Slashdot Mirror


Schiller Says Apple Is the Last PC Maker From the Mac Era, Forgets About HP

An anonymous reader writes "Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing, recently claimed that Apple is the only computer company left from the early days of the Mac. Unfortunately for him, HP still exists. "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone," Schiller told Macworld in an interview on Apple's Cupertino campus. 'We're the only one left.' I'm sorry Apple, but when exactly did HP declare bankruptcy? We contacted an HP spokesperson for a statement on Apple's ridiculous claim and were pointed to its timeline history page."

474 comments

  1. Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Wow, he really must be the spawn of satan. How dare he make a mistake. We must hate on Apple as hard as we can.

    1. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He didn't make a mistake, he knowingly made a false statement in order to posture Apple above other computer makers. It is not possible for anyone that has anything to do with the computer industry in a professional capacity to "forget" about IBM, HP, Dell, Acer, NEC, Sony, Cray, Fujitsu, etc. who all made computers from before or since the Mac to current day.

    2. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      OMG! Some VIP gave a false statement on a corporate press event. Is there a front page post on /. every time that happens?

    3. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone

      And you're an idiot. Learn to read.

    4. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      IBM don't make PCs any more
      Dell started 8 years after Apple (and after the Mac)
      Acer started 13 years after Apple (and after the Mac)
      NEC don't make PCs any more
      Sony made their first PC 7 years after Apple (and after the Mac)
      Cray never made PCs
      Fujitsu only started making PCs 14 years after Apple (and after the Mac)

      So no, none of the companies you listed fulfil the criteria of making PCs before the Mac, and still making them today.

    5. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have any proof? Mac was in 1984. Dell came in 1985. HP's own timeline of innovation shows 1995 as the year in which it entered home pc market. Prior to that it shows 1983 when they introduced first touch PC which were not IBM PC compatible and they barely qualify as "PC" as defined in general sense. So, yes, it is true that when people use the term PC and PC makers of 1984, then all except Apple are gone.

    6. Re:Oh by EEPROMS · · Score: 1

      accept Apple do not technically make computers anymore either, they design them yes but then get them made by OEM's

    7. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      IBM don't make PCs any more

      That's funny, because I see them selling workstations and tower servers. Those are PCs.

      Dell started 8 years after Apple (and after the Mac)

      Dell traces its origins to 1984, when Michael Dell created PC's Limited while a student of the University of Texas at Austin. The dorm-room headquartered company sold IBM PC-compatible computers built from stock components.

      Acer started 13 years after Apple (and after the Mac)

      The Micro-Professor MPF-I, introduced in 1981 by Multitech (which, in 1987, changed its name to Acer)

      NEC don't make PCs any more

      Really?

      Sony made their first PC 7 years after Apple (and after the Mac)

      Really?

      Cray never made PCs

      "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone"

      Fujitsu only started making PCs 14 years after Apple (and after the Mac)

      In 1954, Fujitsu manufactured Japan's first computer, the FACOM 100, and in 1961 launched the transistorized FACOM 222.

      FM-7

    8. Re:Oh by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      If you're going to say that it doesn't count if it wasn't IBM PC compatible, then Apple doesn't count, either. Early Macs were clearly not PC compatible - never mind that the processors and file formats are different, the disks - even if they fit in the other computer - won't be readable due to incompatible low level formatting.

    9. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should learn to read.

      Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone. We're the only one left. We're still doing it, and growing faster than the rest of the PC industry because of that willingness to reinvent ourselves over and over.

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

      Phil never claimed the Mac was a PC in his quote. Is his quote he said that every manufacturer that was making PC's, before Apple made it's non-PC Mac, is either out of business or not making PC's anymore. The second part of the quote says that Apples non-PC Mac business is growing faster than the PC industry.

    11. Re:Oh by Guspaz · · Score: 4, Informative

      IBM just announced Lenovo is purchasing the server business, so... that correction is false at least. The Dell one is too, since Dell started in late 1984, nearly a year after the first mac shipped.

      The rest check out. The MSX is of particular note, as it's the platform (MSX2) where the Metal Gear videogame franchise started. Unfortunately, most people are more familiar with the later NES port. It was a pretty terrible port with much more primitive graphics and lots of important stuff removed, like, say, the actual metal gear the game is named after.

    12. Re:Oh by egcagrac0 · · Score: 2

      The AC I was replying to seemed to suggest that HP didn't count (barely counted), because their touch-PC wasn't "PC Compatible".

      Lots of computer manufacturers' offerings from that time period weren't "PC compatible", yet they were still clearly computers.

      The actual article said computers, not PC's. That's a much broader standard.

    13. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to have trouble with comprehension. That is a separate statement and one that isn't even directly connected to his original premise.

      Now think about this. What area is Apple growing in? Smartphones and tablets. Those are the things they are making that are growing faster than the rest of the PC industry. He never made a PC to PC comparison.

    14. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lenovo is purchasing the x86 server business, not the POWER business.

      Dell
      Founded: May 1, 1984

      Macintosh
      Release date: January 24, 1984

      For all intents and purposes, the two came into existence simultaneously.

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

      You seem to have trouble with comprehension. That is a separate statement and one that isn't even directly connected to his original premise.

      Learn how to read. It's all one quote.

      Now think about this. What area is Apple growing in? Smartphones and tablets.

      Apple's Mac business alone is out growing the PC industry.

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

      The actual article said computers, not PC's.

      WRONG

      Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone. We're the only one left. We're still doing it, and growing faster than the rest of the PC industry because of that willingness to reinvent ourselves over and over.

      Phil is clearly referring to PC's.

    17. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Founded: May 1, 1984

      Macintosh
      Release date: January 24, 1984

      For all intents and purposes, the two came into existence simultaneously.

      If by simultaneously you mean not simultaneously at all in anyway possible.

    18. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why did he say "computers"?

    19. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, think of all of those people who were born three months sooner than you. Surely that makes a huge difference in your overall life experiences.

    20. Re:Oh by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

      Yes because the thing that really says cool is: we were making computers in the 80's. If it was longer than 5 years ago it has 0 impact on me whether or not I'll buy your current product. (less then 5 I don't have a reasonable, as reasonable as possible in the tech industry, that you build quality and will be around long enough to handle warranty issues).

    21. Re:Oh by maccodemonkey · · Score: 2

      Dell traces its origins to 1984, when Michael Dell created PC's Limited while a student of the University of Texas at Austin. The dorm-room headquartered company sold IBM PC-compatible computers built from stock components.

      8 years after Apple started making computers, just like the OP said.

      The Micro-Professor MPF-I, introduced in 1981 by Multitech (which, in 1987, changed its name to Acer)

      5 years after Apple started making computers.

      Really?

      7 years after Apple.

      Cray never made PCs

      In 1954, Fujitsu manufactured Japan's first computer, the FACOM 100, and in 1961 launched the transistorized FACOM 222.

      Here's a picture of your FACOM 100, c'mon, check your facts before you do the Wikipedia copy/paste. It's pretty obvious Schiller meant PCs, even the Slashdot title says "PC Maker."
      http://museum.ipsj.or.jp/compu...

      Pretty sloppy counterargument. Your biggest problem? Apple built their first PC in 1976.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

      You're using the date of 1984, which is the Mac. OP clearly was not talking about the Mac intro date, he calls the Mac's release date out as a separate date in several sections.

    22. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really need to learn reading comprehension. The entire thread is based on the false statement that no computer companies that were around in 1984 (the year the Mac was released) are still producing computers today.

      No wonder you buy Apple.

    23. Re:Oh by laird · · Score: 0

      Schiller said when they started the Macintosh, which was 1978.

    24. Re:Oh by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      If there was a giant fire in the maternity ward of the hospital I was born in three months earlier, that would make a pretty big difference in our overall life experiences, yes.

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

      IBM is selling there x86 server business. They will continue making other servers. So technically IBM will still make computers even after the sale.

    26. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because oddly enough, people speak loosely, or imprecisely from time to time. If you don't think the meaning was obvious from the context, then you need some reading comprehension skills.

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

      They started the Macintosh development in 1979. Iin 1977, the TRS-80 was released by Radio Shack, and in 1979, the TI99/4 was released by Texas Instruments.

    28. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I totally forgot about the giant PC fires of spring 1984.

    29. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This thread is full of people tripping over themselves to dredge up technicalities such as dates of copmany registration, name changes and product release dates in a pathetic effort to defend an indefensible statement.

      The nonsense that has been spewed by those idiots in this thread do nothing other than clearly demonstrate just how odiotic Apple fans are.

      At the end of the day this was a douchey statement from a douchey guy working at a company that, in a world where company names had to reflect the character of the people who worked there and the market they served, would be called "The Douche Bag".

    30. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I accepted that long ago. ;)

    31. Re:Oh by rescendent · · Score: 1

      Didn't Apple Computer, Inc only start making PCs in 2006? Before that they were making PowerPC based computers and prior to 1995 Motorola based computers. With the general definition of the PC market being something you can install Windows/DOS on or WinTel compatible; the IBM compatible bit being dropped some time ago. Though Apple Computer, Inc ceased to exist in 2007 when it became Apple Inc.

    32. Re:Oh by ToasterTester · · Score: 1

      Actually Dell started about the same time as the Mac, the orignal name of the company was PC Limited and they later changed their name to Michael Dell's name.

    33. Re:Oh by Zalbik · · Score: 4, Informative

      And this is why Slashdot needs a "Wrong" moderation.

      a) The quote was specifically "computers", not "PC's"

      b) He mentioned HP....but you conveniently ignored that one.

      c) Sony made it's first computer (a PC even) in 1982, before the Mac

      d) NEC still makes computers (servers)

      e) Acer was making PC's in 1983, before the Mac

      f) Fujitsu made computers in 1954, and PC's in 1981, before the Mac

      But yeah...you were right about IBM & kinda right about Dell (though it could be argued it was just a rename of his PC's Limited...which started in 1984), so I guess 2 out of 8 is a good day for you....

    34. Re:Oh by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Not possible?

      He's Vice president of fucking MARKETING. Of course he's gonna over-exaggerate Apple's accomplishments.

      And it's not that much of an exaggeration. In marketing speak today a computer is intended for sale to a consumer. It's usually a desktop, but laptops sometimes count. Since there were no laptops in 1984 (luggables were the portable technology everyone loved) and he's a marketing drone he could only mean desktop PC sales to consumers. Which HP didn't do in that era.

      And in the '78-'84 era he's referring to the major companies who made computers do not have a good survival rate. Wang, Compaq, Osborn, Commodore, Tandy (remember IBM-Tandy compatibles? If you don't you shouldn't be talking about the history of computing) are simply gone. IBM, Atari, Texas Instruments survived by getting out of the computer business.

    35. Re: Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just replying here because it hardly matters where. And doing so anonymously since I'd be skewered. But seriously. Both sides. You are debating the least important thing ever. Who cares?

    36. Re:Oh by ediron2 · · Score: 1

      If you're going to be pedantic, you have to at least stick to the original quote in it's entirety: "from the early days of the Macintosh". A few months in 30 years is 0.8%, which pretty much seems like a rounding error.

    37. Re:Oh by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Well, there was the Computer Riot of January 1969, at the time the largest student occupation in Canadian history. Fire did indeed burn down the computer labs.

    38. Re:Oh by multisync · · Score: 1

      With the general definition of the PC market being something you can install Windows/DOS on or WinTel compatible

      Where did you get that idea? A personal computer is just that, a small, affordable computer that is operated directly by the end user. Neither Windows or an Intel processor are required.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    39. Re: Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

      Hardware is a means to an end. Software is schizophrenic. Who the fuck cares?

      oh, wait, I fo

    40. Re:Oh by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1

      The nonsense that has been spewed by those idiots in this thread do nothing other than clearly demonstrate just how odiotic Apple fans are.

      Odiotic?

      I know it's a typo, but odious and idiotic is EXACTLY what these fanbois are. Great word, it should be adopted into the English language immediately.

      And don't let those odiotic grammar and spelling Nazis tell you otherwise...

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    41. Re: Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HP was making PC's before almost anyone else. The 9000 series began in 1971. HP bought Compaq in 2002 and Compaq bought DEC in 1997. DEC made computers beginning in 1957.

    42. Re: Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now but not back then.
      If motorola was a few months quicker. It might be there CPUs in most PCs.

    43. Re:Oh by dwater · · Score: 1

      quite possibly from the 'Mac vs PC' advertisements, made by Apple...

      --
      Max.
    44. Re:Oh by jareth-0205 · · Score: 2

      OMG! Some VIP gave a false statement on a corporate press event. Is there a front page post on /. every time that happens?

      Yes, it should be. So must we tolerate falsehoods now?

    45. Re: Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the real problem is that this claim will now be uncritically repeated by the varies blogs and media properties that worship the ground apple walks on, and the obviously false statement will be widely cited as the truth in short order. its the same strategy apple uses to promote the myth that they invented touch screens, tablets, mp3 players, etc etc.

    46. Re:Oh by gwolf · · Score: 1

      Actually... No.

      I got my first Acer (marketed in Mexico under the "Printaform" brand, but manuals were all branded Acer) in 1987. The Acer 5201/5203 (single- or double- floppy drives) were quite popular here in Mexico by then.

      "Simple" PC clones, built on a passive ISA backplane. The motherboard was just a "special" ISA card with the CPU and the 256KB of RAM in it. First expansion slot had a CGA card, second expansion card was the I/O controller, and it had one free port (to which I eventually hooked up a MFM controller and knew the bliss of having a hard drive).

    47. Re:Oh by multisync · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're probably right about that.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    48. Re:Oh by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      The MSX is of particular note, as it's the platform (MSX2) where the Metal Gear videogame franchise started. Unfortunately, most people are more familiar with the later NES port. It was a pretty terrible port with much more primitive graphics and lots of important stuff removed, like, say, the actual metal gear the game is named after.

      Incidentally, you can get the English versions of the two MSX games with Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence (it's on Disc 2), the Metal Gear HD Collection, or the Metal Gear Legacy Collection. I know they're in the MGS3 game menus in the HD Collection, I'm not sure about the Legacy Collection.

      I think the fact that English-speaking audiences didn't get to play the real Metal Gear or play its sequel at all is why those games were included.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    49. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you autistic or mentally handicapped? You keep bringing up things that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

    50. Re:Oh by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      The topic at hand were the great PC fires of spring 1984, pay attention.

    51. Re:Oh by Shalhav · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between tolerating falsehoods and not making stupid harmless ones front page news.

    52. Re:Oh by ragefan · · Score: 1

      quite possibly from the 'Mac vs PC' advertisements, made by Apple...

      Except those ads come after the beginning of the Intel Mac era, not prior...

    53. Re:Oh by dwater · · Score: 1

      except we're talking about a (mis)understanding *now*, not then...

      --
      Max.
    54. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG! Some VIP gave a false statement on a corporate press event. Is there a front page post on /. every time that happens?

      Yes, it should be. So must we tolerate falsehoods now?

      Hey, you still keep loving that guy RMS, don't you.

    55. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're going to be pedantic, you have to at least stick to the original quote in it's entirety: "from the early days of the Macintosh". A few months in 30 years is 0.8%, which pretty much seems like a rounding error.

      If you are going to be that pedantic, why do you compare the founding date of Dell to the introduction date of the Macintosh?

    56. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Apple Computer, Inc only start making PCs in 2006? Before that they were making PowerPC based computers and prior to 1995 Motorola based computers. With the general definition of the PC market being something you can install Windows/DOS on or WinTel compatible; the IBM compatible bit being dropped some time ago..

      Of course then HP didn't make a "PC" when the Mac came out.

    57. Re: Oh by Mabhatter · · Score: 1

      And Apple had been designing Mac for a year and a half before it came out. And mopping the floor with Apple 2. Dell "reassembling" things isn't close to Apple in 1984.

    58. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus, you pedantic geeks can be so narrow-minded. Do you seriously think Schiller was talking about IBM-PC compatibles when he said "PC industry"??

      He is obviously talking about that bygone era when you could introduce a new platform and make it stick. He was clearly talking about IBM (not the clone manufacturers), Atari, Commodore, TI, Tandy Radio Shack, etc. CONTEXT, people!

    59. Re:Oh by demonrob · · Score: 1

      who is talking PCs? Computers is the word. Cray made (still make?) fairly good computers. And so do many of the others. And why pointing out when Apple started - the discussion is THE MAC. For an AC you really are pretty dumb.

    60. Re: Oh by demonrob · · Score: 1

      but it is important - people are writing wrong things on the internet and it must be fixed!

    61. Re:Oh by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Does not the quote strictly speaking concern the companies themselves, whether or not they still make computers?

    62. Re:Oh by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Didn't Apple Computer, Inc only start making PCs in 2006? Before that they were making PowerPC based computers and prior to 1995 Motorola based computers.

      And how were these PowerPC and 680x0 based computers not PCs?

      There is really some desperation going on here. Imagine Apple made a list of "serious competitors" when the Mac was released. And they made one now. Well, you would really hope they made such a list; not doing it would have been irresponsible. Acer wouldn't have been on the list, a company that later changed it's name to Acer might have been. Dell wouldn't have been on the list. HP built computers, but the HP 150 was an overpriced toy compared to the Macintosh, and HP 3000 etc. were not "desktop computers" but "desk computers". Compaq was swallowed up by HP. "Sony produced computers (MSX home computers and NEWS workstations) during the 1980s, exclusively for sale in the Japanese market. The company withdrew from the computer business around 1990." So yes, Sony wasn't "around" where the Mac was introduced.

      So if we count companies that from 1984 to 2014 consistently sold desktop and laptop computers (not workstations) under the same recognisable name and possibly ignore companies which promised they were leaving the market (HP, I'm looking at you), and were important enough both in 1984 and 2014 to be recognised as a player in the market, then Apple may very well be the only one. (The last because it is quite possible there is some mom-and-pop shop open somewhere that has been selling home-made PCs for 30 years).

  2. And IBM by MWagman · · Score: 1

    Isn't IBM still around

    1. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Nope. IBM sold their PC division to Lenovo about a decade ago.

    2. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They sold out the PC business to Lenovo. They lost their chance to count.

    3. Re:And IBM by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I still count IBM. I believe that quite was, "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone."

      IBM is still around. Maybe they sold their business, but the company is still around and the business they sold to Lenovo is still going strong.
      Likewise for HP, Dell, hell even Atari are still around. Sure their businesses have changed, but so did Apple's. Mac has far less mindshare than iPhone and iTunes these days.

      --
      "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
    4. Re:And IBM by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 1

      s/quite/quote/

      --
      "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
    5. Re:And IBM by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

      I forget where I read the quote, but at one point when Atari changed hands (probably when Hasbro bought the brand) the company wasn't much more than "a crate full of documents".

      .

    6. Re:And IBM by lord_mike · · Score: 1

      Mainframes and minis apparently don't count, which makes no sense. IBM still sells plenty of computers, just not PC's. The apple spokesman's quote did not specify PC's. They said computers as a whole, so they are wrong on two counts at least.

    7. Re:And IBM by horm · · Score: 1

      The Atari now is Atari in name only. The name has been owned by several different companies in the past couple decades.

    8. Re:And IBM by GiantRobotMonster · · Score: 1

      Yep, Sadly the current Atari is simply Infogrames rebadged.
      Infogrames bought the name, trademarks, and other IP.

    9. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      However wrong Schiller is, you're interpreting the meaning quite differently than intended or than any reasonable person would take it. IBM doesn't make personal computers, therefore they're no longer a maker of personal computers that were around when Apple started the Mac.
       
      And saying Atari is still around is like saying Southern California is still Spanish* since some of the towns have the same name as when the Spanish ruled. Hell, it's not even that, considering SoCal still has some buildings left from that time.

      *Not to be confused with Hispanic, Mexican, etc.

    10. Re:And IBM by Sable+Drakon · · Score: 1

      Dell doesn't really count. They weren't around back when Apple was founded. If you're curious, Apple was founded in 1976, Dell in 1984.

      --
      The Amarri pray for god, the Caldari pray for profit. the Gallente pray for peace, but the Minmatar pray their ships hol
    11. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone,"

      IBM still makes computers.

    12. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I forget where I read the quote, but at one point when Atari changed hands (probably when Hasbro bought the brand) the company wasn't much more than "a crate full of documents". .

