Slashdot Mirror


Top 10 Apple Flops

Kelly McNeill writes "Though Apple computer is known for some of the computing and technology industry's most notable innovations, its not as if the company hasn't also taken its lumps. Thomas Hormby submitted the following editorial contribution to osOpinion/osViews, which supplies us with his top ten list of Apple's (and some of associated partners) most significant flops throughout the company's history."

75 of 993 comments (clear)

  1. Cube? by nathanmace · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wonder why the cube isn't on the list. Seems like it should be.

    --
    I'm very responsible, when ever something goes wrong they always say I'm responsible.
    1. Re:Cube? by michaeldot · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Cube, of which I have one powering my plasma 42" as a "photowall" and DVD player, was more a marketing flop than a technological one.

      Alone, or especially when combined with a still new and pricey LCD flat panel, it was perceived as very expensive for what it was - a miniaturized desktop with no slots.

      Petite computers hadn't been around for long (I think Shuttle actually came after, maybe in fact inspired by the Cube) and in the US market, the Cube was a radical approach going against the "gas guzzling SUV paradigm," where most male computer buyers still equate bigger with better.

      It also had a significant number of detractors in the press, who all gleefully reported the "cracks" (scratches on the lucite moulding for the first batch) as if the thing was going to split open like a lizard egg.

      Still, they sold 100,000, created a loyal following of uber-elite modders, contributed R&D to the iMac G4 and Mac mini, and were responsible for the coolest (pun intended) press release signaling its termination: "Apple is putting the Cube on ice."

      Not a total flop.

  2. Powered by "PostNuke" by bobetov · · Score: 3, Funny

    I love it. As perfect a description of a slashdotting as I've ever seen.

    Do you want to play a game?

    --
    Looking for a Rails developer in Chapel Hill?
    1. Re:Powered by "PostNuke" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Article text, karma whore free:

      "Though Apple computer is known for some of the computing and technology industry's most notable innovations, its not as if the company hasn't also taken its lumps. Thomas Hormby submitted the following editorial contribution to osOpinion/osViews, which supplies us with his top ten list of Apple's (and some of associated partners) most significant flops throughout the company's history."
      --

      Apple and its compatriots have been highly innovative. These companies have proven that even if their ideas are well implemented, they cannot always promote them correctly. Other times, a good idea is implemented poorly, and despite their best marketing effort, the product fails. I have compiled 10 of the most notable products released by Apple or its comrades that have failed.

      Apple Pippin

      Introduced under Spindler's rule as CEO, the Pippin should have won Apple a position in the console market, one Apple had yet to penetrate. Apple's goal was to make the Pippin a multimedia machine, capable of reading CD ROMs, surfing the internet and to play games.

      Apple had decided to share the Pippin's source code with developers for a licensing fee. The developers had a lot more flexibility, and would be able to redesign the Pippin's software to make it attractive for any number of markets. However, Apple was able to recruit only 4500 developers willing to pay the licensing fee.

      The operating system of the Pippin was based on the MacOS and with a PowerPC 603 running at 66 MHZ, the Pippin used a similar processor to desktop macs at that time. Being a multimedia machine, the Pippin was capable of producing CD quality sound, and displaying up to thousands of colors. With the powerful Power PC processor, Apple thrashed Nintendo and Sega consoles performance wise, but never won a sizable portion of the market.

      OpenDoc

      The concept behind OpenDoc is an intuitive one. Many elements of applications are redundant (calculators, multimedia players, spreadsheets). Why not 'cut them up' and use different modules interchangeably. Each file would then make calls on these different modules as needed. With OpenDoc, if a user wished to create a word processor document that includes a spreadsheet, the user would not have to copy it over as a table, or use a gimped up version included with the word processor. Instead, they could call up the ClarisWorks for OpenDoc Spreadsheet module and have a full-blown spreadsheet in the middle of a word processing document.

      OpenDoc development started in 1995 in collaboration with Novell, IBM and Apple. In 1997, Apple integrated OpenDoc into its core strategy, releasing several OpenDoc apps, and including the technology in Mac OS 7.6. At the same time, the technology was being developed for Windows and UNIX. The companies created the Ci Labs which would authorize OpenDoc components that proved to be compatible as "Live Objects".

      In accordance to Apple's vision, it became possible with the OpenDoc compatible version of ClarisWorks to create a document that integrated various OpenDoc modules. The example below has an integrated Video Conferencing session with QuickTime, a browser frame from CyberDog and a graph from another OpenDoc module.

      Since 1996, Novell has ceased Windows development of OpenDoc, forcing IBM to take on responsibilities for the platform at the same time they continued development on their AIX (UNIX from IBM). The two versions both evolved and were mature commercial products in 1997. There were problems for OpenDoc, however. At the same time, Microsoft released ann updated version of OLE, and released ActiveX, that closely mimicked the OpenDoc principles. OpenDoc was embraced by major OS developers, but it had failed to attract third party developers. Mac OS 8 was the last release from Apple to include OpenDoc, and it was quietly killed at the hands of Gil Amelio.

      Mac TV

      Apple was the first major personal computer manufacturer to release a machine with a bundled TV tun

    2. Re:Powered by "PostNuke" by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Funny
      > I love it. As perfect a description of a slashdotting as I've ever seen.
      >
      >Do you want to play a game?

      Ahem. That's "Shall we play a game?" to you, sir.

      Turn in your geek card. As mistakes go, that's a WOPR. (Slashdot is a strange game. The only winning move is not to play.)

    3. Re:Powered by "PostNuke" by servognome · · Score: 4, Funny

      Slashdot is a strange game. The only winning move is not to play
      Shall we play a game?
      Love to. How about Slashdot Fanboy Flame War
      Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?
      Later. Right now let's play Slashdot Fanboy Flame War
      Fine.
      Apple First Strike - WINNER NONE
      Microsoft First Strike - WINNER NONE
      Apple vs. IBM Hardware Scenario - WINNER NONE
      OSX vs Windows Software Scenario - WINNER NONE
      APPLE-AMD Alliance Scenario - WINNER NONE
      European Amiga Uprising - WINNER NONE
      Transmeta offensive - WINNER NONE
      MS-AMD Pact - WINNER NONE
      Opensource theater wide uprising - WINNER NONE
      Grammar Nazi hostility escalation - WINNER NONE
      IBM-SCO counterstrike - WINNER NONE
      Sun product announcement surprise - WINNER NONE
      Amazon One-Click Conflict - WINNER NONE
      DRM limited war - WINNER NONE
      Internet Explorer quick strike - WINNER NONE
      P2P crackdown - WINNER NONE
      Worm assault on Firefox - WINNER NONE
      Swedish viral attack on Windows - WINNER NONE
      China-India Outsource Pact - WINNER NONE
      Torvalds-Gates peace accords - WINNER NONE
      ATI Graphics card Domination - WINNER NONE
      BSD survival - WINNER NONE
      All out format war - WINNER NONE
      Programming Language Preference Battle - WINNER NONE
      Browser standards confrontation - WINNER NONE
      OpenOffice GPL dissention - WINNER NONE
      Missing Poll Option Discord - WINNER NONE
      Off-topic political rivalry - WINNER NONE

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    4. Re:Powered by "PostNuke" by Zoop · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was on eWorld! I remember it being fairly empty, but the interface was very cool--much like what the Cleveland FreeNet was trying to do, but all GUIlicious. I also had my first experience with live chat, which was some 16-year-old kid who assumed my androgynous name was the opposite sex and wanted me to go into a private room.

