Slashdot Mirror


Rare Operating Apple 1 Rakes In $374,500 At Sotheby's Auction

coondoggie writes "It's not one-of-a-kind, but it's pretty darn close. Sotheby's this week auctioned off a rare, working Apple 1 computer for $374,500 to an unnamed bidder. The price was more than double the expected price listed on the Sotheby's web site. Sotheby's notes about the Apple 1 say it is one of six thought-to-be-operational boxes and one of about 50 known to exist."

118 comments

  1. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sounds like a pretty run of the mill Apple mark up...

    1. Re:Well... by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      "$374,500 ottah be plenty for anyone" -Bill Gates

    2. Re:Well... by PatPending · · Score: 4, Interesting

      $666.66 in 1976 had the same buying power as $2,710.75 in 2012.

      Now, as then, that'll buy you Apple's latest and greatest computer.

      (Actually it's $2,799.00 but still remarkably close given this span of 36 years!)

      --
      What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
    3. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder: what today's value would be if one had purchased $666.66 worth of Apple stock upon its initial offering?

    4. Re:Well... by geoffaus · · Score: 0

      well if you dont measure in paper money but instead in real money ie gold - the price of gold in 1976 was roughly $125 per oz = 5.328oz so converting back into funny money at roughly $1626 per oz it would be worth $8663

      --
      As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a reference to Godwin's Law approaches 1
    5. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I know you think you're incredibly intelligent.

      Please look at the values of gold for the last 50 years and realize that the only reason gold is worth so much now is idiots who think it has some inherent value different than any other publicly traded commodity. See how the price spikes in the last six years? See the correlation between the price increase and wackjobs telling you gold is the only safe option?

    6. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not too many other options

    7. Re:Well... by uhuru_meditation · · Score: 1

      Jesusputer.

    8. Re:Well... by Skippy_kangaroo · · Score: 1

      More accurate would be to say, no metallic standard has ever lasted. They all died - every one of them. Gone, kaput, ex-currencies.

      Fiat currencies, on the other hand, are alive and kicking. You can find them in every corner store.

    9. Re:Well... by mcavic · · Score: 2

      real money

      Please send me all of your "worthless" paper money. I'll send back a box of pure copper pieces.

    10. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How long of a run did the metallic standards have before going kaput?

      How long have we had non-metal-based fiat money?

    11. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gold is nothing more than a common barter. As such it allows for a value index of items. Fiat money accomplishes the same thing with the only difference being you print fiat money instead of borrowing gold. In the end using a shiny rock for currency doesn't really change anything.

    12. Re:Well... by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      There's a limit to how much gold you can borrow. There is no limit to how much fiat money you can print.

      That is a pretty big difference (which doesn't mean gold backed money is better, just that it really does change something).

    13. Re:Well... by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Informative

      $105 832 based on today's close. So I guess the Apple 1 was still a good investment! (if you were one of the 5 people who managed to keep it functional for 30 years).

    14. Re:Well... by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Fiat currencies, on the other hand, are alive and kicking. You can find them in every corner store.

      The average lifespan of a fiat currency is around 40 years.

      The world came off the last vestiges of the gold standard around 40 years ago. Gold is exploding and the Euro, at least, is heading toward the dustbin of history.

      Odd, that.

    15. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gold is awesome! If I had bought $1000 worth in 1981, I could have sold it in 2008 for $1000!

    16. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, gold "spiked" well before all the QE and LTRO.

      It climbed from $350 to $500 between 2004 and 2006. By the end of 2007 as it was becoming apparent that Credit Default Swaps were going to unwind it reached $800. by March 2008 it had reached $1000. Then the stock market crash happened in October 2008. And yes, since then it as steadily climbed to where it is now, but I wouldn't call it a spike. As spikes go, it's pretty blunt IMO.

      Quantitative Easing and Long Term Refinancing Operations are activities that were initiated after the crash to deal with the recession that followed the crash and the credit default swaps unwinding. The US didn't employ QE until late 2008, i.e. after the stock market crash. The Bank of England and the European Central Bank followed suit later.

    17. Re:Well... by PatPending · · Score: 1

      Assuming a 4% rate of inflation, in 35 years a new Apple computer will cost about $11,045.

      --
      What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
    18. Re:Well... by arose · · Score: 2

      You're lumping all gold based currencies, splitting up the fiats all without even touching on silver standards. What kind of argument is that?

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    19. Re:Well... by cnaumann · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Apple IPO was in 1980 for $22/share. $666.66 would have purchased a little over 30 shares. Since then, it has paid a few dollars in dividends (which can be ignored) and split 2:1 three times. You would now own 240 shares, and it closed today at $574 for a value of $137,000.

    20. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it doesn't change anything. If gold is scarce. It just means you will trade lesser amounts of it when it gains more value.

    21. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so Jim Rogers is a wackjob? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=bfAqFw_9IQI see from about 4:00

    22. Re:Well... by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      I used the closing price on 12/12/80, which was around $29, giving only 184 shares. I figured no one but insiders and institutional investors usually manage to get the offering price, and if you were one of those you wouldn't be worried about where to best spend $666 ;)

    23. Re:Well... by macs4all · · Score: 1

      $105 832 based on today's close. So I guess the Apple 1 was still a good investment! (if you were one of the 5 people who managed to keep it functional for 30 years).

      Six.

      Mine works, too.

    24. Re:Well... by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      WHich is completely different from being able to print it into worthlessness of a whim. But feel free to pretend.

