Slashdot Mirror
Remembering the Apple I
harrymcc writes "This month marks the 35th anniversary of Apple--and the 35th anniversary of the Apple I, its first computer. It was a single-board computer that was unimaginably more rudimentary than any modern Mac — it didn't even come with a case and keyboard standard — but in its design, sales and marketing, we can see the beginnings of the Apple approach that continues to this day. I'm celebrating with a look at this significant machine."
When Apple hardware was open. Apple ][ computers had their wiring diagram on the inside of the lid (which required no screws to open!). 8 slots, baby, *eight*, to fill with whatever you wanted. No voiding the warranty by opening it up, etc. I later went Amiga and didn't look back until recently. I got a nice ROM 03 Apple //gs on eBay, and even got a nice TransWarp GS card for it. Hot stuff! :)
Never was a fan of Macs. *shrug*
first!
fail.
Replica I
Wait a minute when was Linux written? Never mind.
Linux kernel 0.01 was released September 1991.
The other computers that could be purchased at that time had rows of LEDs and switches on their front panels, and they needed them. The Apple was quite sophisticated for a single board computer - Altair and IMSAI used that many ICs just to make a CPU chip talk to a bus.
The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
Article: 13 pages! Oh, good, some content!
10 words and a pic, NEXT. 13 words and a pic, NEXT. 10 words and a pic.
Close.
A winner is you!
Early Apples will be on display at the Vintage Computer Festival East 7.0, May 14-15, in New Jersey.
That's what you get when you keep the glorified salesman rather than the technical genius.
A successful company worth billions and a product others are still playing catchup with? Never mind NeXT with a computer ahead of it's time.
Considering the size of the wiring diagramS for my Osbourne, I'm kinda doubting that. Also my ][e had no such info. Clarification please? Like was it a block diagram for the slots 'n' ports or suchlike?
I have no idea - I couldn't then (and can't now) read wiring diagrams. *shrug* It was an Apple //e - the first version, not the later one with a numeric keypad.
(heresay following, I may be wrong) At one point Steve Jobs said it is cool for 3rd party developers to make applications. This flew in the face of other corporations at the time like ATARI and IBM who were trying to say,"Only the hardware manufacturer had the right to make applications" The world would be a much darker place if only hardware manufacturers could make applications for so many reasons I don't feel the need to list them here. In fact... some of the corporations are trying to backtrack on this today that,"Only some companies can make applications on their hardware."
God spoke to me.
Tom rules.
The Admin and the Engineer
http://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/processors/the-truth-about-benders-brain I didn't realize that Apple would be responsible for Bender's MOS 6502 brain. Apparently David X Cohen programmed assembly for the Apple ][ in high school.
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
so while Apple is turning 35, Linux will be turning 20 later this year.
The 6502 processor was fast, clean and easy to program. My first assembly programs were on it. The assembly language was simpler and almost as fast as Z-80, and the apple BIOS permitted much more elegant control of the screen. It was so nice, it persisted into the Vic 20s, a much newer machine with a tidier construction and layout.
The 6502 was eventually surpassed by the 6809, which lead into the notorious 8088 and then x86 range.
None of them beat the 6502 for intuitive assembly code. It was almost as clean as the PDP-11.
I had schematics for the ][ and the entire annotated source code for that and Apple DOS 3.2/3.3. And these weren't pirate, Apple happily published them. Woz was a freaking genius with how much he did with so little hardware.
You wanted to add lower case? Just run this wire here. Optionally bypass the write protect for floppies? Just put a three pole switch here. You want to extend the BASIC? Sure, here's these hooks (and Beagle Brothers made insane use of that).
The Apple I was the prototype for that and I salute it. I never had one, though of course now I wish I did!
Also funny how it's utterly unlike the Apple of today. I remember when the first Mac came out, completely unexpandable, and The Steve declared that it would never have more than 128K of RAM because that was more than enough for anyone. Which was ridiculous, because my Apple ][ had 16x that much already.
Yes I'm old.