      I've pretty much hated chat ever since, and from what I can see of IRC and AIM spam, things haven't much improved.

      It was eerie, though, how much it felt like AOL, which I was also on (being a refugee from the craptastic Prodigy).

      The frightening thing is, I still have an AOL account. Never set your parents' sites up on a non-portable system.

    5. Re:Powered by "PostNuke" by DarthWiggle · · Score: 4, Funny

      Congratulations, you beat the Internet. Three - three?! - WarGames references in a two-line comment... that's fantastic.

  3. site already /.ed by all+your+mwbassguy+a · · Score: 4, Funny

    did they host this on a newton, a pippin, or an apple ///?

  4. Microsoft Word 6? by eweu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is a fairly good list of notable Apple flubs, but why include Microsoft Word 6? It sure was a dog, but that wasn't Apple's fault.

    In it's place, I'd like to nominate the Apple ///. It was such a failure that perhaps the list's originator doesn't even know about it.

  5. First on the list... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    According to the first one in TFA:

    Problem in database connection

    You'd think they'd be a little more specific.

  6. Most recent blunder by amichalo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think a recent blunder many remember but will soon be forgotten is the whole iMac G5 blunder.

    Apple misjudged product availability and actually ran out of iMac G4's for two months before they released the iMac G5.

    Yeah, the iMac G5 has relaly been making sales records at Apple, but how much of that is due to there being nothing in the iMac line for people to buy for two months?

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    1. Re:Most recent blunder by ozric99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apple starve the market of "old tech" just before releasing "new tech", thus creating massive demand and huge sales figures, and you describe this as a blunder? I'll have two of whatever you're having!

  7. At least... by Ikn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At least one of the flops isn't the OS the entire company is based on. Just sayin'.

    --
    I know nothing
    1. Re:At least... by powerlinekid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't walk around bitching about it like some of the idiots here.

      I do support, I deal with people who use windows to do their jobs. The fact is its not user friendly and it has a lot of particular quirks that get in the way.

      I'm not saying its any worse than say Linux in that regard, but at least Apple can be proud of OSX. Windows may not be a business flop but it is in terms of quality.

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
  8. Apple ///, anyone? by Faust7 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why the heck isn't the Apple /// in there? They made it for three whole years, less than 100,000 units (something around 75,000 I believe?).

    The first models were plagued by quality control problems - a clock chip from National Semiconductor that wouldn't work, inadequate ventilation resulting in the unseating of chips (which was rectified by lifting the computer a few inches and dropping it), too-short keyboard cables, and very little software.

    The Apple ///'s reputation was ruined almost right after it was out of the gate, despite the advanced SOS. Production stopped in '83 I believe, and it's a damn good thing Apple had the Mac coming out right afterwards.

    1. Re:Apple ///, anyone? by mveloso · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What's amazing to me is the Apple ][ series lifespan was from 1977 to 1993. Unbelievable! That's 16 years from the original Apple ][ to the last gs EOL.

    2. Re:Apple ///, anyone? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why the heck isn't the Apple /// in there?

      I heard it was such a flop that Apple became kind of superstitious about their naming conventions and refused to name any subsequent products beyond "][". They had the Apple I, Apple ][, and Apple ][+ before the Apple ///. After the Apple /// flopped, they went back to "][" and had the Apple //e, Apple //c, and Apple //gs. For the Macintosh line, they had the Mac //, Mac //x, Mac //cx, Mac //ci, Mac //si, Mac //fx, Mac //vi, and Mac //vx. They never used "///" again, or any roman numeral above it.

      Even now, they have dumped numbering their product lines altogether, despite the constant upgrades in hardware configurations. The only exception is the processor suffix (G4 or G5), which doesn't really indicate the product generation anyway. This applies to iPods as well.

    3. Re:Apple ///, anyone? by toddestan · · Score: 4, Funny

      Only if we disregard the fact that the 1984 Macintosh has nothing, apart from the name, to do with the current models.

      That's not true! They both have a one button mouse! *ducks*

  9. Flops at Apple are predictable by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apple has always had significant trouble when Steve Jobs is not at the helm. Gil Amelio and his drive to gain business credibility really put a huge pain on the company.

    It has always been about Steve Jobs. The man has insight and what could almost be considered clairvoyance when it comes to building things that people crave. God knows that I'm one of those at his feet, weeping and bathing him in frankincense.

    1. Re:Flops at Apple are predictable by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apple has also had significant trouble with Jobs at the helm. It's hard to say whether they've been better off with, or without the man. Let's not forget that he was responsible for bringing Markkula and Sculley on board. That worked out real well, didn't it (rhetorical question.)

      I started out in 1977 on a first-run Apple ][ Standard (Integer ROMs and casette tape.) I eventually upgraded to an Applesoft BASIC card, 4 Mhz. turbo card, Corvus hard drive, the works. I still have all that stuff, actually, except the Corvus which died long ago. I was one of the early crowd of Apple hackers: in 1978 I was selling a simple speech synthesizer that plugged into the game paddle port ... those were great times. It'll never be like that again, that's for sure.

      Now, his decision to unceremoniously drop the Apple // series and the millions of loyal Apple // users may be be an example of Jobs' insight. But from my perspective, as a member of that once-loyal class, I will never trust that company ever again. I invested several years of my career developing software for those machines, only to be told, in the end, "We recommend you buy a MacIntosh." Screw you, Jobs, and the horse you rode in on.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Flops at Apple are predictable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Now, his decision to unceremoniously drop the Apple // series and the millions of loyal Apple // users may be be an example of Jobs' insight.

      Wow, you need help with reality.