    25. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both answers were "good enough" for answering my question. I had presumed buying stock would have surpassed this purchase price -- alas, no. Is there a web site for doing this type of query? (I took a stab at finding one before my O.P. but came up blank.)

    26. Re:Well... by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      I just went to Google's financial page for AAPL and used the chart to look at the price on their first and most recent day of trading. It also tells you the % gain over a window, which for the whole period was "15,875.57%" (based on daily closing prices).

    27. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you!

    28. Re:Well... by rubikscubejunkie · · Score: 1

      sounds like people have way too much money....

  2. Expensive, but... by Iniamyen · · Score: 2

    Still cheaper than an iPhone

    1. Re:Expensive, but... by olsmeister · · Score: 1

      And immune to viruses, too.

    2. Re:Expensive, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, yeah? You're forgetting the exploit that occurs when one plays Black Sabbath backward via the cassette interface!

    3. Re:Expensive, but... by Golden+Section · · Score: 1

      This was an auction. *Every* person in the world, excluding just one, thought this items was worth less than the final offer.

      --
      Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
    4. Re:Expensive, but... by macs4all · · Score: 1

      This was an auction. *Every* person in the world, excluding just one, thought this items was worth less than the final offer.

      According to one article I read, it eventually came down to two bidders; one online, and one on the phone. Phone guy won.

  3. Bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No SSD? No retina screen? No ethernet or firewire port?! Worst Mac ever.

    (yes, I know it's not a Mac)

    1. Re:Bah by binarylarry · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's even user upgradable.

      Ewwwwwwww

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    2. Re:Bah by ganjadude · · Score: 0

      an apple that you can work on yourself? woah, no wonder its so expensive! shit id pay for the priviledge of being able to work on an apple myself, from my understand you cant do that anymore, even the memory is hard wired............

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:Bah by drkim · · Score: 2

      Actually, it has solid-state storage, no DVD-R, no BD support, not much on gaming, and it HAS a retina display (if you stand back far enough)...

      ...so yeah, it IS the new Mac!

  4. Beowolf cluster by BennyB2k4 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine a.. wait, I can't. there's only 6 of them.

    1. Re:Beowolf cluster by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      i see what you did there

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    2. Re:Beowolf cluster by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Imagine a.. wait, I can't. there's only 6 of them.

      Seven, if you count mine.

  5. AppleCare by MrEricSir · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'd definitely want AppleCare for this one, those Apple 1 computers are notoriously fragile.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
  6. My high school had one, way back in 1977 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if they still have it, and if it still works.

    If they do, that'd make one heluva good PTA fundraiser.

  7. Re:Expensive, but... unique by muon-catalyzed · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Very scarce and unique item, that thing should be pretty hard to copy as all the chips on the board are impossible to manufacture nowdays. Who does MOS at that big scale today ? Or the other rare electronic components inside..

    Such an artifact might be worth millions in a few decades, should be a good anti-inflation bet.

  8. 36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find it amazing that the three 2,400uF electrolytic capacitors are still working after 36 years! These capacitors slowly degrade over time--I wonder what their capacitance is today?

    1. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by fnj · · Score: 2

      They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days. I've got electrolytics over 50 years old in an R-392 surplus tube type receiver that still work fine - the whole receiver works fine, dozens of tubes, intricate geared ganged tuning slugs and all. If you contracted to build that thing today you would probably pay north of $100,000 per, even using surplus tubes from ebay.

      I've got a 10,000 uF 15 V electrolytic I bought around 1960 or so, somewhere. Or was it 100,000? If I can find it, I can test it with a DVM and a resistor.

    2. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by Nimey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course they did. It's just that the crap stuff isn't here anymore, so the survivors were the better ones.

      Same deal with houses, when some idiot says that they make worse houses now, they're forgetting about all the crap houses from back then that don't exist anymore.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    3. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by JDG1980 · · Score: 2

      They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days

      Average build quality may have been higher (though it wasn't always), but that doesn't change the fact that old electrolytic caps will still fail. If you read a guide on troubleshooting an old solid-state pinball machine from the late 1970s or early 1980s, one of the first things it will tell you to do is replace the filter caps. They can and usually do go bad over time, causing unstable operation.

    4. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days

      You realize that there are only SIX known operating Apple 1's, right? The production run was around 200. That means roughly 3% survived - the rest are either in a landfill, or non-operational. And who knows what condition they are in - for all we know, they could've had parts replaced (including capacitors).

      Heck, the original Apple 1 hanging at 1 Infinite Loop might not even work anymore. (It's sitting in a plaque marked "Our Founder").

    5. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Informative

      While that is certainly true, i'd add that back then there simply weren't that many manufacturers for chips and caps so you didn't get really chip shitty dodgy parts like you do today. back then the boards were thick, traces thick, caps were made by a few companies for primarily industrial uses so were built tough, there just wasn't tons of truly cheap shitty parts to build something like that out of.

      This is why I'd argue that its easier, when comparing number existing VS number made of course, that its more likely that old VIC or Atari VCS will work well VS say your average PC from 1994 or the first Playstations, because by that time it was a LOT easier to cut corners by using cheap chips than it was in the late 1970s. There is a good reason why a lot of today's stuff is called 'designed for the dump" and that is because the parts are so thin and cheap that you can practically look at it funny and kill the damned thing whereas i can't even count how many times i knocked my old VIC off my desktop into the floor and it was still working when it disappeared during my last move 5 years ago.