... including the claim that its 16 bit address bus allowed expansion to 65K of memory. /me didn't realise the use of decimal rather than binary capacity multipliers in marketing claims was so old.
somebody IP ban this guy please, or at least mod him down...this crap does not fly here at /.
Why does a date entry device need a banner?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Bull-fucking-shit. My iMac came with a keyboard. Mac pros come with a keyboard. The only computers that don't come with a keyboard is the mac mini.
Considering the size of the wiring diagramS for my Osbourne, I'm kinda doubting that. Also my ][e had no such info. Clarification please? Like was it a block diagram for the slots 'n' ports or suchlike?
I have no idea - I couldn't then (and can't now) read wiring diagrams. *shrug* It was an Apple //e - the first version, not the later one with a numeric keypad.
Are you sure it wasn't a clone? There were NO Apple ][, ][+, //c, //e or IIgs computers with a schematic, block diagram, or anything else for that matter, on the lid, or anywhere else. Schematics were in the owner's manual (and I think that even disappeared with the //c or //e).
Of course Steve Jobs is more of a salesman than a geek. But even more so, he is a megalomaniac with a need to change the world. That's why he wouldn't leave Apple from something else if that would bring him more money per se, because the other thing has to be more world-changing than Apple can be.
Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
And Apple still does not provide a keyboard standard. You have to pay to get one. At least it comes with the case.
The only Apple computer that doesn't come with a keyboard is the Mac mini.
Stop trolling, fucktard.
Are you sure it wasn't a clone? There were NO Apple ][, ][+, //c, //e or IIgs computers with a schematic, block diagram, or anything else for that matter, on the lid, or anywhere else. Schematics were in the owner's manual (and I think that even disappeared with the //c or //e).
No, I'm sure it wasn't a clone, and who knows, I may be misremembering - I sold that thing in 1986 to buy an Amiga 500 (took that long to pay it off!). I don't know what else I would be thinking of - I certainly couldn't open my Amiga 500 (other than the little trap door in the bottom). *shrug* Who knows. I'm probably just getting senile. It's to the point where with my home projects, I want to check out even older tech than I once had - I want to get an old Altair 8800 or IMSAI 8080 to play with, and figure out how those monsters worked. Definitely before my time, but they look like a lot of fun. They are sadly expensive these days - so few are still working. :(
Considering the size of the wiring diagramS for my Osbourne, I'm kinda doubting that. Also my ][e had no such info. Clarification please? Like was it a block diagram for the slots 'n' ports or suchlike?
I have no idea - I couldn't then (and can't now) read wiring diagrams. *shrug* It was an Apple //e - the first version, not the later one with a numeric keypad.
We had Apple ][s at high school. I made a joystick for it by interfacing to an IC socket at the back of the motherboard. I don't recall where I got the information but I am certain it didn't come from google ;)
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Steve is not really selling so much, he is only selling at most ten days of the year and not even full days, in fact he spends most of the days running a company where he oversees design and production of both software and hardware, that is not the job of a salesman.
I do not think Steve Jobs would be happy doing whatever makes him rich, remember what he said to John Sculley in 1985 "Do you want to sell sugarwater the rest of your life, or do you want to come with me and change the world?" is a pretty strong indicator that Steve was not in it just to make money (but I wouldn't fault him if he saw money as something entirely positive). Jobs most likely sees himself as a visionary or an artist, perhaps even a philosopher, he probably is an "architect" archetype where he wants to leave a lasting legacy (see his Stanford Commencement speech where he hints at this).
I have an affinity for things I can tweak but I have to admit this represents a minority opinion and that sealed boxes make sense for typical users (cost reductions, simplified supply chain, etc).
Of course there are other good reasons for "closing the box"... The original Mac, the first iMac and several models in between had built-in CRTs and the associated high-voltage circuitry, so you really, really didn't want users poking their fingers inside.