      I mentioned this a couple days ago in the "How can Nintendo recover?" comments, when someone suggested Sony and Atari moving to software-only was great for them. It was such a great move for Atari that, as I said there, Infogrames bought them and started wearing their skin, only to go bankrupt themselves years later with the same model.

    13. Re:And IBM by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      Well yeah they kind of invented the fucking things. And everyone else stole the BIOS from IBM. Sorry, I mean "Reverse engineered." Back when that sort of thing was still legal. Of course if you look at IBM, they're really more of a conglomeration of smaller companies and their desktop division got sold a while back. Not profitable enough. So if you had some sort of device that allowed you to travel in time from the past (I have a car that does this, at the rate of one second per second,) you might not recognize the IBM PC division anymore, but I suppose TECHNICALLY they're still there.

      Now if you're thinking of PCs in terms of PCs that Apple made, then I suppose Apple might be the only PC maker from that era. I'm pretty sure that's technically a tautology. "Apple is the only company from the PC Era that's still making Apple computers," doesn't have quite the same ring to it, though I think if you say something like that you might get points for comedy value.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    14. Re:And IBM by nojayuk · · Score: 1

      Apple didn't exist back then, it was Apple Computer. Apple Computer produced the first Mac, Apple produce the current Mac range. I forget when the rebranding occurred.

    15. Re:And IBM by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Dell doesn't really count. They weren't around back when Apple was founded. If you're curious, Apple was founded in 1976, Dell in 1984.

      The quote was "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone", not "Every company that made computers when we were founded, they're all gone", so it's irrelevant that Apple was founded before Dell.

    16. Re:And IBM by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 2

      yes and that is the same business that existed from day one just with a different owner - it did not go away.

    17. Re:And IBM by Guspaz · · Score: 3

      Perhaps, but what is relevant is that Dell (November 1984) had not been founded when the Mac shipped (January 1984).

    18. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple dropped "computers" from its name in 2007 and outsourced manufacturing to China long ago.
      They are more a marketing/design company now but somehow they still count as a computer manufacturer?

      Isnt the whole IBM -> Lenovo thing similiar as Apple -> Foxconn?

    19. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can buy a standard sized tower computer from IBM for $1200 USD right now. If that isn't a PC, then what is?

    20. Re: And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A server. Not a PC.

      And even that business has been sold to Lenovo.

      IBM doesn't count. The end.

    21. Re: And IBM by Black+LED · · Score: 1

      Small servers are PCs

    22. Re:And IBM by msauve · · Score: 2

      I assume he meant to limit it to PC makers. IBM obviously made computers way before Apple, still does, and is still around as a company. HP made minis in the '60's.

      But, Apple started making PCs in 1976, 4 years before HP according to HPs own timeline referenced in the summary. IBM came out with their PC in 1981.

      Other than IBM and HP, what pre-Apple computer makers are still around intact? DEC, Data General, Amdahl, Cray, Control Data, Burroughs, Sperry Univac, NCR, Honeywell, GE, RCA, etc. either don't make computers, or their current corporate existence bears only a tenuous relation to the original (e.g. DEC was bought by Compaq, which was bought by HP, but there's not a bit of DEC left at HP).

      The PC contemporaries of Apple - Radio Shack, Commodore, Cromemco, Northstar, IMSAI, Altair, etc. aren't around or aren't making computers.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    23. Re:And IBM by laird · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apple Computer was rebranded Apple in 2007. It's clearly the same company, and had nothing to do with the launch of the Mac in 1984 - it was rebranding because Apple sells tons of phones and tablets, and not just "computers". And since it's clearly the same company, changing "Apple Computer" to "Apple" doesn't affect whether their claim is correct or not.

      To drill into their details:
      - "When we started the Mac" was several years before the Mac shipped. Specifically, it was 1978, when the Lisa and Mac both started parallel development as competing teams.
      - Clearly when he said "computer" what he was talking about was "personal computer". There are still a few of the mainframe-era companies around and still selling mainframes. But in the early personal computer market, all of Apple's competitors from the early days are out of the business. Remember, Apple's founders left HP to start Apple specifically because HP didn't think personal computers were viable, so I'm pretty sure Apple didn't forget that HP existed. Arguably HP did sell their first personal computer, the incredibly obscure HP-85 starting in 1980 (http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/museum/personalsystems/0029/). Long after Apple Computer was selling the Apple ][, and a few years after the Lisa and Mac projects started.

      So IMO if you accept that by "computer" he meant "personal computer" and by "when we started the Mac" he meant when they started working on it, not when it shipped, I think his claim is true.

    24. Re:And IBM by robthebloke · · Score: 1

      Well yeah they kind of invented the fucking things.

      Bletchley park called, and they'd like their place in computing history back.

    25. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still count IBM. I believe that quite was, "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone."
      IBM is still around. Maybe they sold their business, but the company is still around and the business they sold to Lenovo is still going strong.
      Likewise for HP, Dell, hell even Atari are still around. Sure their businesses have changed, but so did Apple's. Mac has far less mindshare than iPhone and iTunes these days.

      You are reading it far too closely, he's talking about PCs, and the rest of the quote is about still being around because they are constantly reinventing themselves. IBM (and HP) are also still around only by reinventing themselves. However, they reinvented themselves right out of the PC market, and HP wasn't in that market before Apple began developing the Mac.

    26. Re:And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 0

      Wrong. Lenovo bought the name. They put IBMs logo on their own Chinese made computers, rather than continue the actual IBM manufacturing.

      They only used it for a few years. These days Lenovo use their own logo on those computers.

      IBM PCs are long dead.

    27. Re:And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 0

      Ah, the value of looking up the primary source rather than believing a summary of an article, which is commenting on the original article.

      From the original article, which includes a little more of what Schiller said: âoeEvery company that made computers when we started the Mac, theyâ(TM)re all gone,â said Philip Schiller, Appleâ(TM)s senior vice president of worldwide marketing, in an interview on Appleâ(TM)s Cupertino campus Thursday. âoeWeâ(TM)re the only one left. Weâ(TM)re still doing it, and growing faster than the rest of the PC industry because of that willingness to reinvent ourselves over and over.â

      It's clear he was talking about PCs.

    28. Re:And IBM by dwillden · · Score: 1

      Exactly, he said computers. And as I recall Texas Instruments was making computers before the Mac As far as I can find Apple started the Macintosh program in 1979, TI released the TI99/4 in late 1979 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI99/4A meaning they started the development some time before. They are no longer in the end user computer market, but they too are still around.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    29. Re:And IBM by dwillden · · Score: 1

      He didn't say still making computers he said still around and from your list at the end you left off TI who is also still around, and their high end calculators are arguably personal computers.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    30. Re: And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      They may use descendants of the the IBM PC compatible architecture. But by definition they are not personal computers.

    31. Re:And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Indeed Dell didn't exist till 1988.

      Michael Dell did have a company called "PC's Limited", but even that didn't manufacture a PC of it's own till 1985.

    32. Re: And IBM by Black+LED · · Score: 1

      If you look at what IBM offers for their x86 tower servers, you'll see that hardware and price-wise they are very similar to any run of the mill PC you might buy. When I think of "server", I generally think of multi-chip systems with gobs of RAM connected to large RAID systems. In fact, the laptop I am typing this message on has better specs than their low end servers.

    33. Re: And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Right, but they are intended to SERVE files or data to many users PCs. They are by definition not PERSONAL computers.

      Server doesn't mean hi-spec.

    34. Re:And IBM by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Well yeah they kind of invented the fucking things. And everyone else stole the BIOS from IBM. Sorry, I mean "Reverse engineered." Back when that sort of thing was still legal.

      Reverse engineering for the purposes of interoperability is still a protected activity.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    35. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I forget where I read the quote, but at one point when Atari changed hands (probably when Hasbro bought the brand) the company wasn't much more than "a crate full of documents". .

      I mentioned this a couple days ago in the "How can Nintendo recover?" comments, when someone suggested Sony and Atari moving to software-only was great for them. It was such a great move for Atari that, as I said there, Infogrames bought them and started wearing their skin, only to go bankrupt themselves years later with the same model.

      Damn, I just noticed I said "sony" when I meant to say "sega"
      Should have proof-read better.

    36. Re: And IBM by Black+LED · · Score: 1

      They are no more capable of serving files or data than my laptop is. The server title for those particular machines is just that, a title, not a computer category.

    37. Re: And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      That doesn't seem to be true even for their base model IBM System x3100 M4. These machines are engineered to be servers.

    38. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HP wasn't in that market before Apple began developing the Mac.

      Oh really? I didn't know Apple started developing the Macintosh back in the 60s.

    39. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are the one that is wrong. Lenovo bought the division, all employees within that group went over. Included in the sale was the advanced manufacturing technology. The computers sold by the division, in the last several years IBM had ownership, were manufactured by third parties, in the many manner as other companies such as HP and Apple.

      http://news.lenovo.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=1261

    40. Re: And IBM by Smauler · · Score: 1

      The IBM's being sold now are a hell of a lot closer in terms of architecture to their ancestors than current macs are to theirs.

    41. Re:And IBM by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      But, Apple started making PCs in 1976, 4 years before HP according to HPs own timeline referenced in the summary.

      According to their timeline HP were advertising a device as a "personal computer" in 1968

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    42. Re: And IBM by Black+LED · · Score: 1

      I am looking at these. I really don't see anything that distinguishes it from a "normal" PC. I guess the three year onsite repair is something you don't normally get.

      Ah well. A rose by any other name and all that.

    43. Re:And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Even assuming your spin was true, that doesn't detract from his point.

      If desktop computers were an easy business to make money in a company like IBM, which makes a lot of other computer-related products, would have stayed in. But it's really fucking hard to stay profitable as a PC-maker because PC-makers put together a bunch of commodity components anyone can buy, which means that the Chinese have your quality at a better price and everyone knows it. Just go down the list of top-10 PC manufacturers in the late 70s/early 80s. Almost all are gone completely. Most of the rest went bankrupt, and were forced out of the PC business completely.

      HP is a PC manufacturer today that was around then, but it wasn't a major PC manufacturer in 1978-1984. Dell claims lineage to '84, but Dell wasn't a major PC company until the mid-90s.

    44. Re:And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Dude, this is a quote from marketing. Applying engineering-level precision to it is just cruel. Particularly since you know what he meant from the context.

      He clearly meant that the big companies that everyone would have recognized as manufacturers of the things we call PCs today (ie: desktops for sale to consumers, but the luggables used as laptops also count), is no longer in the business of making desktops or laptops.

      Dell claims they existed in 1984, but they weren't major. HP is apparently convinced that a calculator in 1984 was the equivalent of a desktop computer, because that's all a consumer could buy from them in 1984. The rest of the modern top 10 are a) Apple, b) Sony, or c) some Chinese company.

    45. Re: And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      That's kinda the point.

      The title of PC manufacturer sucks, so IBM sold it to the Chinese and kept a stealth-PC-manufacturing business in selling servers.

      Which means that of major PC manufacturers from the early 80s Apple is the only that still tries to make money on selling personal computers.

    46. Re:And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Well yeah they kind of invented the fucking things.

      Bletchley park called, and they'd like their place in computing history back.

      He didn't challenge it. He's talking about mass-produced computers you sell to anyone with a checkbook, with a CRT as an interface, and a QWERTY-keyboard as a controller. Which Bletchley Park did not do.

      The Apple II may not have technically been the first of those to exist, but it was definitely the first to make a major impact on the US market.

    47. Re:And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 2

      From the context it's pretty clear he meant "around and making personal computers." Which means this was a statement from marketing that is only untrue if you a) intentionally distort the context, and b) insist on rigorous definition of "personal computer" that includes things like calculators.

      Be honest. When's the last time your company's marketing guy was that close to the truth.

    48. Re:And IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once more, with feeling: The quote refers to "computers", not "PCs", YOU FUCKING DIMWIT.

    49. Re: And IBM by Black+LED · · Score: 1

      I don't believe that was ever the point.

    50. Re: And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. Hardware wise they are both direct evolutionary descendants of the IBM PC. But the IBM servers still aren't personal computers.

    51. Re: And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      I don't believe that was ever the point.

      This is a quote from the VP of Marketing, not an engineer. You know he didn't crack open the inaugural PC world, make a list of all PC-selling companies in the magazine, and then order his horde of marketing flaks to search Google high and low for anything that could easily be adapted into being a general-purpose PC on their websites today.

      What he probably did was remember back to those days, look at the list of the biggest companies that actually tried to sell computers to ordinary Americans, and he noticed the only one on that list still trying to sell PCs to consumers was Apple. And since IBM made a big deal about leaving the PC-to-consumer business a few years ago they don't really count even if a truly fanatical IBM customer could buy something a lot like a PC from them. Acer might count, because I vaguely remember they had PCs widely available in some ancient PC Worlds I read when I was bored at the library in the mid-90s, but so far I have yet to see any other potential examples of companies who were big in the PCs-to-ordinary-American-idiots market in the late 70s/early 80s, and are still big in the PCs-to-ordinary-American-idiots market.

      His point was that being a PC manufacturer sucks. If you don't make a Wintel clone it's very difficult to convince the masses to buy your machine. If you do make a Wintel clone some asshole will under-cut your prices. Literally. Anybody with a screwdriver and the brains to read can build his own damn computer. And if you make the sale to the cheapskate you're gonna have to put up with (and pay for) a lot of tech support calls from idiots who installed adware. You can make money if you re-badge your PCs as "servers," sell support contracts to most of you customers, and laugh in the face on anyone without a contract who calls, but even that doesn't seem to be too lucrative as IBM is exiting the field.

    52. Re:And IBM by dwillden · · Score: 1

      From the context he said still around. Verbiage is verbiage. But even if he did mean making personal computers, HP is still around.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    53. Re:And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Your 2005 news article is very out of date. Lenovo did buy the IBM PC brand, and manufactured them for a while. And then they abandoned the IBM brand and only shipped their own Lenovo brand PCs.

      IBM PCs haven't been manufactured for years. Believe I'm wrong? Supply a link to where you can buy new IBM PCs.

      (And note, that's PCs, not servers.)

    54. Re: And IBM by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Same thing. Only you are only looking at the numbers. The difference between a PC and a server is engineering. Server grade memory. RAID etc.

      http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/...

    55. Re:And IBM by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      Show me Apple's profits in personal computers please. Prior ot the iPod and later iPhone the company was on death's door because they could not stay afloat selling Mac's.

      As to IBM going to Lenovo - Lenovo got assets not just a brand name sticker. And they have continued the primary product - Thinkpad's to this day and added new ones. Is Apple's product line up identical to what it was 10 or 20 years ago?

    56. Re:And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      To quote the entire quote:

      “Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they’re all gone,” said Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of worldwide marketing, in an interview on Apple’s Cupertino campus Thursday. “We’re the only one left. We’re still doing it, and growing faster than the rest of the PC industry because of that willingness to reinvent ourselves over and over.”

      If you understand how adjectival phrases work you understand that he's saying those companies are gone from making computers, not that God came down from the heavens and smote them with lightnings. If you're gonna be an anal-retentive dick about the specific definition of computer you're faced with the problem that he explained that the computers he was talking about are the ones made by the "PC industry" in a subsequent sentence.

      As for HP, can you name a single model they made between 1985-1995? Hell can you link to a source that mentions their market share in 1980? They were making PC-like objects in the early 80s, but that's arguably outside of his time range (Mac development started a couple years before their first machine was launched), and they made so little impact on the market that nobody outside of HP remembered the damn things until they decided to sic their marketing shills on Schiller.

      In other words I'd call you a troll, but effective trolling requires there to be something vaguely resembling substance to your case, so I'm forced to conclude you are a) an incredibly inept HP shill, b) an incredibly effective paid Apple shill, or c) a guy who commented without bothering to read the entire quote and is pretending he knew what he was talking about.

      Really, you have a perfect counter-example in Acer, but you're repeating the HP marketing drone's obvious marketing BS, how can you possibly expect anyone to take you seriously?

    57. Re:And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      You're a really bad troll. Jobs returned in '96, profitability followed shortly, and then a couple years after that the iPod appeared. How much is Apple paying you to make it's critics look bad on the internet?

      I mean that very seriously. I need one of those internet jobs that allows you to make $80 an hour, and somebody is clearly paying you something.

      As for Lenovo, read the quote from MacWorld, not the version HP paid Slashdot to put on the front page. It says every other PC manufacturing company company is gone from the PC Market. IBM is gone from the PC Market. If you actually wanted to make a counter-example that wasn't ridiculous you'd be using Acer. This is my clue that the people paying you must be Apple, because you're carefully avoiding the one piece of evidence that makes your case reasonable.

    58. Re: And IBM by Black+LED · · Score: 1

      That's just it, I don't see anything special there. Those are similar to the standard components that I would choose to put into a mid range PC build.

    59. Re:And IBM by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      The numbers pls: net income (millions ) after the return of Jobs

      1997: (1,045)
      1998: 309
      1999: 601
      2000: 786
      2001: (-25)
      2002: 65
      2003: 69
      2004: 276

      Apple was going no where with the iMac. The initial success (as far as the bottom line) faded pretty quickly. What happened in 2004? The iPod started to take off. And in 2008 the iPhone. Were Apple without those two products today it would at best be on life support and at worst be gone, assets and IP sold off in whole or parts.

      The quote in question was intended to imply that all the other PC businesses went bust and vanished from the face of the earth. The business that IBM sold continued without interruption as Lenovo - it did not vanish or go bankrupt. And honestly, its comical for anyone at apple to talk about pcs as they have never broken 15% of the market and continue to this day to trend between 5 and 15% of the overall market.

    60. Re:And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Where are you getting these numbers? I ask partly due to curiosity (I couldn't find any info on Apple profitability from the late 90s from a free site), and partly because they don't really support either of our stories.

      The iPod was introduced in '01, aka: the year on your list that has a loss after Jobs came back. 2004 isn't interesting due to the iPod hardware taking off (as a piece of hardware the iPod had been a hit the whole time), but because that's the first full year of the iTunes store, which launched in April 2003.

      From those numbers it looks like the Mac alone was a decent line of business for Apple. They aren't making Billion$, but they're well into the black every year. Then the iPod hits and something causes their net income to crater until they open the iTubnes store, and it recoversw to '98 levels (but not the '99 and '00 levels).

    61. Re:And IBM by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      Google is your friend as is Apple IR. And from Wikipedia "Though the iPod was released in 2001, its price and Mac-only compatibility caused sales to be relatively slow until 2004." iMac was briefly a boon to the bottom line though without combing through the financials I couldn't say what else might have added to botttom line (tax credits, goodwill, who knows what).

    62. Re:And IBM by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      It still doesn't support your case very well. It looks like the iPod division is dragging down Apple's results until '04. Then Apple's result is worse then the year the iMac was introduced.

      My case isn't that Apple's making it's billions solely off the Mac division, but rather that it's making enough money that selling the thing off to Lenovo doesn't make much sense. It also makes enough money to support research into new technologies which do make $billions upon $billions.

      This is extremely unusual. Most PC companies have been killed by the fact that anyone can make a PC, and all PCs act pretty much the same, so competing on quality is very difficult. Since competing on price wins you one sale today, but no long-term relationship with customers, there is a lot of churn in major PC companies. As I said the only major US PC company besides Apple that's been a major US PC company every year since the era Schiller mentioned (late 70s/early 80s) is Acer. And they aren't exactly the first, second, third, or even fifth company you think of when you think of PC Builders.

      If you care about such things (for example, maybe you're VP of Apple marketing, or me) that's a very interesting factoid and extremely worthy of discussion.

      If you don't (and most people don't) then it's boring.

    63. Re:And IBM by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Show me Apple's profits in personal computers please. Prior ot the iPod and later iPhone the company was on death's door because they could not stay afloat selling Mac's.

      The latest estimate that I found, before Dell's profits dropped, was that Apple makes about 45% of all profits in the PC hardware market, Dell makes about 13%, and I think Lenovo came next with about 7%. That's purely PC hardware, not counting tablets, and not counting operating systems.

  3. !HP by iroll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comparing today's HP to the HP of the 80s, I'm inclined to side with Schiller.

    --
    Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
    1. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Doing the same comparison on Apple yields the same results.

      Woz must be turning in his grave.

    2. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Woz is alive. Jobs has passed.

    3. Re:!HP by pushing-robot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are you thinking of Apple of the 70s? Woz was basically out by 1981.

      Apple today is very much like Apple of the early Mac years: building computers that are small, easy, and appliance-like.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    4. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      HP tried to stop making PCs. Then they had a board room revolt and fired their CEO. Now they still lose money on making crappy PCs that can't stack up against their two major competitors on either features or price.

      They might as well not be making PCs, it's clearly a business they don't want to be in.

    5. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, that's better than the other way around.

    6. Re:!HP by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Woz must be turning in his grave.

      When did Woz die?

      I'm no Apple fan, the only Apple I've owned is an Apple 2 (that fired up just fine last time I plugged it in). But I would certainly take an Apple product over some piece-of-shit Dell or HP crapware. My current laptop is a Thinkpad...

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    7. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's dead to me.

    8. Re:!HP by pianophile · · Score: 1

      Comparing today's HP to the HP of the 80s, I'm inclined to side with Schiller.

      Agreed. Of course, /. being /., the pedants are having a field day with Phil's offhand remark, but c'est la vie.

      --

      'Your brain is God.' -- Dr. Timothy Leary
    9. Re:!HP by russotto · · Score: 3, Informative

      Schiller's wrong, but HP isn't the company which exists from that era. It's Compaq, they just call themselves HP.

    10. Re:!HP by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      I don't think HP made PCs back then. Didn't they jump on the bandwagon after Dell proved you could do it profitably?

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    11. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder why, since Woz wouldn't have worked for Apple to give you the iPhone.

    12. Re:!HP by cheesybagel · · Score: 0

      Apple doesn't own fabs. The manufacturing is done by Chinese/Taiwanese assemblers. Might as well get a PC from Asus, Lenovo, or whatever.

    13. Re:!HP by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Yeah coz HP is OLDER.

    14. Re:!HP by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      HP made PCs long before that. Are you nuts? They have been around longer than Apple.

    15. Re:!HP by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Wow, dunno how I missed that one back then. Their marketing department must have been worst than Commodore's.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    16. Re:!HP by bloodhawk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Today's Apple is also nothing like the Apple of 80's. It is arguably undergone even more drastic changes than HP.

    17. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but we're talking about ACTUALLY PRODUCTION SYSTEMS, not some one-off that a company produced as a concept pipe dream.

    18. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed it because HP never ACTUALLY put it into production. That was just a concept show piece.

    19. Re:!HP by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Because saying "died" is less polite.

    20. Re:!HP by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Samsung is Korean, they're the ones with the fabs Apple uses. TSMC (Taiwan) will be getting some of their business in the future (contracts have been signed to split 14nm A9 production between Samsung and TSMC), but they're not doing that yet.

      Now, for actual factories, those are in China. But not the semiconductor fabs.

    21. Re:!HP by Alomex · · Score: 3, Informative

      The company I worked for back then owned five of them. So I can tell you without a doubt that it was nor just a concept piece.

    22. Re:!HP by Alomex · · Score: 1

      I programmed in those in the mid-80s so I can tell you that they are more than just concept pieces.

    23. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans have manners and care about this?
      wow that should be a /. article its first time I've heard of it

    24. Re:!HP by Streetlight · · Score: 1

      HP clearly made computers before Apple Computer. Around 1970 they were the second largest mini-computer maker in the world. Not sure if IBM or DEC was number 1, but in the lab I was working in we had a choice between an HP and a Varian computer. Others were adopting the PDP 8 which came out 22 March 1965. HP acquired DEC some time ago. The statement by Schiller didn't use the term PC he used the term computer. He's wrong.

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    25. Re:!HP by laird · · Score: 0

      Sure, if you think that software, design, etc., aren't important, only component manufacturing. :-)

      Note that Apple (reportedly) really wanted to manufacture the iPhone in the US, but found that the US manufacturing capacity had been wiped out by offshoring to the point where the US couldn't support large scale US electronics manufacturing. I recall a article saying that Apple would have had to hire ever single graduating manufacturing engineer in the US for five years just to have enough line managers to run the teams to manage production. In contrast, in China, they could get staffed in two weeks. Not only isn't their manufacturing capacity in the US, the schools don't train people to do the work, so there's nothing to even start with. And now not only is offshore manufacturing cheaper, it's generally better than the US, because US corporations basically invested in training them instead of US workers.

      US trade strategy ("free trade") wiped out US manufacturing jobs, and they're basically not coming back, except for some high-margin niches (like the Mac Pro). But if Apple, with their resources, can't make manufacturing electronics in the US work, when they were willing to build the factories and hire the people and invest in the US economy even though the costs were a bit higher, then I can't see how anyone can make it work.

      There are some niches where the US is competitive.

      But contrast to Germany or Japan, where trade policy promotes local industry. Their economies are doing great, with good wages and benefits, because they're not doing what the US is, "race to the bottom" by trying to make the workers work hard for third-world wages and just barely survive, they're focusing on having a highly skilled, well paid workforce that out-engineers the competition. Turns out that's a much better strategy - businesses do better, workers do better, everyone wins. But it requires long-term strategic thinking, not just short-term penny-pinching. We're not good at that in the US, aside from a few companies like Apple.

      So now Apple does design, software, etc., in the US, and manufacturing offshore (aside from a few small things like the Mac Pro). On the plus side, they have hundreds of stores with tons of employees there. Not as good as manufacturing jobs, but better than telephone sanitation engineers.

    26. Re:!HP by laird · · Score: 1

      Yep. That was in 1983. The Mac started (internal development) in 1978.

      Actually, HP claims their first personal computer was in 1980 (http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/museum/personalsystems/0029/). Still after they started working on the Mac, but closer.

    27. Re:!HP by machine321 · · Score: 1

      But contrast to Germany or Japan, where trade policy promotes local industry. Their economies are doing great, with good wages and benefits

      Except Japan had/has that whole "Lost Decade" thing going on. I guess it depends on how you define "economy doing great".

    28. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately you're right. The free trade policies have undermined the ability to not produce everything from the cheapest bidder, because if you don't, your competitor certainly will. This will all come back and bite us in the ass when the cost for shipping starts outstripping the cost savings, but by then it will be too late as domestic shipping will also be expensive.

      Right now it's still economical to produce a phone in China and have it Fedex'd directly to the buyer.

    29. Re:!HP by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Maybe? I'm Canadian.

    30. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Schiller's quote was about computers, not personal computers. IBM, HP TI, Radio Shack, Timex made computers before he introduction of the Macinstosh, with some of the models for the home.

    31. Re:!HP by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't own fabs. The manufacturing is done by Chinese/Taiwanese assemblers.

      Were this true then Apple would be like every pretty much ever other PC and consumer electronics company in America.

      But it's not true. Apple has it's own factory in Arizona that manufactures Sapphire for it's lenses and screens. And they have Flextronics in Fort Worth manufacturing the Mac Pro. I believe there are other examples, such as made to order Macs which are assembled in the US.

