6502 was eventually surpassed by the 6809, which lead into the notorious 8088 and then x86 range. None of them beat the 6502 for intuitive assembly code. It was almost as clean as the PDP-11.

I can't tell you how many tens-of-thousands of lines of 6502 assembly I wrote for the Apple 1, Apple ][, Commodore 64 (6510, but still the same core), as well as a bunch of my own embedded designs.

I also wrote a lot of assembler for 6801, 6805, 6809, 68HC11 (6801 core) and some 8085 and 8048/8051 stuff, too.

Other than a "6" at the beginning, the 6809 really has more in common with the 68000 than the 6502. Quite the cool beast; I really wish that Mot. had made some microcontrollers based on the 6809. REALLY cool architecture, with DUAL STACKS, concatenatable accumulators, 16 bit index registers, etc.

But I loved me some 6502... I could program a sunny day in that thing in assembler!

Re:Kickass CPU (1)

Dollyknot (216765) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779524)

Yeah back in the day, I could think in 6502, beautiful simplicity - why on earth they did not keep the same register arrangement and zero page arrangement, but scale everything up will always baffle me.

Just imagine a zero page with 65536 registers and 16 bit a,x and y registers, a missed opportunity surely.

Re:Kickass CPU (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779766)

Yeah back in the day, I could think in 6502, beautiful simplicity - why on earth they did not keep the same register arrangement and zero page arrangement, but scale everything up will always baffle me.

Just imagine a zero page with 65536 registers and 16 bit a,x and y registers, a missed opportunity surely.

Just imagine....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WDC_65816/65802 [wikipedia.org]

Can we forget about the Apple I ? (0)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778656)

Please ?

Re:Can we forget about the Apple I ? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779566)

No.

Most Hackable Computer (3, Interesting)

Sarusa (104047) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778712)

I had schematics for the ][ and the entire annotated source code for that and Apple DOS 3.2/3.3. And these weren't pirate, Apple happily published them. Woz was a freaking genius with how much he did with so little hardware.

You wanted to add lower case? Just run this wire here. Optionally bypass the write protect for floppies? Just put a three pole switch here. You want to extend the BASIC? Sure, here's these hooks (and Beagle Brothers made insane use of that).

The Apple I was the prototype for that and I salute it. I never had one, though of course now I wish I did!

Also funny how it's utterly unlike the Apple of today. I remember when the first Mac came out, completely unexpandable, and The Steve declared that it would never have more than 128K of RAM because that was more than enough for anyone. Which was ridiculous, because my Apple ][ had 16x that much already.

Yes I'm old.

Re:Most Hackable Computer (2)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779414)

I had schematics for the ][ and the entire annotated source code for that and Apple DOS 3.2/3.3.

I can go one better: I actually assembled DOS 3.3 on a regular basis, and made several, several modifications to same, all the way down to the RWTS (Read-Write Track and Sector) and Nibble-handling routines.

In fact, I created a custom version of Randy Wigginton's TED-II Weekend Assembler that could assemble to and from disk; because that was the ONLY way you could assemble something as huge as DOS...

And these weren't pirate, Apple happily published them.

BZZT! Wrong! Apple didn't sue the shit out of the people who DID publish the source. I think it was the Apple Pugetsound guys (the "CALL A.P.P.L.E." user group, or maybe it was Bob Sander-Cederlof...); but it WAS at least partially "pirated" (actually, disassembled from object code). IIRC, the DOS 3.3 manual had some bits and pieces of source; but certainly NOT the entire source code listing.

Woz was a freaking genius with how much he did with so little hardware.

You'll get no quibble from me on that point!!!

You wanted to add lower case? Just run this wire here. Optionally bypass the write protect for floppies? Just put a three pole switch here. You want to extend the BASIC? Sure, here's these hooks (and Beagle Brothers made insane use of that).

So did I. I even created a virtual-memory and Applesoft BASIC "Overlay" system using that wonderful "Ampersand" hook!!!