      The Apple II had an incredible run ... from 1977 until 1993... almost 9 years after the Mac's release! And well after Jobs was out of Apple.

      Now I'm a pretty huge Apple II fan ("call -151" and "PR#6" always come to mind...) but I completely understand why Apple gave up the Apple II after so many years.

      It was a great machine. But it was an evaporating market after 1985, and the fact that Apple kept it up until 1993 is nothing short of incredible.

      And remember: By 1990 all of the other non-Intel PC architectures had failed. C64, Amiga, TRS-80, Rainbow, anything CP/M, AT&T, Atari, and all the others were dead. The fact that Apple kept it going until '93 is nothing short of amazing.

      Hell, even the old Mac LC came with an Apple II compatability card.

  10. "This Website is powered by PostNuke" by richcoder · · Score: 3, Funny

    What a bad place for this notice on this website. I know where to go if I want a server that can't stand the heat.

    -rich

  11. Flops, big deal! by mOoZik · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Any company that challenges the state of technology at any given time has to have flops. Hell, ANY business that strives to push the boundary has to have flops. Has MS had flops? Yep. Has GE? Yep. But the underlying strength of any company is how it deals with those flops, how it changes direction, how it survives, and how it kicks ass in the long run. However, the list would be interesting to see...though it's not loading for me.

  12. Two words... by tattoi.nobori · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Microsoft Bob.

    (For every Cube Apple produces, Microsoft is happy to come back with a Windows ME or MS Passport. At least with Apple, the flagship OS doesn't kick you in the jewels every time you sit down to use it. ^_^)

  13. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by realdpk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just think it's a bit sad to concentrate on someone's failures.

    I think if you were to look over the last few years of posts on slashdot, regarding Apple, you'd see that "we" have been concentrating on their successes, with very few exceptions. I don't think an article that will probably generate interest for a few hours will do Apple's rep any harm.

  14. Thank goodness for the flops by jockm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because the only way you can innovate and try and make better is by getting out there and trying risky things and learning from your mistakes. I applaud any company willing go out and try these things.

    --

    What do you know I wrote a novel
  15. Here is a picture of the Apple ///. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.mynewoffice.com/pcmuseum/AppleIII_336.j pg

    You have to admit that it is cool looking. Weird-ass keyboard (why make a numerical keyboard with just subtraction?!), but cool looking.

    1. Re:Here is a picture of the Apple ///. by realdpk · · Score: 4, Funny

      Weird-ass keyboard (why make a numerical keyboard with just subtraction?!), but cool looking.

      More buttons would confuse users. You can perform any basic arithmetic operation with that keypad *.

      Subtraction? x, -, y, ENTER.
      Addition? x, -, -, y, ENTER.
      Multiplication? 4, -, -, 4, -, -, 4, (... so on ...) ENTER.

      So much less complicated than our "modern computers" with our * and / and + keys.

      * Not including division.

  16. Cube "Cracks" by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I dunno, I honestly thought the cube "cracks" could take the place of something as lame as the asinine iMac colors.

    For those who don't remember, the Cubes would occasionally develop these "cracks," for lack of a better term. IIRC, owners started to see hairline fissures slowly appear underneath the ploycarbonate surface. Apple played it off by saying it added to the "personality" of the cubes, since each set of cracks was unique.

    Heck, I love the cubes and I'd probably put them in that blunder list; if Apple could've figured out a way to make them a bit more powerful or a bit cheaper, they may have been succesful. As it was, their exorbitant pricing simply reinforced the notion that "macs are too expensive."

    1. Re:Cube "Cracks" by ztirffritz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm a Plastic Engineer. Those cracks are not so easy to eliminate. On a molded 2 cm thick piece of PolyCarbonate, it is very difficult eliminate internal stresses. It can be done, but the cycle times on the molding process probably would be measured in hours instead of minutes or seconds. If they had introduced a heavily "cracked" model of the Cube they probably could have gotten away with saying it was "character marks". All that they would have to do is spead up the cycle time and build in some more internal stresses. Pop a piping hot piece of plastic into a tank of ice water and then build a computer in it! I think that it would have looked cool.

      --
      Why doesn't anything interesting happen when I have mod points?
  17. Article text, links & images intact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Posted anonymously to avoid whoring karma!!

    --

    Top 10 Apple Flops

    Though Apple computer is known for some of the computing and technology industry's most notable innovations, its not as if the company hasn't also taken its lumps. Thomas Hormby submitted the following editorial contribution to osOpinion/osViews, which supplies us with his top ten list of Apple's (and some of associated partners) most significant flops throughout the company's history.

    [Image] Apple and its compatriots have been highly innovative. These companies have proven that even if their ideas are well implemented, they cannot always promote them correctly. Other times, a good idea is implemented poorly, and despite their best marketing effort, the product fails. I have compiled 10 of the most notable products released by Apple or its comrades that have failed.

    Apple Pippin

    [Image] Introduced under Spindler's rule as CEO, the Pippin should have won Apple a position in the console market, one Apple had yet to penetrate. Apple's goal was to make the Pippin a multimedia machine, capable of reading CD ROMs, surfing the internet and to play games.

    Apple had decided to share the Pippin's source code with developers for a licensing fee. The developers had a lot more flexibility, and would be able to redesign the Pippin's software to make it attractive for any number of markets. However, Apple was able to recruit only 4500 developers willing to pay the licensing fee.

    The operating system of the Pippin was based on the MacOS and with a PowerPC 603 running at 66 MHZ, the Pippin used a similar processor to desktop macs at that time. Being a multimedia machine, the Pippin was capable of producing CD quality sound, and displaying up to thousands of colors. With the powerful Power PC processor, Apple thrashed Nintendo and Sega consoles performance wise, but never won a sizable portion of the market.

    OpenDoc

    [Image] The concept behind OpenDoc is an intuitive one. Many elements of applications are redundant (calculators, multimedia players, spreadsheets). Why not 'cut them up' and use different modules interchangeably. Each file would then make calls on these different modules as needed. With OpenDoc, if a user wished to create a word processor document that includes a spreadsheet, the user would not have to copy it over as a table, or use a gimped up version included with the word processor. Instead, they could call up the ClarisWorks for OpenDoc Spreadsheet module and have a full-blown spreadsheet in the middle of a word processing document.

    OpenDoc development started in 1995 in collaboration with Novell, IBM and Apple. In 1997, Apple integrated OpenDoc into its core strategy, releasing several OpenDoc apps, and including the technology in Mac OS 7.6. At the same time, the technology was being developed for Windows and UNIX. The companies created the Ci Labs which would authorize OpenDoc components that proved to be compatible as Live Objects.

