Slashdot Mirror


Apple Macintosh Turns 30

snydeq writes "30 years ago today, Apple debuted the Macintosh. Here are some reviews of the early Mac models, including the Macintosh ('will be compared to other machines not only in terms of its features but also in the light of the lavish claims and promises made by Apple co-founder Steven Jobs'), the Mac SE ('contains some radical changes, including room for a second internal drive and even a fan'), the Mac IIx ('a chorus of yawns'), and the Mac Portable ('you may develop a bad case of the wannas for this lovable [16-lb.] luggable'). Plus insights on the Macintosh II's prospects from Bill Gates: 'If you look at a product like Mac Word III on that full-page display, it's pretty awesome. ... But the corporate buyer is never going to be a strong point for Apple.'" iFixit got their hands on a Mac 128K and did a teardown, evaluating the old hardware for repairability. What will the Mac look like in another 30 years?

36 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. The more things change the more they... change? by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

    I loved that when I turned on my old Apple IIe it dropped me right to a 'root' BASIC terminal and didn't cost a dime to begin my software enterprise as an elementary schooler. The Mac? Well, Resedit was just not the same...

    1. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You could hit the debugger switch, which was an add-on or semi-hidden piece, and get to a debug prompt. A very limited CLI.

      The main thing, though, was that NOT having a CLI on the classic MacOS was a 'burning the ships behind' moment. By removing that as a fallback, applications had to be graphical and work without CLI install/diagnostic processes, Even minor utilities had to have some effort put into a proper user interface.

      This worked, mostly. Some apps reimplemented command lines, and a lot of apps went to the super-limited interface, of course... but most stepped into the relatively new paradigms of the GUI (Apple not being the first, but popularizing it)

    2. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by TWiTfan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't like the movement of Apple towards a Microsoft-like business model where they care about their own corporate agenda more than their users

      I was unaware that there was a time when that WASN'T the case.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    3. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by DewDude · · Score: 2, Informative

      As someone who's used Windows 8; you are able to install arbitrary software in Desktop mode. Maybe not arbitrary Metro apps; but who cares about that?

    4. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by knarf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not having a CLI and forcing developers to either limit their applications to what could be pointed at and clicked, or implementing their own application-specific CLI is one of the reasons why the Macintosh ended up being a niche platform, derided by some as having its manual 'printed on drool-proof paper'. If there is one thing Apple did right when they introduced OSX it is their decision to 'allow' command line access.

      --
      --frank[at]unternet.org
    5. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      I think feeling is that they are moving OSX towards more of an iOS/Windows 8 model where you are not allowed to installed arbitrary software easily if at all.

      Except that will never be the case.

      First, the Mac App Store is a nice idea, but it's not the be-all end-all. Gatekeeper is easy defeated, and defaults to Mac App Store + Signed Apps.

      Signed apps are just that - signed. You buy a developer cert from Apple ($99). You sign your app and release it however you want - obviously not through the Mac App Store since you don't need it for that.

      And it really only matters if the app was downloaded from the internet. Gatekeeper isn't working if you compiled it yourself. Or you can run unsigned apps without leaving the system completely open (the popup happens, but you can have it ignore that one app always).

      And there are plenty of apps that CANNOT be put in the Mac App Store. Firstly, apps are sandboxed from there, so you cannot access files outside. Which limits the utility of well, utilities. Second, companies like Microsoft, Adobe and others are huge players on Mac and they will never use the Mac App Store. (It's not the 30%, either - companies like Autodesk find they make more money per sale from Mac App Store than their traditional channels)..

      And no demo apps.

      Finally - you need to develop apps on something. There's no way you can limit your OS to "App Store Only" and still be able to develop on it. iOS is fine - no one develops apps on their phones (and we've had years of experience on it - on-mobile development has remained a mere curiosity since PalmOS days).

      Hell, just because of the development loophole already means there's one method of arbitrary software development that's always possible - full source code distribution. If Apple somehow made it possible to lock down OS X, but still allow development, well, you just need to distribute source code and every user has to build it to get it to work. Though it would be pretty ironic for a closed-source OS to enforce open-source distribution.