      Finally i have to wonder whether we'll have anything THAT old still working 36 years from now thanks to the new solder and tin whiskers. I have an engineering buddy and you want to hear an all day rant just bring up the new solder, he says he can't count the number of times he's opened up something fairly new that failed and couldn't trace it back to the new solder. So while I wouldn't be surprised if you'll be able to find PCs from the 70s and 80s still running i have to wonder if we'll see anything from our current era or will it all be in the dump.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    6. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Its the same in the software industry. You make so much money from support that it doesn't pay to make things that last (see my sig).

    7. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by Crosshair84 · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, I dream of the day that leaded solder is used again in electronics. Got to love brain-dead environmentalists who don't bother researching WHY some things are done the way they are.

      Lead paint in kids toys? Yea, no good reason for that.

      Lead solder in electronics? VERY VERY VERY GOOD F*****G REASONS FOR USING IT.

      Any environmental savings is more than made up by the lowered reliability and shorter lifespans. Anyone who thinks lead-free solder has been a good idea is either ignorant of its problems or an idiot.

    8. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I wonder how often the working ones were powered up over the years? Generally speaking, electrolytic capacitors will last longer if they are used occasionally.

    9. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by fnj · · Score: 2

      I don't have to read anything. I have first hand experience with many kinds of antique electronics. I'm not going to tell you that electrolytics never failed until crap manufacturers started using crap constituents and crap manufacturing in the late 90's, but I CAN tell you they didn't practically always fail after a piss-poor life like they did after that. And I CAN tell you a lot of mil surplus stuff from Vietnam, Korea, and WW-II still works, original electrolytics and all. That's not a guess; that's first hand experience. I CAN tell you that it's not uncommon that computer equipment from the 70s and 80s still works, but it IS uncommon that stuff from the late 90s through at least the mid 2000's works for more than a few years, and there is still a lot of crap being built, though it is starting to recover a little from the nadir of around 2000.

    10. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by macs4all · · Score: 1

      I find it amazing that the three 2,400uF electrolytic capacitors are still working after 36 years! These capacitors slowly degrade over time--I wonder what their capacitance is today?

      Mine still work. And the capacitance of those computer-grade caps stays pretty good, even after all this time.

      Having said that, I still brought my Apple 1 up on a Variac, with all the chips removed, the last time I fired it up.

    11. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, I dream of the day that leaded solder is used again in electronics. Got to love brain-dead environmentalists who don't bother researching WHY some things are done the way they are.

      Lead paint in kids toys? Yea, no good reason for that.

      Lead solder in electronics? VERY VERY VERY GOOD F*****G REASONS FOR USING IT.

      Any environmental savings is more than made up by the lowered reliability and shorter lifespans. Anyone who thinks lead-free solder has been a good idea is either ignorant of its problems or an idiot.

      Yeah. And they didn't even replace it with some known-inert metal, either.

      Twenty years from now, they'll be bitching about all the Bismuth and Indium leaching into the water table.

      Mark my words. You heard it here, first!

    12. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by macs4all · · Score: 2

      They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days

      You realize that there are only SIX known operating Apple 1's, right? The production run was around 200. That means roughly 3% survived - the rest are either in a landfill, or non-operational. And who knows what condition they are in - for all we know, they could've had parts replaced (including capacitors).

      Heck, the original Apple 1 hanging at 1 Infinite Loop might not even work anymore. (It's sitting in a plaque marked "Our Founder").

      I think that one got sold, didn't it.

      Oh, and it's SEVEN now. My one-owner Apple 1 still works, and it isn't in the Apple 1 Registry. Mike Willeagal (who runs the Apple 1 Registry site) says he can't figure out where Sotheby's came up with the "Six working" figure, except maybe they counted the ones on his site that mention that they have BEEN working.

    13. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Nice to see i'm not the only one who thinks its retarded. I've been recently sorting through the stuff in my late sister's trailer with a neighbor who asked to rent it and it really shows what a difference lead solder makes when we were firing up all this stuff that had been sitting for years and damned near everything fired right up. the late 70s TV, the old microwave, VCR, hell just about every damned thing we plugged in fired right up despite being in an abandoned trailer with no heat for a couple of years.

      Compare this to I don't know how many electronics I've tossed a month or two passed warranty, after i got to be buds with an ex NASA engineer i'd swing them by his place and sure enough, tin whisker death. Doesn't matter how well a device is taken care of either, those things are like ticking time bombs and when they go they usually do enough damage to make it not worth fixing.

      So I'd personally love to see the figures, i think the only ones that have gained from this "designed for the dump" solder has been the manufacturers. That neighbor that is taking my sis's place is gonna use all that gear because even after all this time it works like brand new, yet thanks to the new solder damned near everything i get now won't last 6 months past warranty. that is one of the reasons I'll never let go of my Trace Elliot bass amp, i got one of the last Brit made ones that used the old solder. My guitarist has had to take his amps into the shop at least 3 times in the past few years, in each case? Tin whiskers. I swear that shit is nothing but useless as far as i'm concerned.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    14. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did he say anything like that? he said it's a pretty good estimate.

      Mike Willegal, an engineer with a major technology company, says “That’s probably a pretty good estimate of original Apple-1s that have been operated in the last four or five years.”

    15. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by Crosshair84 · · Score: 1

      In case anyone is wondering, here is a list of failures cause by Tin whiskers.

      http://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker/failures/

      Note that we are talking about failures a bit more serious than your netbook, we are talking about communication satellites and NUCLEAR REACTORS. Yes, the people who say nuclear power is unsafe are working to make nuclear power unsafe.