    In accordance to Apple's vision, it became possible with the OpenDoc compatible version of ClarisWorks to create a document that integrated various OpenDoc modules. The example below has an integrated Video Conferencing session with QuickTime, a browser frame from CyberDog and a graph from another OpenDoc module.

    Since 1996, Novell has ceased Windows development of OpenDoc, forcing IBM to take on responsibilities for the platform at the same time they continued development on their AIX (UNIX from IBM). The two versions both evolved and were mature commercial products in 1997. There were problems for OpenDoc, however. At the same time, Microsoft released ann updated version of OLE, and released ActiveX, that closely mimicked the OpenDoc principles. OpenDoc was embraced by major OS developers, but it had

    1. Re:Article text, links & images intact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Thanks for the article text, but damn, you are distrubing to be including a hidden "Kill Michael" message there! (For those that didn't notice, look up all the random italicized bits.)

  18. Question... by physicsphairy · · Score: 4, Funny
    Just how many floating point operations is an Apple flop?

    I'll need to know this information before I can top one, much less ten of them!

  19. An overlooked flop by overbyj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    was really the whole Performa line of computers. At the time the Performa's were aimed at the home user and overall they were a decent computer. But the flop part was the fact that there were something like 8,000 different versions! (Of course, I am exaggerating, but only by a little bit.)

    I remember going to OfficeDepot and looking at the Performas and they along had like six different models with six different model numbers. Something like 6510, 6511, 6512, 6514, 6515, etc. (I know the actual numbers were different. These are to illustrate my point.) There were just very subtle differences between the models but for whatever reason, it warranted a different number. Basically it was a nightmare trying to remember what was the difference between any two numbers. That whole scheme of trying to provide a range of configurations was a flop. Fortunately, Steve undid that and cut down the product line into four basic models. I, for one, welcomed that.

    --
    No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
  20. Re:Always liked the Tangerine iMac by linuxbert · · Score: 4, Funny

    I was once an admin for a mac only company. they ran Eudora mail sever on a tangerine imac. they ran it on a tangerine imac beacuse nobody in the office wanted that color on their desk.

    I also once worked for a Mac retailer. 2 guys walked off with a tangerine ibook. the one question i had for my co-workers working at the time was how did you not notice them stealing a bright orange laptop. anyway, i doubt they were able to resell it :)

  21. Link to other version of article by mgkimsal2 · · Score: 4, Informative
  22. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by mister_tim · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, if you RTFA, the author appears to be an Apple fan; I quote:
    "Thomas Hormby is a high school student in Nashville, Tennessee. He maintains two Mac history websites, http://www.mlagazine.com and http://www.macreate.net."

    So, it's not so much Apple bashing (although the editorial by-line does make it appear that way) as much as it is a look at some of the ideas that flopped: some were very good ideas not well implemented, others were just ahead of their time, and some were jsut bad ideas (e.g. Word 6.0 for Mac from Microsoft). Oh yeah, not every comment in there is against Apple - some of them are about Apple-related products.

  23. Mirror by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 4, Informative

    Macreate.net
    This may be /.'d fast, but it's here as well!

    --

    ----
    Go canucks, habs, and sens!
  24. 10 flops? by slavemowgli · · Score: 5, Funny

    10 FLOPS? Come on, guys, even my pocket calculator does more than that. :)

    --
    quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
  25. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Still ... Apple was one of the early leaders, one who made some absolutely bone-headed mistakes that cost them the lead. Granted, Apple is one of the few survivors from the start of the personal computer revolution, a revolution littered with dead products and companies: the Commodore Pet, 64, Amiga, Ohio Scientific, Southwest Technical Products, Atari's 400 and 800, Franklin, the PC Jr., the various Radio Shack toys and many more ... all gone. But given the fact that Apple was there at the beginning (hell, the Apple ][ defined the PC revolution) they really should have come out on top, with Bill Gates relegated to the status of proud owner of a fifth-rate CPM clone. Bill Gates even told them how to do it! But between Jobs, Scully and Markkula, Apple failed to capitalize on their head start.

    Frankly, I'm still pissed at Apple for abandoning the Apple //e the way they did. About a year after the original Mac came out, I called up to order a replacement gate array for a //e motherboard. The person I spoke to wouldn't acknowledge that Apple Computer had ever manufactured an Apple Computer and instead recommended that I buy a Mac. They basically just dropped an entire product line and alienated a whole lot of users, many of whom promptly bought an IBM PC or compatible. So, yes, I think it is fair to slam Apple's decisions over the years. They're where they are now (a highly competent technically, but basically marginal player) because they blew it and left the market to Gates and the IBM-compatibles.

    And don't even get me started on the Apple //c.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  26. Re:"Apples == expensive" not a stereotype by Leo+McGarry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Virginia Tech did.

  27. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by geoffspear · · Score: 3, Funny

    Great... someone who wasn't alive in 1984 is running two sites about Mac history?

    --
    Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  28. Re:Limits of Innovation by oldwolf13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm no fan of apple (I do like them, just not all their fanbois... same thing as linux, and to a lesser degree, windows)

    But my guess is three things... PRICE and PIRACY.

    Apple boxes are way too high priced for what you get, IMHO and the opinions of ALOT of people... if I can do the same thing on a PC for half the price, I will). Even their high end systems, are not high end by my standards... I mean if I'm paying close to $3000 (CND money) for a machine, I expect it to have a better video card then a Radeon 9600 (currently i have a 9800 pro which cost me $400 CND.. the whole machine it's in .. Athlon XP 2800+ probably cost me $1200... with monitor)

    Geek factor.. even tho I hate the term geek, nerd is much better. I prefer to build my own machines, even tho it's not very exciting anymore as I've done it a billion times, I prefer to chose every piece that is going into it.

    Piracy... who here knows someone (besides a company) that pays for all their software? Piracy is accepted by most people as a worthwhile risk. It's much harder to find "warez" for the macs then for pcs. Incidently, I believe this is also a contributing factor as why Windows has the monopoly... both pirating of their OS, and of the apps for it. Kinda funny how MS is trying to fight it now.

    Also, I have never met anyone who bought a mac to throw Linux on... altho I know it is possible. Yet friends of mine, and myself included, have bought machines specifically for linux (or BSD)

    --
    If I can't smoke and swear I'm fucked.
  29. Re:Limits of Innovation by dr.badass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If Apple is really the brains of the industry--if its products are so much better than Microsoft's or Dell's or IBM's or Hewlett-Packard's--then why is the company so damned small?