    6. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by Nerdfest · · Score: 2

      Having to buy a developer licence qualifies as 'easily', in my opinion. The rest of the stuff is also 'for now'. As it is, there are already apps that can only be run if they're installed through the OSX app store. The concern is that things will keep heading this way. I see I've been modded down again though, so I guess there's no worry for Apple people. Enjoy. Let's see what happens.

    7. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2

      Well, IIRC, the only reason that A/UX even existed was because the US government had a requirement of POSIX compatibility for all computer purchases, even if the actual people and departments who wanted to buy the machines and use them had no intention of ever taking advantage of that.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    8. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2

      When this firts Macintosh came out my dad's friend, an academic, bought one. We went to his place to remonstrate to him. We pointed out the limitations of the little screen and the little keyboard but I noticed that the keyboard had none of the keys-which-do-nothing which I had on my CP/M machine at the time. The mouse made text edting simple and intuitive.

      It was the way of the future, and it only needed a short look to convince me of that.

    9. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A mouse driven text editor is nice as a set of training wheels but kind of a drag if you ever get anywhere beyond total novice.

      Usable the first time you sit down with it and usable 10 years later aren't always the same thing.

      If you are too dumb to use the build in (and well defined over the whole platform) keyboard shortcuts of Mac text editors - how the hell are you going to use vi or Emacs?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    10. Re:The more things change the more they... change? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The mac wasn't aimed at your typical vim user in the same way a Toyota Corolla isn’t aimed at professional drivers.

      Come on. We all know this. Its a 30 year old argument.

  2. My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

    In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 300 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

    Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

    1. Re:My Mac Sucks by MightyYar · · Score: 2

      My Google-fu was weak. I had a cup of coffee and recovered. Original is an old troll meme that I had forgotten.

      Kudos to the AC.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  3. All Across America Today... by glennrrr · · Score: 2

    Capacitors are failing on analog boards that haven't been powered up in 20 years.

  4. It probably will by davidwr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They used lead solder back in those days, assuming the floppy drive isn't too dusty and your boot disk is intact.

    When Steve Jobs died I booted a mid-80s Mac and it came up fine. MacPaint (source code here) was an amazing feat given that it had to run in 128KB (really 192KB - like most Mac applications of its time, it made extensive use of the code that was in the 64KB of ROM).

    So was the "disk copy" program that could copy a 400KB (400,000 byte) disk in only 4 passes. It stole a large chunk of the 22KB RAM normally allocated to video to do it.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:It probably will by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Funny

      They used lead solder back in those days

      You mean I shouldn't give babies pacifiers made of 8086 boards?

  5. MS Word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    MS Word on the original Mac was an incredible change. (This was before MS went all gung ho on Windows: they were still doing MS DOS and Windows was this DOS addon). I remember doing my physics papers on it and being able to put in math symbols and format and a bunch of other font and formatting things - all with a click of the mouse! And the WYSIWYG interface that printed what you saw on the screen!

    That was mind blowing back then. Because before that it was a text editor and trial and error in getting it to print well - or just an old fashioned IBM Selectric and a bottle of White-Out.

    Yeah, yeah, yeah, I had to write papers in the snow, uphill, both ways,.... AND LIKED IT!

    1. Re:MS Word by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2

      Because I used a Mac at home, work allowed me to purchase Windows 286 and Word for use at work. I was probably one of the few who ever used Windows 2 for any real work.

    2. Re:MS Word by Solandri · · Score: 2

      I remember doing my physics papers on it and being able to put in math symbols and format and a bunch of other font and formatting things - all with a click of the mouse!

      The scalable fonts also meant you could print banners by printing sideways on a dot-matrix printer, and not separating the individual pages. Perfect for printing title boards for posters or your science fair project.

      I still don't understand why after practically inventing scalable fonts (Postscript) and scalable GUI elements in a drive for resolution independent displays (a 12-point font was always the same physical size regardless of your screen size or resolution setting), Apple abandoned them with iOS. It's like they deliberately chose to go backwards. Come to think of it, if you look at their 1984 commercial, they've pretty much become the monolithic overlord preaching conformity that they promised to overthrow in the commercial.