The Apple I was the prototype for that and I salute it. I never had one, though of course now I wish I did!

Not to brag; but I do... Had it since 1976. One owner (me).

Also funny how it's utterly unlike the Apple of today. I remember when the first Mac came out, completely unexpandable, and The Steve declared that it would never have more than 128K of RAM because that was more than enough for anyone.

Actually, that was a price-point decision. RAM wasn't so cheap back then...

Which was ridiculous, because my Apple ][ had 16x that much already.

Your Apple ][ had 2 MB of RAM?!?! Where did you put the auxiliary power supply?!? Perhaps you mean Apple IIgs, right?

Yes I'm old.

Bet I'm older...

Re:Most Hackable Computer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779550)

Also funny how it's utterly unlike the Apple of today. I remember when the first Mac came out, completely unexpandable, and The Steve declared that it would never have more than 128K of RAM because that was more than enough for anyone.

Which was ridiculous, because my Apple ][ had 16x that much already.

Your Apple ][ had 2 MB of RAM?!?! Where did you put the auxiliary power supply?!? Perhaps you mean Apple IIgs, right?

Ramworks.

Re:Most Hackable Computer (1)

eganloo (195345) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779790)

I remember when the first Mac came out, completely unexpandable, and The Steve declared that it would never have more than 128K of RAM because that was more than enough for anyone.

Which was ridiculous, because my Apple ][ had 16x that much already.

Your Apple ][ had 2 MB of RAM?!?! Where did you put the auxiliary power supply?!? Perhaps you mean Apple IIgs, right?

Ramworks.

I think the grandparent article was pointing out that an Apple ][ could not have 2MB of RAM "already" when the first Macintosh was released in early 1984, since RamWorks' Applied Engineering and other expansion makers did not offer the 2MB option until later. By September of 1984, it was a moot point, since the Macintosh 512K hit shelves (with the third-party option for more memory).

Who's not a geek (0, Troll)

macraig (621737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778742)

Being a geek is about values. Only one of the Two Steves is a geek. Steve Wozniak is a geek; Steve Jobs is not. Wozniak would be reveling in gadgets and tech whether it made him a pile of money or not; Jobs would head for the exit the moment it was clear to him the grass was greener elsewhere. Jobs would be perfectly happy doing anything, in the complete absence of anything geeky, if it made him filthy rich and popular.

Wozniak is a geek. Jobs is just a... salesman.

Re:Who's not a geek (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779294)

Of course Steve Jobs is more of a salesman than a geek. But even more so, he is a megalomaniac with a need to change the world. That's why he wouldn't leave Apple from something else if that would bring him more money per se, because the other thing has to be more world-changing than Apple can be.

Re:Who's not a geek (3, Insightful)

inpher (1788434) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779386)

Steve is not really selling so much, he is only selling at most ten days of the year and not even full days, in fact he spends most of the days running a company where he oversees design and production of both software and hardware, that is not the job of a salesman.

I do not think Steve Jobs would be happy doing whatever makes him rich, remember what he said to John Sculley in 1985 "Do you want to sell sugarwater the rest of your life, or do you want to come with me and change the world?" is a pretty strong indicator that Steve was not in it just to make money (but I wouldn't fault him if he saw money as something entirely positive). Jobs most likely sees himself as a visionary or an artist, perhaps even a philosopher, he probably is an "architect" archetype where he wants to leave a lasting legacy (see his Stanford Commencement speech where he hints at this).

Re:Who's not a geek (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779860)

remember what he said to John Sculley in 1985 "Do you want to sell sugarwater the rest of your life, or do you want to come with me and change the world?"

He wouldn't have said that in '85, by '85 the board had ousted him from Apple. IIRC Sculley came in in 1983. Jobs left in '84, not too long after the launch of the Macintosh.

Beginnings of the Apple style... (2)

julesh (229690) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778772)

... including the claim that its 16 bit address bus allowed expansion to 65K of memory. /me didn't realise the use of decimal rather than binary capacity multipliers in marketing claims was so old.

Re:Beginnings of the Apple style... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779344)

It's not decimal. The Apple I had a separate 1k video memory made of shift registers. So 64k RAM + 1k video shift registers = 65k memory.

Re:Beginnings of the Apple style... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779624)

/me didn't realise the use of decimal rather than binary capacity multipliers in marketing claims was so old.

You've got it backwards. "kilo" is and always was a decimal prefix, so strictly speaking, Apple was correct. What's more, the custom to (mis)use "kilo" etc. as binary multipliers didn't arise until much later, so they didn't pull any marketing tricks, either.

It's like going back to 1850 and claiming that a 4-hp carriage is misleadingly labelled because it's drawn by four actual horses rather than having a 4 hp engine. ;)

Re:Beginnings of the Apple style... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779654)

You've got it backwards. "kilo" is and always was a decimal prefix, so strictly speaking, Apple was correct. What's more, the custom to (mis)use "kilo" etc. as binary multipliers didn't arise until much later, so they didn't pull any marketing tricks, either.

So when Apple advertised "8K Bytes of RAM" in 1976 then meant 8000 bytes? No, I don't think so. You're just wrong.

Re:Beginnings of the Apple style... (1)

Arlet (29997) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779796)

Just as 65K didn't mean 65000 bytes, there's no reason why 8K would have to mean 8000 bytes. It's called rounding.

Negroes are inferior (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35778882)

As we Whites and Asians already know, Negroes are inferior. Of course Negroes are one of the highest form of monkeys , but the lowest
form of "humans". They are trash, and the world would be better off without Negroes. Thank you!

Re:Negroes are inferior (1)

CTU (1844100) | more than 3 years ago | (#35778934)

somebody IP ban this guy please, or at least mod him down...this crap does not fly here at /.

One page of content spread across 13. Joy. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779070)

Gotta love those click farms with one single photo and two paragraphs of text per page. Nice way to spread one article out over 13 pages.

I love this poster but I have to ask... (0)

dingen (958134) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779188)

...wtf is up with this dude's chin? http://technologizer.com/2011/04/08/apple-i/13/ [technologizer.com]

Re:I love this poster but I have to ask... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779330)

Looks like he's grown two heads.

It's Xaphod Beeblebrox!

And if it wasn't for some help from Chuck Peddle (3, Informative)

prowler1 (458133) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779456)

it may not have been completed.

http://www.commodore.ca/history/people/chuck_peddle/chuck_peddle.htm [commodore.ca]

Apparently when he turned up to help them out, he ended up doing a lot of analysing of what they were doing and helping them understand how the 6502 worked and what they were doing wrong.

Hire Dedicated Seo (0)

ariahills (2038632) | more than 3 years ago | (#35779462)

I was very encouraged to find this site. I wanted to thank you for this special read. I definitely savored every little bit of it. Hire Dedicated Seo

You have 650 Advanced Orders for Apple II? Right. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779494)

My earliest memory of meeting Steve Jobs was, IIRC, at the Atlantic City Microcomputer Festival in August 1977. He gave me a pitch about the Apple 1 and explained why people wanted color computers, even low resolution, instead of the state of the art monochrome displays. He told me, confidentially, that Apple already had 650 orders for the unannounced Apple II computer. I walked away thinking he was a misguided huckster. 650 advanced orders? Yeah, right, will never happen. I finally decided to buy an Alpha Micro, a 16 bit PDP-11 clone and use it to develop and market software. Now that was a useful computer. It was a true multiuser computer capable of support a whopping 5 users. Alpha Micro Basic language was much more advanced than Apple's. The main regret I have is in not taking more photos of those early days. The majority of the vendors exhibiting at the show were are now long gone, with the notable exception of Apple.

Commie? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35779684)

Ah, yes, let's remember the Apple I but forget the ol' Commodore 64.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>