Most subsequent consumer Macs have been "small form factor" (and usually much smaller form-factor than competing SFF computers). If you make something as tiny as the Mac Mini or a slim as a modern iMac, you're gonna end up with "no user servicable parts inside". The advantage for Apple is that ultra-slim systems can sell for a premium *useful if you're trying to develop your own platform), rather than trying to compete in the low-margin mini-tower and boxy laptop market.
As you point out, Apple tower systems are still clip-open (swapping drives or adding memory to a Mac Pro is a breeze).
The other thing is, the motive and opportunity for tinkering has reduced. In the 80s any self-respecting geek would have lost the lid of their computer and have all manner of internal expansion - even on systems that didn't support it there would be boards piggybacked on chips and flying wires soldered to pins on the motherboard. Not so easy on a modern multi-layer motherboard with surface-mount components. I haven't felt the need to go near a computer with a soldering iron in years... There's also less need - the main reason I ever went delving in a Mac (apart from memory and HD upgrades) was to fit ethernet cards - these days, you'll find at least one ethernet port (probably plus WiFi) built in to any half-decent board, and anything else can be fitted via USB. The only PC with an internal add-on card I have now is my MythTV box - and I'm planning to replace that with a smaller box + USB tuner (having found that there are few linux-supported PCIe tuners and that the most suitable dual tuner PCI card is actually a USB tuner stuck on a card with a PCI-USB bridge...)
Apple have also pushed external expansion - first SCSI, then Firewire, then the iMac pulled USB out of the doldrums, now they're pushing ThunderBolt...
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Are you sure it wasn't a clone? There were NO Apple ][, ][+, //c, //e or IIgs computers with a schematic, block diagram, or anything else for that matter, on the lid, or anywhere else. Schematics were in the owner's manual (and I think that even disappeared with the //c or //e).
No, I'm sure it wasn't a clone, and who knows, I may be misremembering - I sold that thing in 1986 to buy an Amiga 500 (took that long to pay it off!). I don't know what else I would be thinking of - I certainly couldn't open my Amiga 500 (other than the little trap door in the bottom). *shrug* Who knows. I'm probably just getting senile. It's to the point where with my home projects, I want to check out even older tech than I once had - I want to get an old Altair 8800 or IMSAI 8080 to play with, and figure out how those monsters worked. Definitely before my time, but they look like a lot of fun. They are sadly expensive these days - so few are still working. :(
Not as expensive as my Apple 1... ;-) I keep threatening to fix it up and sell it; but so far...
The problem with old S-100 bus systems would be getting one to WORK. They hardly worked reliably when they were new, let alone after al the timing gimick capacitors have aged for 40 years...
it may not have been completed.
http://www.commodore.ca/history/people/chuck_peddle/chuck_peddle.htm
Apparently when he turned up to help them out, he ended up doing a lot of analysing of what they were doing and helping them understand how the 6502 worked and what they were doing wrong.
My earliest memory of meeting Steve Jobs was, IIRC, at the Atlantic City Microcomputer Festival in August 1977. He gave me a pitch about the Apple 1 and explained why people wanted color computers, even low resolution, instead of the state of the art monochrome displays. He told me, confidentially, that Apple already had 650 orders for the unannounced Apple II computer. I walked away thinking he was a misguided huckster. 650 advanced orders? Yeah, right, will never happen. I finally decided to buy an Alpha Micro, a 16 bit PDP-11 clone and use it to develop and market software. Now that was a useful computer. It was a true multiuser computer capable of support a whopping 5 users. Alpha Micro Basic language was much more advanced than Apple's. The main regret I have is in not taking more photos of those early days. The majority of the vendors exhibiting at the show were are now long gone, with the notable exception of Apple.
No.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
"Jobs most likely sees himself as a visionary or an artist, perhaps even a philosopher..."
From what I've seen of how he talks, how he treats customers, and how fans follow him, I would say "prophet" would be more apt.
(And like most prophets, he's invented his own religion.)
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
I had a late model Apple II+ (Revision 7 motherboard). Loved the machine.
The System Manual for the Apple II (forget the exact designation) had a fold-out circuit diagram of the entire system.
One of the other manuals also provided a significant amount of assembly code (relating to some aspect of the system). I don't remember the exact nature of the code provided.
I didn't realize that Apple was still selling Apple I's after they introduced the Apple II. I thought they has sold out the entire first (and ONLY) run of Apple 1 boards before the II was introduced. What the story didn't mention was the fact that Apple ALSO sold the Apple II as just a bare board sans case, just like the Apple I. They didn't offer this option very long, but I do remember it being available. Perhaps they thought that Apple I owners who had built the I into a custom case would want to upgrade? I think the two boards were about the same size, but the II had to be mounted with the short dimension front to back (if you wanted the expansion slots in back).
Stan Veit operated a NYC computer shop (in the back of a toy store) and carried the Apple I. I remember seeing it AND the Apple II when they first came out. I worked at a rival computer store, but we didn't carry Apple or Altair. The place I worked at had SWTP, Processor Technology, and Imsai computers.
He wouldn't have said that in '85, by '85 the board had ousted him from Apple. IIRC Sculley came in in 1983. Jobs left in '84, not too long after the launch of the Macintosh.
True, the quote is from 1983 and Jobs was ousted in 1985, I got them mixed up.
And Wozniak couldn't even get the thing to work properly without help from MOS/Commodore's Chuck Peddle. As always, Apple's contribution to early computing is severely overblown by revisionists.
I think your take is revisionism. Steve Wozniak freely admits to having a problem with the 6502 in early Apple II designs: namely, the original DRAM refresh system did not interleave refresh/video cycles with 6502 cycles. Instead it stopped the 6502 for 40 usec at a time while refreshing DRAM. This was done because the Synertek data sheet for the 6502 indicated that the clock could be stopped for 40 usec. As it turned out, the data sheet was wrong, and the 6502 could not reliably be stopped for 40 usec. If Chuck helped Woz with this problem he never came up with a good solution because the problem was finally solved by the availability of 2Mhz DRAMS that permitted the seamless interleaving of CPU and refresh cycles.
The duplication in the middle was for margin error, as this ad was originally printed sideways. Think of it like a playboy centerfold for nerds.
...it didn't have those cool bitmap graphics as function keys that the Timex Sinclair had! An Apple ][+ was the first computer I ever killed. Accidentally plugged in a parallel card while the thing was on. Actually, all it killed was the BASIC ROM. You could still boot Pascal games.
When you qualify your statement to include only conditions which only satisfy your premise and fail to mention your conditions, your statement can be demonstrably false. You are asking people to interpet your unspoken thoughts instead of your written words. In the same light I can say that the iPod Touch is the only wifi capable MP3 player*, I'm sure that will get challenged as false if I didn't specify the following conditions.
* made by Apple that is not an iPhone.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Wrong. From wikipedia:
"However, to make a working computer, users still had to add a case, power supply transformers, power switch, ASCII keyboard, and composite video display."
It didn't have a power switch to flip. And Wozniak couldn't even get the thing to work properly without help from MOS/Commodore's Chuck Peddle.
As always, Apple's contribution to early computing is severely overblown by revisionists.
For a good history of early personal computers (particularly those where the 6502 is involved), check out the book "Commodore: A Company on the Edge"- the first half is basically about the father of personal computers, Chuck Peddle.
Ok, I'll give you that it was just a motherboard. However, once a user hooked up a power supply, keyboard, and composite monitor (or RF modulator and TV), then they instantly had a working system, which didn't require toggling in a bootloader everytime the power was removed.
So, Woz asked for some help with something that was ultimately due to an errata in the MOS Technology 6502 datasheet. So?
f Chuck helped Woz with this problem he never came up with a good solution because the problem was finally solved by the availability of 2Mhz DRAMS that permitted the seamless interleaving of CPU and refresh cycles.
Right.
And now that I think about it, the GGP was conflating the Apple 1, which had no video interleaving, because it used a "glass TTY"-type display, using SHIFT REGISTERS for the "video RAM", vs. the Apple ][, which used the system DRAM in an "interleaved" timing fashion.