  6. The Computer for the Rest of Us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's how they pitched the Mac... that is to say, a computer that's not just for computer nerds.

    "I think a nerd is a person who uses the telephone to talk to other people about telephones. And a computer nerd therefore is somebody who uses a computer in order to use a computer."
        - Douglas Adams

  7. 30 years old.... by sunderland56 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...and *still* stuck in their parent's basement, unable to make it in the business world.

  8. Re:hmm by jedidiah · · Score: 2

    > I am looked down upon because my laptop of choice comes pre-installed with a certified UNIX OS.

    No. You're looked down upon because you think that means something.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  9. Re:I find it amusing. . . by jedidiah · · Score: 2

    The great irony with that commercial is that even when that thing was made, the PC represented an attempt to resist centralized control. Even in 1984 that commercial was bogus misleading tripe.

    Even funnier still is how that girl looks distinctly Scandinavian...

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  10. Story time! Perspective: by kheldan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember the first time I saw a Macintosh. I was in my late teens, very much a young techie, and visiting what few computers stores there were at the time was a treat for me, I'd maybe get an opportunity to play with some of the new, cutting-edge stuff I could only dream about affording. At the time I was using Z80-based systems running CP/M, so there were no fancy bitmapped graphics for me, only a text terminal with ASCII/ANSI character sets. I'd heard about this "Macintosh" thing, and happened upon one, and sat and played with it for a few minutes. I found the "graphical user interface" to be "cute", but somewhat useless. After poking around with it for a few minutes, I thought to myself "well, this graphical thing is cute and clever, but let's get a look under the hood at the real operating system" and attempted to find a way to exit to the command line I expected was underlying this frilly graphical thing on the screen. Imagine my surprise (and to a lesser degree, horror!) when I discovered that this frilly, almost childish-looking graphical thing on the screen was in fact the operating system itself! I shook my head and blinked in disbelief and walked away, disbelieving that anyone could ever do anything useful with such a machine. To this day I've never owned an Apple product, but I guess I do have to admit that they were on to something big with the Mac.

    ..and no, Mac fans, I am not trolling you, and this is not flame-bait either, this is a true story, so spare me the hate, OK?

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    1. Re:Story time! Perspective: by lord_mike · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I remember my first time. It was at a department store that had decided to open up a "business computer" shop. I remember going in and seeing the mac, and trying it out. I was blown away. It was such a completely different paradigm, I didn't know what to do or how to use the machine. Even the text was different--black on white? Who would have ever thought of that? Is there any reason to even have a keyboard? I didn't manage to use it once while I was there. I played around with McPaint for about an hour and left disoriented. I looked at the other PC's, Compaq's, and PC clones around the store, and they seemed so incredibly antiquated. My mind was blown. I knew that whatever this Macintosh was, it was going to change a lot of things with computing. I wasn't sure if I was going to like that or not, but change was inevitable... and it was.

  11. Favorite computer of all time: PowerBook 540c. by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Blackbird.

    It was chunky by modern standards, but back in 1994 it was elegant and sleek. I still think it looks really good. More importantly, I think the 540c was the best computer for *working on* I've ever had. It had a terrific keyboard, a trackpad whose operation has never been equalled in my opinion, and you could swap out the optical drive for a second battery for a then-astounding four hours of battery life.

    The screen was in modern netbook range for size (9.4 inches/24 cm diagonal), and very low resolution (640 x 400), but somehow it was very comfortable to work on for a long time. The entire system had only 4MB of RAM, but the software was built around this and it felt like plenty. About the only thing I didn't like was the proprietary Ethernet transceiver connector, (a) because it was proprietry and (b) because it was garbage. That's it. Everything else was as perfect as the technology of the day could make it.