      Reminds me of the worldwide Chlorine ban that Greenpeace was proposing in the 80's. (Patrick Moore left Greenpeace over this.) Yea, go drink non-Chlorinated water for a year, I call dibs on your stuff when you're dead from Cholera. People need to THINK about these things.

      Then there is the fact that mining Tin is VERY damaging to the environment, much more so than mining Lead.

    16. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Great, not only more billions crapped away but more space junk two, /double facepalm/. what pisses ME off is it isn't like we didn't already have precedent for simply having a reclamation fee, I'm sure most would have agreed like me to happily pay an extra $5-$10 a device to have it last for years instead of tossing all that money not to mention toxic materials into our landfills. I can tell you I've seen a hell of a lot of laptops and netbooks killed waaay too damned early by the whiskers, hell i got a nice mobile Athlon I need to take by my NASA buddy to see if he can salvage that wasn't even old enough to lose the shine to the plastic, about 4 months passed warranty and zzzt. i have NO doubt when he opens it it'll be those damned whiskers.

      But frankly I've always know the tree huggers were retarded, I've seen them protest our nuke plant and I've been in the thing and taken a tour, those two plants are as nice as the day they were built and talking to a former HS classmate that works there they constantly run scenarios for every possible emergency on a full size simulator built next door yet the tree huggers will have a fit, while ignoring the ONLY way to replace it in this area would be a coal fired which of course leaves much worse radiation and toxic sludge. I've taken a tour of a coal plant and frankly those things are just nasty, that shit gets everywhere.

      But I can tell you that the ROHS solder is just a fricking disaster, my NASA buddy helps the local college with its rocketry and robotics programs and he's is having to pretty much build everything from scratch because those higher stresses just make that shit fail that much quicker. I've got him looking into BeagleBoards and Arduinos but frankly i can't blame him for being gunshy, not with all the damned failures he's had to deal with that comes down to that craptastic solder. he says there is just no way in hell to make that shit safe to use, its just worthless.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    17. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Where did he say anything like that? he said it's a pretty good estimate.

      Mike Willegal, an engineer with a major technology company, says “That’s probably a pretty good estimate of original Apple-1s that have been operated in the last four or five years.”

      I was paraphrasing from an email exchange I had with Mike. Here's my queston, and exactly what he said in response:

      The TUAW article I saw the news about the auction last week stated that this was one of six WORKING Apple 1s. Where did they arrive at that number?

      And Mike responded:

      Not sure where they got that number, but probably from counting the units on my registry that I know that have been operated within the last few years - I don't think the number is too far off - though getting a dysfunctional unit or unit that hasn't been powered on in years working again, shouldn't be rocket science.

    18. Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      While that is certainly true, i'd add that back then there simply weren't that many manufacturers for chips and caps so you didn't get really chip shitty dodgy parts like you do today. back then the boards were thick, traces thick, caps were made by a few companies for primarily industrial uses so were built tough, there just wasn't tons of truly cheap shitty parts to build something like that out of.

      Given inflation, if eveyrone kept using "the good stuff", we'd be paying over $10,000 for a low-end PC still. Given you can buy a PC for $500 all in (or much less), the loss in quality is probably justified when you consider back in the 70's, you probably were talking about a PC costing under $100. With monitor, keyboard, powersupply, etc. You'd be laughed right out of the room as NO ONE could do that. The MOS 6502 was popular because it costed only around $20 or so alone (the Motorola 68000 - easily $200+).

      Then there's the usefulness factor. That PC from 1994? Most probably still worked when they were junked as they got obsolete by the turn of the millennium, if not earlier. (My parents still have one from the era, they use it to play one game (which I copied off and put onto DOSbox). Hell, I have a PC from 2000 I'm having to replace because Windows 2000 is dead, Firefox won't run on it anymore, and 512MB of RAM just isn't cutting it (and it can't run XP because 512 is barely adequate).

      Most of what we have will be in the dump purely because there's no reason to keep it around. Or more precisely, at a recyclers because there's so much that can be reused and smelted. Rightfully so as well - most of the stuff isn't really worthy of saving - there just isn't anything special about them, and as people move about, more are recycled as it's not worth moving them about. Doubly so when you consider that modern day emulation is good enough that once the hardware dies ,the software can still live on.

      Of course, there will still be the occasional one someone buried deep in their house and forgot all about until they went cleaning it years later.

  9. Some things money can't buy... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...a retail price of $666.66, a number that garnered complaints among conservative Christians

    A new Apple I, $666.66. Upsetting conservative Christians, priceless.

    1. Re:Some things money can't buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple marketing company HQ is loacted in the hell. XD

    2. Re:Some things money can't buy... by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      Woz says he didn't even know the symbolism of 666.

    3. Re:Some things money can't buy... by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Woz says he didn't even know the symbolism of 666.

      He's pretty a-religious; so I can believe that.

  10. Replicas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There are a few replicas available for those of us who can't afford a real Apple 1. The least expensive is Briel Computers' "Replica 1" which is not a cosmetic replica but more of a "work-alike" computer. Applefritter.com's Tom Owad wrote a book based on that kit. On the other extreme is Mike Willegal's "Mimeo 1" which is an extremely accurate reproduction. I know the people behind these kits/sites and they're all very hobby-centric.