    Does the size of a company determine the quality of it's product?
    Does the quality of a product determine it's company's size?

    If you answer yes to either of those questions, you're out of your fucking mind.

    I'd also like to point out that the year-old article you're linking to predicts that the iPod will be crushed by competitors such as the Dell DJ "selling for as little as $299", that the iTunes Music Store will be crushed by Wal-Mart, Microsoft, and Sony, and that it will take "at least a year" for Apple to sell 100 million songs. None of these things are even remotely true.

    --
    Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
  30. My Top...err, Bottom Ten List. by ktakki · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The osviews.com site is a smoking hole in the ground, so I have no idea what Thomas Hormby's list looks like. But I have my own list. It's been twenty years since I bought my first Mac (512K), and I'm probably going to order a Mac Mini this week; in between I've owned over a dozen different models. I love Apple, but I'd be the first to admit that they haven't been without problems over the years. So, here's my list of fuckups that came out of 1 Infinte Loop, Cupertino, CA:

    1. 128K in the original Mac - Even in a world where an operating system, a couple of applications, and all of your documents could fit on a 400K floppy, 128KB of RAM was still not enough. Fortunately, the Mac shipped with 512KB less than a year after its introduction.
    2. Service problems in the early '90s - Quality problems, particularly with LaserWriters, were endemic for a while, and Apple's support during this period was less than stellar. It took years before Apple even began to shake off its reputation for poor customer service.
    3. LCII - I didn't really want to single out one model, but the LCII was the only Mac I absolutely hated. It barely had enough power to run the Finder.
    4. System 7.6 - A System that stayed around long past its sell-by date. All the dithering about Copeland as a potential replacement didn't help things much, and its replacement (System 8) was little more than a stop-gap measure (like Windows ME).
    5. Holding on to ADB/NuBus too long - I never really saw what advantage ADB had over the PS/2 mouse/keyboard interface other than vendor lock-in (I think only one other peripheral - a modem - used this interface). NuBus did have advantages over ISA, but the move to PCI could have happened a year or two earlier.
    6. Some outrageous prices during the '90s - This was where the Mac got its "overpriced" reputation. I recall that the list price for a Quadra 950 was close to $10,000. It wasn't always like this: I bought my first Mac 512K because it was nearly $1,000 less than the equivalent PC/XT clone (and the peripheral I needed, a MIDI interface, was less than $100, less than half what an MPU-401 for a PC cost).
    7. Begun the Clone Wars Have. - Now you see 'em, now you don't. The conventional wisdom was that Apple wanted the clonemakers to stake out the low end of the market, leaving the high-margin high end market to Apple. But Radius and Power Computing had other ideas.
    8. John Scully - 'nuff said.
    9. Mutant Macs (Cube, 20th Anniversary Mac, Color Classic, Portable) - Not everything that emerges from 1 Infinite Loop is to die for. Well, some are to die for (Cube) but stink up the marketplace. I think every manufacturer is allowed to make an Edsel now and again.
    10. Copeland - All that work for what?


    What, you were expecting one button mouse to be here?

    k.
    --
    "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
  31. Re:Apple ///, no. Apple SOS, yes. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, the Apple /// was a fairly unsuccessful small business computer system. Remarkably so, although by rights it should have been a runaway success as it addressed all the business-related issues that had been plaguing the Apple ][ series from the beginning. Improved keyboard, cool enclosure, decent display, faster CPU .. pretty slick actually. Honestly, the Apple /// should have eclipsed the IBM PC ... it was there first, had the applications, an actual Business BASIC and backwards compatibility with the older Apple ][ software. What killed it was the initial (and well-deserved) bad rap it got for being unreliable (as well as pricey.) At the time (1980) I was working as a service tech for a local computer store, and the early units I serviced were flaky as hell. Hardly suitable for a home machine much less a business system. Furthermore, initial production runs had a defective real-time clock (great idea, Apple was again ahead of its time) chip. It wasn't until the IBM AT came out that IBM had a built-in hardware RTC. Anyway, Apple did eventually fix the problems with the Apple ///+, but by then it was too late ... it was considered a flop. A few months later the original IBM PC was released (I was sent to IBM sales/service school in Boca Raton the week before the official unveiling) and that sounded the death knell for the Apple ///.

    But, yeah. SOS was kinda weird.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  32. II GS by meehawl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    don't even get me started on the Apple //c.

    Don't forget the II GS. That was a killer machine with sound processing to die for. When it was released it made the available Macs look a bit weak (I think all there was available was the 128/512K models, the Mac Plus, and the Lisa/MacXL). All monochrome, very dull, totally unexpandable. Very pricey!

    People who say that Apple's rot began when Jobs was fired miss the point. Jobs had managed to convince the execs (both regulars and the people who replaced him) that the II line was dead as a dodo and they should focus on the Mac. So Apple did, basically letting their mindshare evaporate within the personal and education markets. Apple had an extremely strong position but managed the transition to Mac very badly, or in fact failed to manage it at all. The II died from neglect.

    One reason lots of other companies that emerged as PC makers in the 80s went on to massively outgrow Apple (think, Compaq...) is that they managed their transition from the 8/16 bit IBM PC through lots of architecture and CPU generations without suddenly dropping support for their existing customer base or alientating them completely. That kind of demonstrated lack of commitment to preserve existing relationships is why so many companies and purchasers found and find it hard to trust Apple, or to believe that its direction or strategy will endure past a few quarters.

    Apple has always had problems as a company splitting its focus between different product lines. Witness the prolonged dullness and fading away of the Mac line the past few years as the iPod has obsessed the one-track-mind of Jobs.

    The best thing for Apple the *computer* company right now might be to spin off or float iPod as a separate division, much as 3Com spun off Palm. use the massive cash raised to do something exciting for the computer line like, I don't know, buy Sun or something! Apple would then be selling both low-end, mid-range, and high-end Unix products!

    Or given undercurrent of US regulatory resistance to Lenovo's purchase of IBM's PC business, why not buy that? An Apple-IBM PC combination would easily pass regulatory hurdles, and uniting two premium brands might work quite well. And of course, the ironic denoument would be priceless.

    --

    Da Blog
    1. Re:II GS by Jonathan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Problem was when they dropped it, a whole bunch of Apple customers got marooned. It would have been much smarter to get those schoolkids on the Macintosh platform from the very beginning.

      Without a time machine that would have been impossible. The successful days of Apple in education were pre-Mac. They basically ruled the education market in the early to mid 1980's. Logically, if they had wanted to keep the market, they should have maintained the ][ series rather than launching an incompatible computer. There's no real reason why we couldn't have 3Ghz 32-bit descendants of the 6502 today.

    2. Re:II GS by iamacat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Research people were just short-sighted. Obviously, Apple's existing products were not suitable for corporation, but nobody can say that they couldn't possibly develop any new product that would take off. And at that time, if you wanted to do the coolest stuff, you had to do it on expensive workstations first and then trickle down to consumer market as hardware became cheaper.

      After Steve Jobs left Apple, he started NeXT which was obviously oriented towards both big and small business. In the meantime Apple stagnated and didn't revive until he came back and ported NeXTStep to Mac hardware.

      If he wasn't kicked out from Apple, NeXT would no doubt have Mac application compatibility. Then Apple would be the only company with UNIX workstations that also run all popular personal computer apps. Sun and Microsoft would be in deep trouble. And by '95, Apple would run NextStep on consumer Macs and Microsoft wouldn't have any product with unique advantages to grab 90%+ market share.

    3. Re:II GS by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I bought an Apple //e in 1983; four-digit serial number. So I watched events closely. I was tempted to get the motherboard replacement to upgrade the //e to a //GS, but I never decided the cost would be worth it.

      The mac turnaround came with the LaserWriter and the "Fat Mac" (Mac 512) in 1985. By Autumn of 1986, when the IIGS came out, the Mac was well-established as the graphics machine. MacDraw was incredible. The page layout programs (_Ready,_Set,_Go!_, 1-2-3, PageMaker) and the LaserWriter had already created a new industry. Yes, they were pricey.

      By 1987, it was clear that the 65816 processor would never develop "legs". Apple, by itself, was too small to keep Western Design Center in business and making competitive processors. The IIGS was 2.8 MHz; the Macintosh was 8 MHz. And the 68000 wasn't just Apple's: Atari, Amiga, Apollo, and Sun were also using 68000s.

      The Mac system architecture was clean, with plenty of room to grow. Only minor tweaks were needed to enable memory to grow past 8 Megabytes (the "32-bit clean" issue with Applications and firmware in ROMs) when a 1 MB machine was big, and PCs were still struggling to get past 640K. The IIGS couldn't grow like that. GS/OS was clearly porting Mac technologies back to the IIGS.

      The Apple //e was EOL'ed in 1993 and the IIGS was EOL'ed in 1992. So the claim that the Apple II series supported Mac R&D into the late 1990s is uninformed.

  33. Re:I Thought You Were Talking About OS News! by trixy_1086 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I read a link to the story yesterday off of OSNews, and it was damn slow even then. It wasn't so much critical of apple as it was pointing out alot of cool things that never came to fruition, Copland having a huge emphasis. I didn't take it so much as flops as I did "here's a list of cool little known items".

  34. Word 6 by steveha · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the article:

    The new manager decided to just use WinWord 2.0's code-base on the Mac.

    Not quite correct. I worked there around that time.

    The decision was to use the same source code to build both Windows and Mac versions.

    With Pyramid, the goal was to make a word processor that would be carefully designed: back end universal, front end specific to each supported OS (which would be Windows, MacOS, and possibly OS/2 PM). When Pyramid didn't work out as well as they hoped, they decided to take the Windows source code and build it for MacOS.

    Rather than running wild with #ifdef statements and trying to make a native Mac interface, they used a compatibility library. IIRC this was called WLM (Windows Layer for Macintosh). It was not unlike the "winelib" library.

    Because both Windows Word and Mac Word were compiled from the same source code, the two products became fully compatible. This was a major leap in features for the Mac Word product. Previous versions of Mac Word had been much smaller and faster, but they were also missing features compared to Windows Word, which meant that file compatibility was not 100%. (You can't import a file, and then export that file with edits, if your word processor does not support all the features that file uses!)

    Business users were much happier with Mac Word 6 because of the file compatibility. Home users, students, and magazine reporters tended to be annoyed about the slower speed of Word 6 compared to the older versions. There was a bug that made the "word count" feature particularly slow, and Microsoft caught a lot of heat from the press because magazine reporters tend to care a lot about word counts.

    As for it being a top 10 flop, I disagree. I don't think you can reasonably call it a failure. From Mac Word 6 onward, every version of Word for the Mac has had good feature compatibility with Windows Word, and of course Macs got faster and got more RAM. And Microsoft wasn't making enough money on the Mac version to continue to support a complete extra development team with its own code base.

    And by the way, the Mac developers I knew at Microsoft all really loved the Mac and wanted to make good software for it. You can accuse Microsoft of not caring about the Mac, or grudgingly writing code for it, but it's not true.

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  35. Apple flops? No Newton? by Latent+Heat · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Gee, what about the Newton? Was that such a big flop that people don't even remember it to make the list?

    The Newton was a Palm Pilot before there was a Palm Pilot, and it was supposed to have handwriting recognition, but it didn't live up to expectations. The breakthrough of the Palm was that you had to relearn your handwriting in this gestures thing the computer could understand.

  36. A special flop the Slashdot crowd will appreciate: by sakusha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    OK, here's a REAL flop that is so obscure, I bet that 99.9% of Macheads never heard of it, even if they were Mac users at the time it shipped:

    A/UX, the first Unix OS for Mac.

    A/UX included special battery support for the Macintosh Portable (yeah, the first portable, the flop, the really heavy one that used lead-acid batteries) and also had sleep support, which was totally unheard of at that time.

    I took a certification class in A/UX, and the Apple guys told me they didn't seriously expect to sell many units, the product only existed to fulfill requirements for government sales that specified a Unix OS must be available for any personal computer CPU being requisitioned. Nevermind that the users never intended to USE Unix, the bids were rigged against Macs by specifying Unix must be available, and it wasn't, so that meant Macs were disqualified from bids and only PCs would be considered. But Apple won back some major government business by meeting this petty requirement. Cost em a bundle though.

  37. Apple's Great Quality Meltdown by Shannon+Love · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A list of Apple's greatest mistakes must include the company wide product quality failure that occurred under Michael Spindler (*spit*).

    Every major product shipped in late 95-early 96 under Spindler (*spit*) had a major flaw requiring recall or replacement.

    System 7.5, the 6200 logic board, the plastics on the Powerbook 5300, flaming batteries on powerbooks, video cables on several all-in-one models, and many other flaws. I worked in Apple Tech support at the time and it was hell.

    These were not failures of design but they were severe failures in execution, specifically Spindler's (*spit*) dismantling of all quality control groups and procedures within the company. The "Great Quality Implosion", as veterans call it, would have killed any normal company. Only Apple's near fanatical consumer base saved the company.

    1. Re:Apple's Great Quality Meltdown by MacDaffy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The breakup of the quality organization happened under Sculley's watch. I know 'cause I got in trouble for opposing it. I was part of the centralized group that rode herd over Apple quality until the breakup happened. Everything new that Apple made was tossed into this group and tested for compatibility with existing Apple products and with third-party products. It was a great job because it afforded the chance to be the first person in the world to try something.

      The group wasn't composed entirely of geeks--most of them were smart, talented diligent people who knew their products and loved working at Apple. The advantages of it are readily apparent: Economies of scale... independence... cross-training... centralized quality information for management, engineering and marketing... It was an excellent idea and an excellent group.

      I pointed this out in an email to John Sculley when the breakup was proposed. He answered me, said that the points I brought up were good ones that hadn't been raised to him before and asked if I minded if he took it up with the responsible managers.

      Next thing I knew, I was in a small conference room with five layers of management and HR suggesting that I might want to forget my objections and shut the hell up. The breakup went through and quality took a nosedive for a while.

      However, the people from that group were dispersed throughout the company. As time went on, they gained control of their own quality organizations. By the time Steve Jobs returned, he had seasoned, knowledgeable, dedicated quality people throughout the company. Many of them are still there.

  38. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by raehl · · Score: 4, Funny

    If he called them sites about ancient Mac history, would that make you feel better? Or worse?

  39. Re:PDP line? by trb · · Score: 3, Informative
    Yep, the biz about the 68k being used in the "PDP line" of computers a decade before 1983 is clueless. The 68000 came out around 1980. The PDP line wasn't a homogeneous thing anyway, there were PDP-10 mainframes, PDP-11 minis, and PDP-8 smaller/cheaper minis, and they were certainly not based on microprocessors in the '70's. I guess the LSI-11 (around 1975) was DEC's first single-board computer, but it didn't have a single chip CPU.

    PDP-10 rules!

  40. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah. In other news, history professors who weren't alive during Rome's heyday are writing textbooks about ancient Roman civilization.

    In further new, my history prof actually WAS alive during Greece's heyday. Or at least he looked it.

  41. Also, it might have been for the best by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 5, Funny


    If the 'horror stories' are true, having an unmellowed Steve Jobs raise a child during its formative years might not have been such a good thing.

    "Daddy, I drew a pony!"
    "Pony? That looks like a lizard. This is shit. You're fired."
    "Daddy, you can't fire me."
    "Then learn to draw."

    --
    September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
  42. Re:A special flop the Slashdot crowd will apprecia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The "government contract" angle might have had something to do with the birth of A/UX but I really doubt that was the only reason they built it. They continued to improve it for years - later versions were really quite nice. The documentation was also wonderful - probably the best set of printed manuals I've ever received with a UNIX distribution. Oh and running MacOS apps under it actually worked pretty well.

    I definately think they tried to make a go of it. It just didn't work.

    I think what killed it was the bang-for-the-buck problem. The serious UNIX users were running on RISC-based workstations far more powerful than a Mac. The cheapskates were running UNIX on PC's (SCO and its many competitors at the time). There just didn't seem to be a market for a UNIX box that was expensive and slow. Maybe if they had brought A/UX along when they moved to PowerPC it could have finally caught some traction.

    Then there was Apple's 2nd foray into UNIX -- the Apple Network Server back in 1996. It was an Apple machine designed to run IBM's AIX. I think it was available for about 5 minutes before they cancelled the project - one of Apple's most impressive flops.

    They also had mkLinux which was pretty cool (linux with, IIRC, a 1.3 kernel running under Mach on powermacs) I actually used this for quite awhile - I still have a 8100 that can boot it. The project never really went anywhere... I'm not sure if I can call it a "flop" since it was never an official product though.

    Apple's fourth foray into UNIX seems to be working out better for them, though :-)

  43. Re:Limits of Innovation by HuguesT · · Score: 3, Informative

    I wouldn't say Mac gaming is non-existent. If you are not dying to play the latest titles you can find many decent games on Macs, but they are pricy.

    Mac game typically come out one year after their PC equivalent, cost the same as the PC version when it was first shipped, and don't come down in price very fast.

    It's almost impossible to find games for Macs on shelves even at Apple stores (they usually have a few token ones). You need to buy them online.

    However a few publishers do have Mac-PC games in the same box like for the Myst series.

    As for Linux the situation is not very good. Of recent memory only the Neverwinter and the ID games series have been good on Linux. The rest must be run through Cedega/WineX, and this is *hard*.

    Neither Linux or Mac games are a patch on the Windows scene, and that one is being overtaken by consoles at the moment.

  44. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by Moofie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Uh huh. I had one of those beige boxes, and that PC card. (It wasn't PCI, it was Processor Direct). Great card: I played Wing Commander III on it years before the Mac version shipped. It worked beautifully.

    I liked Apple then. I like them better now. Go Steve Go.

    --
    Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  45. Re:A special flop the Slashdot crowd will apprecia by sakusha · · Score: 3, Informative

    ha.. I also have an old 8100 that's loaded with mkLinux, it's sitting about 3 feet from my desk right now, haven't booted it up in years.

    I think what really killed A/UX was MAE, the Mac Application Environment for Unix, which was how you got Mac apps running on A/UX. I think I recall it ran on other platforms like SUN. There was a lot of pressure to release it on more platforms, which Apple definitely did NOT want to do. The last thing Apple ever wanted was to see a Mac GUI running on Intel hardware, and that's where they saw it going.

    Now if you want a REALLY obscure Apple Unix, here's one: SCO Xenix for Lisa. I actually configured and delivered one to a client. He had a custom written accounting package, he got a serial I/O board and hung 4 dumb terminals off the Lisa, and had 5 working terminals (including the Lisa) to do data entry. I just couldn't believe it when I saw the Lisa boot up to a command line and run Unix. After seeing the Lisa's distinctive white screen with black type for so long, seeing white text on a dark Lisa screen was like staring into a black hole.

  46. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by TheOldFart · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Aston Martins, mamma mini-vans, and red-neck giant tires stupid trucks all serve the same purpose. They take you from point A to point B. There is a distinction between tasteful design, practical, and just bad taste. It's irrelevant if you cannot afford it. Just recognize the distinction.

  47. Re:Apple's biggest failure by Detritus · · Score: 4, Insightful
    And Henry Ford was a jerk for not putting gas turbine engines in the Model T.

    The original Mac ran on a 68000. A slow 16/32-bit processor with no MMU or support for VM. It also had limited memory.