    If I could have a mint 540c with software and a pair of fresh batteries, I'd use it instead of my modern laptop for a lot of things like writing where I had to focus on one thing for a long time, use a keyboard and didn't need a lot of CPU. Alternatively I'd settle for a laptop with a really good keyboard.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Favorite computer of all time: PowerBook 540c. by NJRoadfan · · Score: 2

      The Apple AUI connector was used on more than Apple machines. There was an IBM Microchannel Ethernet card that used it too.

  12. "WordPerfect Now Easy to Learn" by vikingpower · · Score: 2

    To the left of the actual Mac SE review, there is an ad sporting "WordPerfect is Now Easy to Learn". Ach. Those times.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:"WordPerfect Now Easy to Learn" by zacherynuk · · Score: 2

      Wordperfect! (OT trivia ahead!)

      I recall a documentary about technology on BBC in the 80's (when the BBC cared about technology) - Wordperfect were touting the fact that they were the first corporation in the world to have a full time call-queue DJ ! The spin they put on it was amazing and all the people interviewed said calling their support was great.

      Like MS Office of the now, Wordperfect of the then, had weird odd version numbers for Macs.

      Wordstar was thankfully the closest DOS came to Vi ;)

  13. Re:I find it amusing. . . by mccalli · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're joking. The PC was an attempt to retain control, quickly churned out by IBM. It was just there to keep down the new micros that were starting to look popular, and the design was never intended to last.

    It worked too - IBM retained control over the business market for quite a while, and didn't realise until OS/2 and microchannel that it had actually lost the control it thought it had kept.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  14. I wonder... a time machine and a NetBSD install by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A/UX was indeed expensive. But even the early Macs could be decent Unix machines, as time (and open source a decade or more later) proved. The SE/30 was an incredible machine - able to take up to 128MB of RAM back when 'standard' was 1MB or less! Mine has seen lots of use as my piddly little home webserver.

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    1. Re:I wonder... a time machine and a NetBSD install by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 4, Informative

      Remember that many of the early UNIX variants (SunOS, HP/UX, some others) started out on the 68000 chip. It was a very well designed and flexible chip. Then PowerPC was supposed to be a platform. (Remember CHRP? of course not).

      Macs have this image of oddball hardware, but except for NuBus it really wasn't all that true.

  15. Actually just the opposite... by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    all the invasion of privacy and Big Brother-ness that went along with it

    Apple is the only large company left that is not trying to track everything you do to resell to others. Your data is YOUR DATA on an iOS system, not going into the Googleplex to figure out what ads to send you...

    They are exactly as they were in the ad, a fighter against a central overseer directing your whole life.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  16. Re:128KB for $2500 ($5700 2014) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2

    Yes. But many years later, I got an SE/30 and maxed out the RAM, just to have finally done it. Fortunately it didn't cost too much on eBay.

    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  17. Sent manuals months before the actual Mac by perpenso · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Some apps reimplemented command lines, and a lot of apps went to the super-limited interface, of course... but most stepped into the relatively new paradigms of the GUI (Apple not being the first, but popularizing it)

    Some friends and I were Apple II developers back then. We therefore had automatic acceptance into the Mac developer program. So we signed up and bought a Mac as soon as possible.

    Months before the Mac shipped, Apple sent the Inside Macintosh manuals (a set of three ring binders). So we had docs but no computer, Apple found a way to get developers to read the manual.

    While reading Inside Macintosh they introduced us to the new GUI paradigm and offered a convincing argument to go with the GUI and not just implement a terminal/console user interface.

    We couldn't afford a Lisa for development so we got 68,000 coprocessor boards for our Apple II's, cross assembled 68K assembly, and downloaded the binary to see it run. Took me days to get an application menu going, it was very frustrating, then I learned that the A5 registers was not for general purpose use. :-)

  18. Re:Funny, there was no ./ article about The Ad by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These chains on your ankles and wrists aren't meant to restrain you but to keep you from falling off the side of the ship.

    That is correct, or did you not notice they can be easily removed by anyone that knows how to swim?

    Apple really doesn't care if you wander off the edge of the ship. They just don't want the 95% of people who would be harmed by doing so to accidentally do so. If you really want to help people, that's the right way to look at the problem at a large scale.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley