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!

Apple-1 Sells For $671,400, Breaks Previous Auction Record

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the built-to-last dept.

The Almighty Buck 79

hypnosec writes "What is believed to be one of the six working Apple-1 computers has fetched a whopping $671,400 for its current owner at an auction in Germany. The Apple-1 was built by Steve Wozniak back in 1976 in the garage of Steve Jobs' parents. The model sold at auction is either from the first lot of 50 systems ordered by Paul Terrell, owner of the Byte Shop chain of stores, or part of the next lot of 150 systems the duo built to sell to friends and vendors. The retail price for the Apple-1 at the time was $666.66."

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

TYPICAL APPLE USER !! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825775)

A sucker !!

Re:TYPICAL APPLE USER !! (1)

bkmoore (1910118) | about a year and a half ago | (#43828717)

Thats an APPLE-1 user, not an Apple user.

Hell, I'd buy it. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825787)

I'd buy it, if only for a chance to start harassing The Woz for tech support.

Re:Hell, I'd buy it. (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | about a year and a half ago | (#43830459)

I'd buy it, if only for a chance to start harassing The Woz for tech support.

What's awesome about that guy? I bet he'd do it.

Re:Hell, I'd buy it. (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about a year and a half ago | (#43832793)

I'd buy it, if only for a chance to start harassing The Woz for tech support.

When Jobs and Woz built and sold their blue boxes, Woz inserted a small slip of paper in it - a poem I believe. The deal was that if your blue box ever stopped working, you could bring it in, and as long as that paper was in there, he'd repair it. Doesn't matter how long ago you bought it, as long as it was in there.

Given the last blue-boxable line was killed around the mid-2000's (yes, there was ONE phone company who still maintained an old MF-signalling line until then - of course, they had also upgraded to modern equipment, but that line was there for nostalgia's sake. Not that you could go anywhere other than the 200-odd customers).

Re:Hell, I'd buy it. (1)

kmoser (1469707) | about a year and a half ago | (#43847059)

I wonder if any of their blue boxes are still around.

Essential for museums (1)

Camembert (2891457) | about a year and a half ago | (#43825799)

It is indeed a piece of modern history, it would be good on display in a museum of the 20th century (along a few other pioneering machines).

Re:Essential for museums (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826205)

The science museum in London does have an apple I...Along with various other rarities (a PDP-8 for example and other even older things).

I don't think any of those is in working order though.

Re:Essential for museums (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826419)

IT BELONGS IN A MUSEUM!

Re:Essential for museums (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826437)

Hi, I'm selling these fine leather jackets.

Re:Essential for museums (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826553)

Why? how many millions of "old" electronics are there in the world? Which ones do you keep for "museum quality"?

Most old electronics get recycled, this is just another piece of 1970's era electronics.

Re:Essential for museums (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826713)

Whoosh. It's an Indiana Jones quote, for comedic effect. So is the leather jacket one by another AC, although that was from a videogame.

I'm sure you're a hit at parties.

Re:Essential for museums (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43830357)

But does Fedora run on it?

What A Dope (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825803)

For that much money, the purchaser could have gotten their hands on a whole truckload of IMSAI 8080s with working 8" drives and had enough left over for a Curta!

666 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825809)

mark of the jobs

Metaphores. (5, Funny)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year and a half ago | (#43825815)

$666.66... The Biblical Apple was from the tree of knowledge. The Apple's salesman was snake, and the users were deceived. Steve Jobs aspired to be devilishly clever in marketing. In Faustian style, his life was cut short ahead of its time... Oh what stories that would be told, if only this silicon could talk.

Re:Metaphores. (0)

Redmancometh (2676319) | about a year and a half ago | (#43825835)

Silicon can't talk? My cross platform text-to-speak function begs to differ.

Re:Metaphores. (5, Informative)

NoMaster (142776) | about a year and a half ago | (#43825873)

Except that the 'apple' in that bit of biblical symbolism is a later European Christian addition. The forbidden fruit of the Bible was most likely a fig, grape, apricot or pomegranate [christadelphianbooks.org] .

Though I do recall an early computer sold in Aus (through DSE?) called the Apricot, which IIRC was a rebadged MPF-II (an early Apple nearly-compatible clone...)

Re:Metaphores. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826039)

Sale price of 666.66.... Sign of the devil. Coincidence I think not!!!!