    1. Re:Replicas by macs4all · · Score: 1

      There are a few replicas available for those of us who can't afford a real Apple 1. The least expensive is Briel Computers' "Replica 1" which is not a cosmetic replica but more of a "work-alike" computer. Applefritter.com's Tom Owad wrote a book based on that kit. On the other extreme is Mike Willegal's "Mimeo 1" which is an extremely accurate reproduction. I know the people behind these kits/sites and they're all very hobby-centric.

      Yeah. Mike Willeagal (creator of the Mimeo-1, and owner of the Apple 1 Registry site) even went to the trouble of creating a custom font for the silkscreen layer. I asked him if he X-Rayed the original board, and he said "No", and that he simply took a LOT of high-detail photos, and then went back and forth, printing out his board and laying it on a light table with the original.

      I don't know much about the Replica 1; but it isn't a cold-copy of the original, like Mike's is. It's so close that I asked him if anyone has tried to auction one of his off AS an original. He said he deliberately put a marking on his board to prevent that from happening...

      And yes, as an owner of an Apple 1 myself, it IS that close.

  11. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I have a TRS-80 in my attic. Haven't powered it on for a few years, but it worked last time I tried it. It was made in 1977. To be fair, there was no reality distortion field model released with this particular brand.

    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe cause the apple I predates the Trash 80 by a handful of years, hand designed by woz as a teen and packaged by 4 people in a garage instead of mass produced in a chineese sweatshop?

      You are a clueless moron, and a dipshit to boot.

    2. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe cause the apple I predates the Trash 80 by a handful of years

      So a ProcTech Sol-20 should be going for over $100,000 as well, right?

      hand designed by woz as a teen and packaged by 4 people in a garage

      So? By your idiotic logic a PET 2000 should go for $100,000 because it was hand designed by Chuck Peddle, who by the way, designed the CPU in your precious precious Apple 1.

    3. Re:Why? by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      mass produced in a chineese sweatshop?

      Hey Anonymous Coward, crack open a history book. In 1977 Mao had been dead for a year. I guarantee they weren't building TRS-80s in China. More than likely Texas.

    4. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PET = Peddle's Ego Trip

    5. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if the pet 2000 wasnt inspired by a prototype apple II, and not produced in mass production, by an already established company a year earlier, then maybe yes

    6. Re:Why? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      as opposed to the apple line now which is...built in a chineese sweatshop......

      ACs... come out of hiding when you talk crap, its no fun this way

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    7. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So? By your idiotic logic a PET 2000 should go for $100,000 because it was hand designed by Chuck Peddle, who by the way, designed the CPU in your precious precious Apple 1.

      Maybe if Commodore was still in business, and if they had completely turned the personal computer, mobile phone, MP3 player, TV, and music businesses upside down, and their market cap made them the most valuable company in the world.

      Maybe.

    8. Re:Why? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      So a ProcTech Sol-20 should be going for over $100,000 as well, right?

      While not as valuable as Apple 1s, IIRC, Sol-20s fetch a bit, too.

      And Chuck Peddle and friends also ripped off about all of Motorola's silicon designs when they left Mot.

      Remember the 6501? Remember the 6520?

      I am a great fan of the 6502 and all Apple products, AND an owner of a WORKING Apple 1; but let's not revise history TOO much, eh?

  12. Morality by pellik · · Score: 1

    Was apple evil back then? Or did that only happen later?

    1. Re:Morality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Were they evil? I'd say the price of $666 speaks for itself. (If you go in for that sort of tripe.)

    2. Re:Morality by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      apple got evil IMO when they killed the PPC and it was all over when the ipod and itunes arived (or jobs came back, take your poision

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:Morality by slartibartfastatp · · Score: 1

      Nobody's evil until they got really rich.

      --
      -- --
  13. In other news... by frostilicus2 · · Score: 0

    A rare Granny Smith bearing the Apple logo was sold to a turtleneck wearing gentleman in exchange for his life savings.

    --
    Nothing sucks like a Vax, nothing blows like a PowerMac G4
  14. What happens... by wbr1 · · Score: 2

    ...if you take that puppy to a 'Genius Bar'. Most of those geniuses wouldn't even know what it was, and that the Woz actually built it with his bare hands.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:What happens... by petsounds · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, technically they probably wouldn't know what it was immediately simply because the Apple I shipped as basically a motherboard. People had to buy their own case, power supply, etc -- no different than the custom-built PCs of today. So unless the 'Genius' opened the case, they wouldn't necessarily even know it was an Apple product.

      It's interesting to note that even back then, Apple's philosophy was sell the hardware, give away the software [big jpg ahead].

      From the Apple I ad: "And since our philosophy is to provide software for our machines free or at minimal cost, you won't be continually paying for access to this growing software library."

    2. Re:What happens... by ghn · · Score: 1

      good point, mod parent up

    3. Re:What happens... by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      99% of them werent even born yet....

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    4. Re:What happens... by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      yeah, but back then they let you have access to the hardware, they even gave you manuals with the pinouts, not so much today, if you dont like it, too bad....

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    5. Re:What happens... by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      That's why they switched to socketed CPUs and removable MXM graphics cards on the iMac, and screw-less PCI card and hard drive caddies in the Pro, right?

      Oh, and quick and easy to remove bottom panels (with standard RAM, hard drives and so on) in the Macbook Pro.

      But oh wait, they made a new computer with proprietary, tiny parts to make it super thin, that means they hate people who upgrade! Got it! If you don't like it then too bad... err, I mean "buy the other laptops they sell".

  15. Future Value? by cynop · · Score: 0

    I'm curious if the buyer was a technology enthousiast, Apple lover or simply someone making a future investment? With all the craze for Jobs, it feels like such an item would probably rise in value in the future.

    1. Re:Future Value? by Tourney3p0 · · Score: 2

      There are other, rarer items from that era that consistently sell for much less. I won't speculate on the other possibilities, but technology enthusiast can safely be ruled out.

    2. Re:Future Value? by cynop · · Score: 0

      Do you mean Apple, Jobs or home computer items? The way i see it, the value of each category is radically different.

    3. Re:Future Value? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While it's possible it will raise in value it would be a really silly investment. I'd hope someone with enough disposable income to pay for it would recognize that and bought it because they're a collector of old computers, apple enthusiast, general technology enthusiast, etc.

      --wmbetts

      Posting AC because I have mod points.

    4. Re:Future Value? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      I'm curious if the buyer was a technology enthousiast, Apple lover or simply someone making a future investment? With all the craze for Jobs, it feels like such an item would probably rise in value in the future.

      I dunno; but I just hope there's another one JUST like that buyer when it comes time for me to sell MY WORKING APPLE 1

  16. Re:Expensive, but... unique by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1
    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  17. And I thought $9,000 was Stretching It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    About 10 years ago I saw an Apple 1 sell for a little over $9,000 on eBay including the original wooden case and I thought that was marginally justifiable. This auction result is just ridiculous, it's simply too high.

    1. Re:And I thought $9,000 was Stretching It by macs4all · · Score: 1

      About 10 years ago I saw an Apple 1 sell for a little over $9,000 on eBay including the original wooden case and I thought that was marginally justifiable. This auction result is just ridiculous, it's simply too high.

      So, I can take you off the potential bidder list for my Apple 1, then?

  18. Re:Expensive, but... unique by SlippyToad · · Score: 1

    It is only selling due to nostalgia.

    I honestly doubt it will be worth much in 100 years.

    --
    One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
  19. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by ganjadude · · Score: 0

    how in the hell can you claim that apple OSX is actually behind redhat, when the treuth is OSX is a spin off of the linix kernal as much as red hat is???

    oh, new UID, troll, thats why

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  20. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by Majik+Sheff · · Score: 1

    You might want to look into the difference between a Linux kernel and a BSD kernel (which is what OSX is based on). The differences are not... trivial.

    --
    Women are like electronics: you don't know how damaged they are until you try to turn them on.
  21. Re:Expensive, but... unique by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    Nostalgia won't exist in 100 years?

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  22. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

    Awesome analogy! I really want to learn that soliloquy from Devil Wears Prada..

    For those who don't get it, http://youtu.be/1LVptO7o4L8#t=1m25s

  23. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    OSX is NetBSD with a propitary UI, supposedly based on next (ATT/SCO Unix System 4?) ... usually by people who have not used a next machine for any significant amount of time, anyway you can download the open source version called Darwin, with no apple code what so ever from Apple's website. To date the only unix operating system in a very small segment of consumer desktop computing ... either way not nearly as innovative as people like to think, it was over a decade old idea when it came out.

    Also it wasn't really the Ipod that changed the music industry, its just a player ... during a time when everyfuckingbody had a MP3 player on the market, it was iTunes, the application and marketplace that allowed you to get qulity music virus free without stealing that changed the music industry ... maybe ... kind of sort of ...

    And if you were not aware, those millions of jobs are in China, which compared to civilized work conditions are a dungeon, though slowly getting slightly better.

    Anywho, I just think you should know some facts before getting all buthurt because people dont like apple... I dont like them because of their games going all the way back to their 8 bit systems with incompatible hardware for their own computers, moving on to proprietary ram and device bios's, onwards to prams that would lock up, and the manual says you need to take it to a dealer so they can hit the button hidden under the cpu for you (8500 I am looking at you) to today, where if you just happen to bought a small selection of apple computers you need a fucking magic SATA plug no one makes.

    Piss on that, no thanks

  24. Kill the Head Vampire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you kill this Apple 1, will all the other Apple devices around the world revert to a move open and less evil state?

  25. Not so impressive. by XahXhaX · · Score: 2

    I know a guy still on his first Xbox 360!

  26. Re:Expensive, but... unique by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nostalgia won't exist in 100 years?

    The Nostalgia market generally peaks when guys who had that item as a teenager go through their mid-life crisis. Do you think that a lot of people born in 2000 have some emotional attachment to 8 track tapes?

  27. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by cyclebiff · · Score: 1

    It truly warms my heart that someone caught the reference, and the humor. And yes, the people who marked me down didn't get it; they were too busy feverishly googling BSD and Linux history to see that my post was actually a rant from a 2006 film about the fashion industry. Please stop being so serious, SD'ers :)

  28. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NetBSD? Hardly.

    Much of the userland is a mishmash of all the various BSDs. How do I know? Someone once published all the version strings in all the libraries. You can do this too. Why do I say "much" and not "all". Well, Next, and then Apple have added a lot of their own special sauce, not limited to just the GUI.

    As for Darwin source? On opensource.apple.com? That was the actual kernel source at one point, up to like Tiger, but then Apple forked and took their source tree private/proprietary. It started out originally as a CMU Mach monolithic kernel, which, not surprisingly, looks somewhat like most of the BSD kernels.