    There is nothing wrong with assembly language or cooperative scheduling, if you are willing to take the time to do it well and in a disciplined manner.

    The Mac team did their best with what was available at a reasonable cost. I'm not going to blame them for decisions that were suboptimal on processors that would not exist for many years.

    If you wanted a Xerox workstation, they were available, at stratospheric prices.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  48. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by bsartist · · Score: 3, Informative

    That was pretty much Moofie's point - all of the things you mentioned were done after Jobs was fired, and before he was re-hired.

    --
    Lost: Sig, white with black letters. No collar. Reward if found!
  49. Buried in a field? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The author is rather given to hyperbole. The remaining Lisa computers (rumored to be 2700, although there doesn't seem to be any evidence for the exact number) were gutted and buried in Utah's Logan Landfill - hardly a "field".

    Nor do I believe that 16.7 pounds would be sufficient for the average aircraft tray table to "snap under the weight" - if they were, airlines would be regularly repairing them every time a passenger accidentally leaned their body weight against an extended tray table when avoiding the in-flight service cart.

  50. One technical Apple failure by NeuroManson · · Score: 4, Informative

    The @world Pippin. Basically a PPC 603 Mac, custom designed as a videogame console with net capabilities. in conjunction with Bandai. Barely sold enough in Japan, barely registered a blip in America. Considering it was released in 1995 and surpassed the Playstation in computing and graphical capabilities, it was definately ahead of its time, but miles behind decent marketing.

    http://assembler.roarvgm.com/Apple_Bandai_pippin /a pple_bandai_pippin.html

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  51. Re:"Apples == expensive" not a stereotype by wan-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Averatec 3200 series. http://www.averatec.com/notebooks/3200series.htm

    My dad got one for $999 with DVD burner, 80gb HD, etc.

    Not only is this laptop sub-1000$, it specs closely to the Mac and is a much better deal than the 12" iBook. In fact, I bought one myself when I was shopping for a laptop and even w/ the Apple education discount, the Averatec was a better deal.

  52. Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up by distributed · · Score: 3, Interesting
    infact this reminds me.... just a few days ago i came across this page on wikipedia, when browsing for the apple Newton portable.

    Failed_Apple_initiatives

    atleast they learn from their mistakes unlike other wellknown companies.

    its pretty aptly titled.. could have made a better post than this one (which has anyway been slashdotted so i havent seen it yet).
    btw how well does wikipedia take to slashdotting ?

    vik

    --
    [all generalizations are untrue except this one]
  53. Taking Risks by Tassach · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Apple is a company that takes risks. They build products based on what their engineers and designers come up with, not with what the marketroids and focus groups say will sell.

    Sometimes, as with the iPod, they come up with the right product at the right time and win big. However, sometimes they get there too early: the Newton was ahead of it's time and much better than the other first generation PDAs, but people just weren't ready to buy them yet.

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  54. the gravity thing by hawk · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's also hard to sell a machine to businesses when part of standard maintenance on it was to lift it two inches from the desk and drop it--especially when that suggestion came from the manufacturor (it caused the RAM chips to reseat).

    hawk

  55. Whole text mirrored here by BTWR · · Score: 3, Informative

    Apple Pippin

    Introduced under Spindler's rule as CEO, the Pippin sould have won Apple a position in the console market, one Apple had yet to penetrate. Apple's goal was to make the Pippin a multimedia machine, capable of reading CD ROMs, surfing the internet and to play games.

    Apple had decided to share the Pippin's source code with developers for a licensing fee. The developers had a lot more flexibility, and would be able to redesign the Pippin's software to make it attractive for any number of markets. However, Apple was able to recruit on 4500 developers willing to pay the licensing fee.

    The operating system of the Pippin was based on the MacOS. With a PowerPC 603 running at 66 MHZ, the Pippin used a similar processor to desktop macs. Being a multimedia machine, the Pippin was capable of producing CD quality sound, and displaying up to thousands of colors. With the powerful Power PC processor, Apple thrashed Nintendo and Sega consoles performance wise, but never won a sizeable portion of the market.

    OpenDoc

    The concept behind OpenDoc is an intuitive one. Many elements of applications are redundant (calculators, multimedia players, spreadsheets). Why not 'cut them up' and use different modules interchangeably. Each file would then make calls on these different modules as needed. With OpenDoc, if a user wishes to create a word processor document that includes a spreadsheet, the user would not have to copy it over as a table, or use a gimped up version included with the word processor, instead they could call up the ClarisWorks for OpenDoc Spreadsheet module and have a full blown spreadsheet in the middle of a word processing document.

    OpenDoc development started in 1995 in collaboration with Novell, IBM and Apple. In 1997, Apple integrated OpenDoc into its core strategy, releasing several OpenDoc apps, and including the technology in Mac OS 7.6. At the same time, the technology was being developed for Windows and UNIX. The companies created the Ci Labs which would authorize OpenDoc components that proved to be compatible as "Live Objects".

    In accordance to Apple's vision, it became possible with the OpenDoc compatible version of ClarisWorks to create a document that integrated various OpenDoc modules. The example below has an integrated VideoConferencing session with QuickTime, a browser frame from CyberDog and a graph from another OpenDoc module.

    Since 1996, Novell has ceased Windows development of OpenDoc, forcing IBM to take on responsibilities for the platform at the same time they continued development on their AIX (UNIX from IBM). The two versions both evolved and were mature commerical products in 1997. There were problems for OpenDoc, however. At the same time, Microsoft released ann updated version of OLE, and released ActiveX, that closely mimicced the OpenDoc principles. OpenDoc was embraced by major OS developers, but it had failed to attract third party developers. Mac OS 8 was the last release from Apple to include OpenDoc, and it was quietly killed at the hands of Gil Amelio.

    Mac TV

    Apple was the first major personal computer manufacturer to release a machine with a bundled TV tuner to the public. The Macintosh TV was Apple's first effort in merging the home theater and personal computer. The machine was also one of the only two black Macs ever made (the second being a special edition 5400 sold only in Europe)..
    The Macintosh TV was first envisioned as a tenth anniversary Mac, but it was eventually cancelled. After the unexpected success of the Color Classic, John Sculley requested that a machine comparable to the Color Classic be made with a CD ROM drive and a 14" Trinitron CRT. The logic card was a slightly modified IIvx, Apple's midrange 68030 machine. The Macintosh TV was released on October 23, 1993, shortly after being resurrected.

    The new machine was designed to be low cost and have a small footprint. Its most notable features were its TV tuner card and remote control. The TV tuner code had RCA and coaxial inputs, allowing us