Re:Metaphores. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826069)

well, W is transposed to the same numerical value as 6 in Hebrew. So when you type in your www guess what your doing..

Actually, V is 6 and there is no W in hebrew so 6 is used. Also the numbers are added together when they are places together similar to roman numerals so www would be 18 (6+6+6) and not 666.

This WWW=666 was a popular thing on the internet back in the mid 90s.

Re:Metaphores. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826235)

Except the New Testament (including Revelations) was written in Greek, not Hebrew.

Re:Metaphores. (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826245)

well, W is transposed to the same numerical value as 6 in Hebrew. So when you type in your www guess what your doing..

Actually, V is 6 and there is no W in hebrew so 6 is used. Also the numbers are added together when they are places together similar to roman numerals so www would be 18 (6+6+6) and not 666.

This WWW=666 was a popular thing on the internet back in the mid 90s.

The number of the beast is only 666 in later christian scripture. According to 3rd century christian texts unearthed by Archeologists the number of the beast is actually 616 and methinks that constitutes prior art.

Re:Metaphores. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826397)

According to 3rd century christian texts unearthed by Archeologists the number of the beast is actually 616

Obviously the Beast has had a few upgrades and version jumps since the 3rd century.

Re:Metaphores. (1)

kerrbear (163235) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826619)

well, W is transposed to the same numerical value as 6 in Hebrew. So when you type in your www guess what your doing..

Actually, V is 6 and there is no W in hebrew so 6 is used. Also the numbers are added together when they are places together similar to roman numerals so www would be 18 (6+6+6) and not 666.

This WWW=666 was a popular thing on the internet back in the mid 90s.

The number of the beast is only 666 in later christian scripture. According to 3rd century christian texts unearthed by Archeologists the number of the beast is actually 616 and methinks that constitutes prior art.

This is interesting, but here is an argument [endtime.com] against, saying that there was another contemporary text found that had 666.

Much of the recent stir about 616 has arisen due to renewed studies of a group of very old manuscripts originally discovered in 1895 by archaeologists at the site of an ancient garbage dump in Oxyrhynchus in Egypt. Many of the Oxyrhynchus manuscripts consist of New Testament papyri, and are very old when compared to other manuscripts. One of them named P115 (also called P. Oxy. 4499), dates from around 300 AD and contains some or all of 12 chapters from the Book of Revelation, including Revelation 13:18. It records 616 as the number of the beast using Greek letters (see figure 1). Because of this manuscript’s age, some have jumped to the conclusion that this must be the original reading. However, this conclusion cannot be made. Other evidence must be considered. For example, three manuscripts from the Chester Beatty Papyri include portions of the New Testament. One of these named P47, dates from the 3rd century and contains chapters 9-17 of Revelation. In its reading of Revelation 13:18, it states that the number of the beast is 666, using Greek letters (see figure 2). So, two equally old papyri have both readings – 666 and 616.

I would argue that it is likely 666 because that falls in line with John's style of writing in the document. John uses explicit and implicit numbers to signify meaning in the text. 7 is the number of perfection- so 7 and lists of seven items are related. 3 implies a unified trinity; good or bad. 10 in both number and lists of ten items refer to human culture. 12 and lists of twelve refer to God's people. Six is one less than 7, implying an attempt at perfection but missing it. It would likely not make sense for John to use 616. A lot of people make hay about the numbers in Revelation, but it's more likely that it was a literary or poetic device John was using to convey symbolic meanings.

Oh, and just in case somebody wants to OT me: my family bought an Apple ][ when they first came out. We still have it. I wonder if it's worth anything :)

Re:Metaphores. (1)

DriveDog (822962) | about a year ago | (#43875705)

The Beast can be reached in Grand Rapids???

Re:Metaphores. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826215)

Though I do recall an early computer sold in Aus (through DSE?) called the Apricot, which IIRC was a rebadged MPF-II (an early Apple nearly-compatible clone...)

Apricat was not a computer model, but the name of the manufacturer. Apricot used to make some wonderfully designed personal computers which, with their uncharacteristically (for the time) high performance could be called workstations. They were also very expensive.

That said, the Apricot with IR keyboard would probably fetch a nice penny at an auction, nowadays.

Re:Metaphores. (1)

jo_ham (604554) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826369)

Not only that, but the "number of the beast" is actually 616. During one of the many translations of that work of fiction, it was assumed by the translating monks to be the equivalent of a typo, so they changed it it 666.

Re:Metaphores. (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826569)

668: The Neighbor of the Beast.

Re:Metaphores. (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about a year and a half ago | (#43827311)

Satan was a quiet, friendly neighbor. Always maintained his garden and kept the walk free of trash. I don't see why people give him so much grief.

Re:Metaphores. (1)

Scarletdown (886459) | about a year and a half ago | (#43828423)

668: The Neighbor of the Beast.

Are you referring to that smokin' hot succubus of a girl next door?

Re:Metaphores. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825939)

"and the users were deceived" Everything the snake said about the fruit was actually true though. The only deceiver in the story was god.

The Church of Apple Computer (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year and a half ago | (#43827039)

So the Apple Computer is THE Apple.
Jobs is the snake.
Woz is God.

The Tower of Babble story is obviously the story about the ancient language of Assembly that people used to build so much of the software stack, which angered the God and then he split the language into many.

The Great Flood and the Noah's Arc is probably an RMS related story.

Makes sense. Now we have men that are men, women that are men and also the FBI agents. The only question remains where is Eve in all of this?

Re:The Church of Apple Computer (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | about a year and a half ago | (#43827099)

Tim Cook?

Takes one to know one, right? (1)

fascismforthepeople (2805977) | about a year and a half ago | (#43827921)

Certainly a deeply religious man such as yourself would know how to recognize cult behavior. You have your cult, they have theirs. The only difference is that they don't call yours as wrong, even though you say that of theirs.

Jebus saves! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43830291)

PC owners were saved from satanic influence by Intel's wise decision to clock Pentium IIIs at 667mhz.

Re:Metaphores. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43830365)

Wow you must be the first person in 40 years to make that connection. You should really pat yourself on the back.

Re:Metaphores. (1)

bjb (3050) | about a year and a half ago | (#43839221)

Considering Jobs and Woz made no claims to knowing what it meant at the time, it was amusing to see Jean-Louis Gassée's book 20 years or so ago called "The First Apple". Had a picture of Sir Issac Newton sitting under an serpent-laden apple tree with a Macintosh. Birth of history (if you consider the bible as such), birth of science (if you consider Newton and the gravity apple as such), and birth of computer revolution (if you consider the Macintosh as such). Clever.

History? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825843)

"a fascination with the early history of the computer age"

1976 was already the middle of the computer age.

Re:History? (4, Insightful)

Kwyj1b0 (2757125) | about a year and a half ago | (#43825871)

"a fascination with the early history of the computer age"

1976 was already the middle of the computer age.

Really? I feel the computer age hasn't even taken off yet, and speaking of a middle for something that is open ended is just silly. In fact, even though the age of the gene-manipulation/bio-tech might be starting now, let us not forget that it is progress in our computation capabilities that makes all this possible. There is still lots more to be done in computational mathematics/biology/engineeering/science.

Re:History? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825919)

"I feel the computer age hasn't even taken off yet,"

What you feel has nothing to do with anything. In 1976 the CDC-6600 was already 10 years old. Banks and companies and universities and governments had computers everywhere. The fact that you are claiming that "we haven't even started" yet is far sillier in that light.

Re:History? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825949)

I encourage you to reread your post. The errors are obvious.

Re:History? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826001)

Then surely it will be simple to point them out.

Re:History? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826207)

The computer age isn't over yet. We don't know how long it will last, but it could be thousands of years.
We have only completed the first 60 years or so.
That probably makes this still the beginning right now.

Re:History? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826213)

OK. The quote and your paraphrase bear no relation to each other. Yet your post is phrased as if you're making an argument against what he actually said.

Harumph. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43825945)

Nice try, English, but you won't be getting us Amish on that Lucifer's Calculator thing. We'll be laughing in Heaven while you're all burning in Hell, and by burning I mean being boiled alive in a vast bowl of hot grits for all Eternity.

Re:Harumph. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826159)

Actually, 'hell' is cold. Dante's Inferno popularized the idea of a hot, molten place, and you'ld get used to lava being poured down your throat all the time. What would really be punishment is cold, different levels of increasing cold. The worse you were in life, the lower you go, and no blankets there. And when you begin to realize why what you did was wrong, you get moved 'up' a few levels. Best thing would be to live life right to begin with, 'do unto others as ye would have done unto you' pretty much covers it all.

Re:History? (1)

Nyder (754090) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826185)

"a fascination with the early history of the computer age"

1976 was already the middle of the computer age.

Really? I feel the computer age hasn't even taken off yet, and speaking of a middle for something that is open ended is just silly. In fact, even though the age of the gene-manipulation/bio-tech might be starting now, let us not forget that it is progress in our computation capabilities that makes all this possible. There is still lots more to be done in computational mathematics/biology/engineeering/science.

The home computer age, the personal computer age had barely started, but there had computers around for those with access.

Re:History? (2)

Kjella (173770) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826795)

Really? I feel the computer age hasn't even taken off yet, and speaking of a middle for something that is open ended is just silly. In fact, even though the age of the gene-manipulation/bio-tech might be starting now, let us not forget that it is progress in our computation capabilities that makes all this possible. There is still lots more to be done in computational mathematics/biology/engineeering/science.

It's not like we left all the iron tools when we left the iron age, yes there are still radios but it'd feel very strange to say we're in the age of radio. It is not new, it is not something that right now is redefining our society. In that sense I feel the computer age maybe has come and gone - as in the moving from pen and paper, calculators and filing cabinets to word processors, spreadsheets and databases. It was already followed by the Internet age - which is of course using computers but that I feel is something completely different, a revolution in communication not computing. I think now we're in the budding of the "always on" age, where you take both with you on the go but I think that is distinct from the former, just like cell phones was a different revolution than phones. If you want to take a more birds-eye view I'd call all of it the Digital Age, because that's really what it's been all about - we take analog information and we convert it to zeros and ones, which we can then compute, transmit, display and lots of other things with. And there we find constantly new ways to apply computers.

Re:History? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43828279)

The computer age arguably started during the second world war when computers were used as part of the code-breaking effort, that is when they started having a significant impact on people's lives. It is somewhat ridiculous to say that the computer ages hasn't even taken off yet when every other person in developed countries has a computer in their pocket. Maybe we aren't quite in the middle of it, but it has certainly taken off.

Re:History? (1)

Solandri (704621) | about a year and a half ago | (#43828341)

The modern (digital electronic) computer age began in WWII with Colossus [wikipedia.org] , used by the British to break German codes.

The Apple I was early in the personal computer era. Computers prior were based on vacuum tubes or individual solid state transistors, and were the size of a room. Silicon transistors were experimental during the 1950s, and slowly commercialized in the 1960s allowing business computers to shrink to the size of a car and eventually a cabinet. Intel got started around then. Silicon microprocessors really took off during the early 1970s allowing computers to shrink to desktop size, spawning personal computing.

So no, the Apple I was not early in the computer era. It's bad enough people think Apple invented MP3 players, smartphones, touchscreens, and tablets. Don't add computers to the list of mis-attributed inventions. The original Apple I as a product was pretty much the same as what Apple does today - buy a bunch of readily available parts, do some modifications, assemble it, and sell it. They don't actually make (much less invent) the crucial technologies. Their biggest technical strength is that they're damn good at making a pleasant and easy-to-use user interface.

Re:History? (1)

dingen (958134) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826145)

Sure, big institutions may have had a mainframe and one or more terminals by that time. But the real revolution began when computing was brought to the home. It was home computing that enabled a whole generation to grow up with computers and learn the skills involved before they went to college and as such it acted like a flywheel to advance computing even more rapidly. The Apple I is very fundamental step in the process of bringing computing to the home.

Re:History? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826387)

Arguing about this at all is stupid.

We've now got robots creating things, CAD, automated warehouses - and stuff keeps getting more awesome all the time.

Computer revolution? Please - we're still in the Industrial Revolution, baby.

Re:History? (1)

DriveDog (822962) | about a year ago | (#43875777)

Yes, merely a bump in the road. Perhaps a larger-than-average bump, but many of the larger bumps have not been recognized outside of this type venue.

apple 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826055)

is apple -1 is the best?????????
manik [blogspot.com]

It is called... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826063)

Inflation after qualitative easings. :-)

iPhone 1 (1)

jamesh (87723) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826095)

I wonder how much an iPhone 1 will be worth in 40-50 years... I suspect they made more of those than the Apple 1 though.

Re: iPhone 1 (2)

DerPflanz (525793) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826153)

It would really depend on the popularity (and existence) of Apple in 40-50 years. I think this thing wouldn't have raked in so much money if Apple did go bankrupt in the late nineties.

As technology goes, the Apple I is not that revolutionary. Not like the first mouse or first transistor.

Re: iPhone 1 (4, Insightful)

jo_ham (604554) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826381)

Well, it sort of is - it's one of the first consumer computers, so it's different in that respect to an iPhone. Regardless of how far down the line we go, the iPhone will never be the product that launched a company and played a large role in the wider acceptance of home computing in general (note again, for slashdot mods: not saying it was *the* thing, or the *only* thing, or the *most important* thing etc).

It's like the auction of the first telephone - these things have cultural significance beyond that of a product from somewhere in the middle, regardless of whether the company is still going or not. I'm sure that didn't hurt, but it's hardly the only thing driving that auction price.

Re: iPhone 1 (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about a year and a half ago | (#43830705)

Well, it sort of is - it's one of the first consumer computers, so it's different in that respect to an iPhone.

Well, it was more properly one of the first computers available for purchase almost complete. Prior to this, you had to assemble the computer yourself. But Apple sold it as a complete board - you just added a keyboard, power supply and TV and you had a computer.

The first consumer computers will be the Apple II - at which point it was one of the first enclosed in a plastic shell available for the mass marker - just add a TV.

The Apple I was aimed at hobbyists, the Apple II at the common consumer who could plonk down some dollars and have a computer that does stuff immediately.

The only thing the iPhone did was turn smartphones from business tools to something consumers could use easily.

Re:iPhone 1 (1)

narcc (412956) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826383)

Probably not much, if anything at all. It lacks both significance and scarcity -- and doesn't have the interesting back story that comes with the Apple I.

Joke's on the buyer... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43826117)

It's been obsolete for decades, numbnuts.

Inflation (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826217)

The $666 of those days is worth about $666,666 today, so the value of the Apple 1 actually reduced a little...

Re:Inflation (4, Informative)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826575)

Nope. $666.66 in 1976 dollars is worth about $2,724.41 today.

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ [usinflatio...ulator.com]

Re:Inflation (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | about a year and a half ago | (#43826753)

After the Fed printed all those trillions that calculator overflowed.

Enough for everybody (2)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year and a half ago | (#43827019)

An Apple-1 computer, made in 1976, sold for a record $671,400 on Saturday at an auction in Germany, including all fees and taxes, said Uwe Breker, the German auctioneer.

That surpassed the $640,000 record for an Apple-1, set last November at a sale at the same auction house in Cologne, Germany, Auction Team Breker. The fall 2012 sale was a sharp rise from the previous record price for an Apple-1 of $374,500, set in June 2012 at Sothebyâ(TM)s in New York.

- I thought 640K was enough for everybody, apparently not until zee Germans get here.

---

As a side note

some irrational exuberance in the prices, for a machine that can do very little and originally sold for $666 (about $2,700 in current dollars).

- isn't that funny, how the official inflation (666 becomes 2700) is so far off the actual bubbles forming in various asset classes, that reflect the actual rate of inflation (666 becomes 641K) and almost none the wiser.

Re:Enough for everybody (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43827285)

Well I agree that official inflation figures are basically fiction, but you are still a goddam Communist suckling off the teat of Big Government.

Re:Enough for everybody (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43827477)

Well I agree that official inflation figures are basically fiction...

When housing prices during the Reagan administration resulted in "high inflation", the government just took the cost of buying a house out of the equation[1] -- and Reagan declared that inflation had been licked.

In 2008, when gasoline prices skyrocketed and fuel prices were factored into the Social Security COLA, retirees received a huge 5.8% increase in 2009[2] -- and gasoline was promptly removed from the COLA equation.

These are just two of many examples

[1] http://mondaymorningeconomist.com/cooking.html
[2] http://www.ssa.gov/cola/automatic-cola.htm

Holy Economics FAIL Batman! (1)

fascismforthepeople (2805977) | about a year and a half ago | (#43827983)

- isn't that funny, how the official inflation (666 becomes 2700) is so far off the actual bubbles forming in various asset classes, that reflect the actual rate of inflation (666 becomes 641K) and almost none the wiser

The $641k number is not, in any meaningful way, a result of inflation. The product did not gain value due to the loss of value of the currency, it gained value because of its own diminishing supply and its associated historic value. The difference between its price in 1976 dollars ($666.66) and the value of that much money today ($2,700) is inflationary; you could describe it accurately as an inflationary difference of roughly four-fold. However the remaining difference between the $2,700 of today's dollars and the auction price ($641k) - I'll do the math for you since you failed math - is roughly $638k. That $638k is not driven by inflation. If it were driven by inflation then everything that sold in 1976 would be worth almost 1,000 times its 1976 price - and anyone with a car from the 1970s can tell you that is simply not the case.