  29. Re:Expensive, but... unique by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

    Depends on whether Apple's still a force to be reckoned with. If Apple's dominating the electronics-implanted-directly-into-your-eyeball trade the way it dominates phones a working Apple I assembled by none other the Woz's sister is gonna be pretty damn valuable.

    Heck even if it isn't a force to be reckoned with if Apple is recognized as a pivotal and important company it's products will be valuable as antiques. Stradivarius violins ain't cheap.

  30. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by ganjadude · · Score: 1

    thats true indeed, my only point was that it is not "just os-x" did not want to open that can of worms.

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  31. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by macs4all · · Score: 1

    Anywho, I just think you should know some facts before getting all buthurt because people dont like apple... I dont like them because of their games going all the way back to their 8 bit systems with incompatible hardware for their own computers, moving on to proprietary ram and device bios's, onwards to prams that would lock up, and the manual says you need to take it to a dealer so they can hit the button hidden under the cpu for you (8500 I am looking at you) to today, where if you just happen to bought a small selection of apple computers you need a fucking magic SATA plug no one makes.

    Ok, I'll bite.

    As the owner of a working Apple 1, that I have personally owned since May, 1977, and as owner of many, if not all, of the Apple computers you mention in your off-base rant, I wish to dissect your infantile and incorrect diatribe one sentence-fragment at a time:

    8 bit systems with incompatible hardware for their own computers

    WTF are you even talking about here? What "incompatible hardware"? Are you talking about the Apple 1, Apple ][, or what? Because there aren't any other 8 bit Apple computers.

    proprietary ram

    Again, WTF? Are you speaking of the fact that they tended to use "non-parity" RAM? Hardly "proprietary"; just not the usual PeeCee standard.

    [proprietary] device bios's

    Incorrect use of the apostrophe aside, are you talking about Open Firmware? Because, if you are, that happened to be a PUBLISHED STANDARD that was largely spearheaded by Sun. And Apple hasn't used OF since the switch to Intel in 2005. That's seven years ago. Let it go... Oh, and the EFI standard that Microsoft and the PeeCee world had to be drug into kicking and screaming was ALSO a PUBLISHED STANDARD created by (IIRC) Intel and others. Hardly "Proprietary". But do rant on...

    prams that would lock up

    The PRAM wouldn't "lock up". It would occasionally (but FAR less often than people thought!) get corrupted data, necessitating a USER action to clear it up (Hold Down Command-Option-P-R on Bootup. Wait for the chime. Release keys. Done).

    and the manual says you need to take it to a dealer so they can hit the button hidden under the cpu for you (8500 I am looking at you) to today

    Oh, NOW you're conflating the PRAM reset (which I detailed above) with the FAR less common CUDA/Systems Management Reset. I think I've had to hit that one ONCE in over THIRTY YEARS of owning Apple computers. And that was when the next door neighbor's garage caught fire and burned through our overhead power lines, causing the AC line coming into my G5 tower to do all SORTS of interesting things before I finally flipped the main breaker on my house, about 30 seconds before the main "drop" into my house burned in HALF and dropped to the ground. I located the Systems Management button, pressed it, and my G5 tower? Well, I'm typing this post on it.

    I NEVER had to press the CUDA button on my 8500, even after the mice (I mean REAL mice!) crawled into an open PCI slot-hole, and started to LIVE IN MY 8500, eventually ruining the CPU card by pissing on it. Replaced the CPU card, cleaned up all the mouse "droppings" (ewwwww!!!) Rebooted, and the 8500 still worked when retired a few years back...

    f you just happen to bought a small selection of apple computers you need a fucking magic SATA plug no one makes.

    WTF are you talking about?!? Thunderbolt? Or are you talking about the iMac hard drives with the thermal sensor integrated? Because the former doesn't make sense, and the latter was a case of Apple being ahead of an industry standard that appeared not to end up taking off.

    If you wanted to bitch about something being "proprietary", then you SHOULD have been bitching about Apple's ancient, odd, penchant for TRULY proprietary Video connectors. But, being the ignorant fucktard that you are, you completely missed the ONE "Proprietary" thing I would have actually AGREED with you about!

    Idiot.

  32. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    1) apple II, disk drives, disk II, unidisk, duo disk and the 3.5 inch variants, depending on what you happen to own may or may not work, I have a IIC it works with the unidisk, some cable hacking it will work with the disk II, but not with the apple 5.25 disk without a rom upgrade. On the IIe a unidisk wont work with the disk 2 controller and etc, its a fucking dumb device why incompatible?

    2) no I am talking about weird shit, name one other computer that used 168 pin 3 volt edo ram with a propitary dimm socket with the slot cut 2 pins away from standard

    3) no I am talking about the stupid ass video bios, hard drive bios and cd rom bios you had to have or bypass in order to avoid the apple tax on otherwise standard hardware

    4) bullshit, it would lock up every time you booted the computer with a slightly different hardware configuration, and I have personally had to reset it over 30 times ON one machine while fighting with video drivers cause I dared to change monitors, and re-arrange hard disks, the keyboard shortcut didnt make it in every version of the mac roms

    5) oh so using a standard sata drive with a non standard pinout and connector that you could only get from apple is now being ahead of the curve, I call it being fucked over

    6) video connectors? yea its a pain in the ass, but if you have delt with their bullshit above a 99 cent adapter is the least of your problems. I am not the retard here, I am the abused broken free, you on the other hand...

    I see its apparent you are an appliance user, when apple tells you to jump to the new model you have zero problems plopping down another 2-3 grand shelving a perfectly good unit obsoleted by a rom upgrade while shouting "yes sir!"

  33. Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid by macs4all · · Score: 1

    Since you have nicely enumerated the list, I won't go through the pain of in-line commenting.

    1. Time does march on. The original Apple ][ (Shugart 400) drives and the later DuoDisk (Alps) drives were essentially the same, internally. That is to say, except for the connector, there was really nothing different about the controller card, data format, etc. Although I personally hated the Duo Disk, it was the only real way to get an external drive onto a "slotless" machine like the //c (I never owned a //c, so I may be wrong about the slots). What are you calling a "Disk II"? That's the Shugart (ribbon cable) drive. The unidisk was a completely different beast, being a 3.5" drive. It actually DID use the (at that point, Integrated) Woz Machine at the controller end (which is why you could plug it into a //c) but in an ENTIRELY different way. The UniDisk (actually UniDisk 3.5, IIRC) actually had a microcontroller on board the drive (the Liron Controller), which basically just used the computer-side's controller as a Serial Bus (rather than a raw "nibble" bus). In fact, when I first got my hands on a UniDisk, I immediately wrote an assembly-language program that ran IN THE DRIVE to do dump the Drive's ROM out, and also wrote a few other things that ran in that drive.

    But NONE of that was INTENDED to screw over users; in fact, the reason why the UniDisk was so complicated internally was PRECISELY so that it could work with an UNMODIFIED //c. So, stop being so butthurt about Moore's Law, willya?

    2. Since it was part of the STANDARD, I assume you don't know what you are talking about here. And the proof is that those RAMs were READILY available from, oh, just about everybody. And that is while Apple had a single-digit marketshare. So, again, NOT "proprietary". Next!

    3. Now you're just making shit up. WTF are you even talking about? Seriously. WTF? I have personally used commodity RAM, commodity Hard Drives, commodity VGA monitors, commodity optical drives in/with ALL of my Macs since they were "expandable" (so, since about 1988). So I repeat, WTF? There simply IS no such thing as a "video BIOS", or "Hard Drive BIOS" of "CD-ROM BIOS". Never heard of them.

    4. Perhaps you had a bad machine. Happens. As I said, ONCE in 30 years and SEVERAL Macs. Both my own, and hundreds more that I have administered. There IS no Keyboard Shortcut for the CUDA/Systems Management MCU (actually, I think that there was one on ONE laptop). Are you conflating the PRAM with the CUDA again? But moving right along...

    5 and 6. I really don't think Apple had "lock-in" in mind. At worst, they were pushing the industry to incorporate the pesky thermal sensor, and the cost-sensitive HD industry didn't want the extra cost, since other OEMs didn't seem to be interested in making it easier to swap hard drives (by not having to mess with a thermal sensor attached with STICKY TAPE). But, we'll call this one a draw; because I really don't know why they did that on some of the iMacs. What you don't consider is that sometimes Apple does things to make it easier for themselves to manufacture, OR (like the ADC) to make it easier for the USER (in the case of the Apple Display Connector, Jobs was trying to reduce cable clutter), that APPEAR to be about "lock-in", when in reality, is just their way of doing things in a different (and if the industry would follow) often BETTER way. But you go ahead and spin everything in the most negative light possible.

    I am anything BUT an "appliance user" (but that DOES describe about 99% of the userbase of ALL computers!). I am an embedded design engineer (both hardware and software). And I HARDLY jump when Apple brings out a new model. In fact, the ONLY "new" Apples I have purchased have been my Apple ][+ (1980), and my G5 tower (2005). Everything else has been purchased through eBay (575, 6100, 8500), fished out of a dumpster and fixed by me

  34. Re:Expensive, but... unique by hackula · · Score: 1

    It will probably dominating in the same way that AT&T does today. It will be dominant, but hated.

  35. Ray-Ban RB2132 lens sunglasses standard by zibing · · Score: 1

    1930, successfully developed the world's first deputy to protect the pilots eyes, green lenses Replica Ray Ban sunglasses, followed by Ray-Ban RB2132 sunglasses began sweeping the world in various corners of the world can see his figure why people are so fond Ray-Ban RB2132 sunglasses because he can not only prevent glare but also UV protection, visual aspects but also to maintain a clear and good vision, stylish design ideas much star welcome by the U.S. public naming trend of the pilot by ".

    In 1937, the company officially put the glasses into the market and changed its name to "Ray-Ban. U.S. Admiral MacArthur was wearing Ray-Ban RB2132. During World War II, Ray-Ban RB2132 lens by the government as the standard of sunglasses, Ray Ban sunglasses 3025 really a combat mission to the Air Force has brought a lot of convenience, some people even call the Le Pen for the Second World War Allied one of the hero wins.

    Ray-Ban RB2132 lens about the advantages:
    (1)Hard coated lenses coated with multi-layer antireflection coating to reduce reflective lens, the lens has a high transmission rate, increase visual contrast and eliminate visual fatigue;
    (2) anti-fade resistance, not easy to yellow, durable;
    (3)Lens light transmission rate, depending on the material more clearly, at the same time, the lens dispersion is small, look at the scenery more fine, sharp, emerald green film has a strong translucent;
    (4)hard coated lens surface is coated with special hardening layer can effectively enhance the wear resistance lenses, the lens surface wear resistance comparable with Ray Ban sunglasses sale lenses, greatly extending the life of the lens;
    (5) plastic frames and metal mirror leg is fully integrated mirror leg pattern makes the whole lot of glasses look more lively.