But of course you want to sell this as inflation as it is part of your religious mantra. You lie to people repeatedly like this to further your church's agenda, which is to get people to hand over what little power and resources they have to those who already hold the vast majority of the world's power and resources. You want to produce more power for the wealthy, and fascism for the people.

And adjusting for inflation (1)

RandomFactor (22447) | about a year and a half ago | (#43827617)

has fetched a whopping $671,400

Or, in 1976 dollars, about $666.66 :-p
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(yes in reality it is more like $150K, but where's the fun in that?)

Re:And adjusting for inflation (1)

cusco (717999) | about a year and a half ago | (#43827759)

Still way off, really closer to $3000-$10000, depending on how you measure inflation.

Had an instructor one time who had worked for Apple when it was still in Wozniak's garage, she may have helped assemble this one (there's a photo of employees from this time period, she's the black woman). At one point the company was so short of cash they were paying employees in stock. She left the company after a couple of months of this because she needed to feed her kids and stock certificates weren't doing that. She later sold her stock for $4500, which was the down payment for her house. At that time (1980s) it would have been worth around $50,000, and we asked her whether she regretted selling the stock. She said, "No, it's a nice house and it was a good place for the kids to grow up."

when I first saw it at the Homebrew Club (3, Interesting)

peter303 (12292) | about a year and a half ago | (#43828181)

back in 1976 at the Stanford Linear Acceleration I thought the Steves would take all the fun out of building a computer if you buy one already made. I was wrong.

Story is Both Cool and Sad (1)

Scarletdown (886459) | about a year and a half ago | (#43828509)

It's always cool hearing about something like this fetching such a high price. The original Apple computer is somewhat of a holy grail among those of us who like these sort of things.

However, the knowledge that there are so few known to exist, the knowledge that most of those are accounted for, and the knowledge that the odds of one of these turning up in a thrift store, donated by some clueless mom who has no idea what it is, priced by some clueless worker who has no idea what it is, and passed up by other clueless shoppers who think that the people doing their pricing must be passing around some good weed to think that this old bare circuit board apparently from some broken Mac would be priced at $15 to $20, are pretty much zero, makes my inner Jawa sad. ;)

Re:Story is Both Cool and Sad (1)

tverbeek (457094) | about a year and a half ago | (#43828591)

If it's any consolation, a copy of Action Comics #1 (cover date June 1938, some guy in a cape on the cover) was recently discovered serving as insulation in the wall of a house bought for salvage for $10K. It's currently on auction, with bidding at $137K [comicconnect.com] . (It'd be fetching more money, but the back cover got ripped in a grabbing contest between the guy who found it and his wife's aunt.)

famous last bids (1)

tverbeek (457094) | about a year and a half ago | (#43828543)

$640K should be enough for anybody.

I remember seeing one on display at The Byte Shop (1)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | about a year and a half ago | (#43829189)

Back when I was pressing my nose against the glass of The Byte Shop (San Mateo was it? Buggered if I can remember, I lived in Redwood City and it was nearby) wishing I could afford one of those nifty Apple ]['s, I saw an Apple I in the shop, under glass, listed for a cool $1 Mill. It was a board, with components. Not terribly impressive, but the ][ had only been out for a few months iirc. I don't think he ever really wanted to sell it.

I went to work for Apple shortly after, got one of their loan-to-own units with a floppy disk and VisiCalc. Wasn't much, but damme, I was empowered.

Expensive game machine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43829633)

Anyone for Super Star Trek?

http://www.callapple.org/soft/ap1/games.html

I wouldn't have bid higher than $666,666.66 (1)

JimtownKelly (634785) | about a year and a half ago | (#43830193)

Just because.

It's hell lot of money (1)

racoon00 (2588849) | about a year and a half ago | (#43847569)

Did Woz got some share out of it?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?