    32. Re:!HP by magarity · · Score: 1

      A better comparison is the beginning HP with the PC maker HP. Like a prior comment about IBM; they're still in business, just not making PCs any more. HP made audio oscillators, thermometers, and other miscellaney items for a long time before they made PCs. So perhaps it isn't a good comparison to say they were a computer company founded at the beginning of the PC era along with Apple.

    33. Re:!HP by Black+LED · · Score: 1

      Apple wouldn't exist if it weren't for Woz. Some might consider that a good thing, but I'm guessing you're not one of them.

    34. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was 1979 you mother fucking idiot. But it does not matter, both Radio Shack and TI were also making personal computers before 1979.

    35. Re:!HP by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, he forgot HP. I constantly forget HP. Most people I know who remember them would like to forget.

    36. Re:!HP by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Flextronics is an US corporation != Apple.

    37. Re:!HP by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Indeed. That's why I gave you both an example of manufacturing plant in the US owned by Apple plus one in the US owned by another company.

      It was in reply to your false claims:
      Apple doesn't own fabs. The manufacturing is done by Chinese/Taiwanese assemblers.

      Apple's US plant proves your first claim wrong.
      Both Apple and Flextronics US plants prove your second claim wrong.

    38. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If all you know about HP is its computers, you might think that, because it's the last remaining bit of continuity from that time. But thirty years ago, computers were not what defined HP.

      Think about this: has today's Apple spun off entire Fortune 500 companies that have defined their markets for decades? HP has. Today's HP has more in common with today's Motorola than with either company in their heyday.

      Last time I checked, today's Apple and yesterday's Apple both designed computers, software, and peripherals. The biggest difference is that today's Apple is a larger lifestyle mark, and makes a product that didn't exist in the 80s, but that is evolved product of the personal computer nonetheless. Sure, today's Apple has a media presence (i.e., iTunes), but it's not the defining product of the company.

    39. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you want an actual workstation, then where are you going to go?
      You know when you really need a good computer to work on, What are you gonna use? A trashcan?

    40. Re:!HP by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      HP is essentially a different company, as it split itself into pieces. Agilent is the real HP. The company with that name today only has some of the original buildings. Whereas Apple has remained the same company all along; it grew and evolved but it never split off its core business and attached the name to some minor sideline instead.

    41. Re:!HP by Retron · · Score: 1

      Not really - "died" is traditionally the upper-class way of saying "passed on". As Wiki says, although the original list of U vs non-U English terms is obsolete in some ways, in others it's still a good indication of class (at least in the UK, I'm not sure how much that applies to the US!)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U... has more info for those who are interested.

    42. Re:!HP by Miseph · · Score: 2

      So you're saying that release is less important than *starting* design? Really? Do you think that HP just magically intuited what Apple was doing, then spat out a product, without any planning or development, in order to beat something that didn't really exist yet to the punch? I'd actually be impressed if they did, but that just doesn't seem possible.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    43. Re:!HP by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      HP making PCs is what keeps their name on people's minds. Not only that, but they can offer total end to end solutions, as opposed to buying PCs from one company and servers from another.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    44. Re:!HP by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      But not making anything resembling a PC longer then Apple because the Apple II invented the PC market in the US. The machine you linked to came out a whole two months before the Mac shipped, and it's predecessors didn't come out until the Mac team had been designing for a year or two.

      Moreover they weren't a major manufacturer of PCs. I payed close enough attention to the history of that era that I know about Osborn, TI, Atari, Compaq, etc., but until I'd seen this article I would have sworn HP didn't make a PC until the 90s. I suspect they only marketed to engineering firms, so while their machines had the same specs as truly Personal Computers, they were not intended to be personal in the sense you could buy one for your sister for Christmas.

    45. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen an Apple One?
      The first thing from Apple was a kit - not for the faint of heart.

    46. Re:!HP by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Well, they did change their name from Apple Computers, Inc. to just Apple Inc. not too long ago, which pretty much aligns with their move to a phone/tablet company that happens to make some computers on the side.

    47. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AND if we ignore Lenovo. You know the IBM division sold off that only invented the x86 PC...

      It also ignores that the modern x86 PC really did not come into being until about 88/89. Plenty of those companies are still around. Thankfully Packard Bell is not among them. I can still get an Asus/Sager/Dell/GW2K/etc.... (ah I miss digging thru computer shopper)

    48. Re:!HP by Patch86 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Assuming you don't count the whole messy business with NeXt- i.e., Jobs leaving, founding a competing company, Apple heading to the point of bankruptcy, buying NeXt in a sort of reverse takeover in which the NeXt board (i.e. Jobs) takes control of the company, replacing their entire product line (Mac OS) with NeXt products. And then, of course, switching their primary business model to selling audio players and phones, with their major revenue source being a content distribution platform.

      So yeah, definitely exactly the same company as existed in 1986.

      I still take your point, but it's disingenuous to pretend that Apple hasn't been through the corporate meat grinder just as much as any other long-lived company.

    49. Re:!HP by murr · · Score: 1

      Some people would argue by a similar logic that "Apple" is really a rebranded NeXT.

    50. Re:!HP by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      There would certainly have been a very different Apple if Woz had stayed around.

    51. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HP might have been doing personal computers, but not being in PC business. IBM created first PC as it wanted its slice from growing personal computer markets (personal computer != PC) and HP was not in PC business at all, they had own personal computers but no PC.
      Compaq is one reason why IBM lost control of its created PC by reverse-engineering BIOS and PC-Clones became popular and so on PC lost its edge on personal computer markets for PC-clones.

    52. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time I checked, Woz is alive and well.

    53. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Woz must be turning in his grave.

      You are mistaken. While Woz may be 'down under', that refers to Australia.

    54. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HP doesn't make its product either. They use overseas manufacturing AND DESIGN.

    55. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "passed" bothers me because of the inherent superstitious connotations. Passed to what? To some magical fairy land where life is eternal and all is well?

      No, he didn't pass. He died. His life was terminated. He no longer exists in any way, shape or form.

    56. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30 years ago apple made computers. Today apple is just a system designer and integrator, they outsource all the manufacturing to places like foxconn. They may still look the same from the outside, but the internal workings are completely different.

    57. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple computers use barely any raw semiconductors designed by Apple, maybe only the TPM chip. The only thing apple designs otherwise is the Motherboard layout and casing, which is then built by Foxconn. So yes, the manufacturing is done by the Chinese.

      People are forgetting that iPhone production lines =/= all Apple production lines, and in he context for comparison with HP, Apple's design is entirely 3rd party + Chinese manufacturing of first party.

    58. Re:!HP by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      The talk was about PC manufacturing.

    59. Re:!HP by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      HP is essentially a different company, as it split itself into pieces. Agilent is the real HP.

      And the HP 3000 and HP 9000 lines weren't made by the real HP? At least by 1980, the "electronic data products" part of HP (computers, calculators, and the like) was 49% of their sales (see page 25 of their 1980 annual report). The rest, i.e. Agilent, is 51%, so Agilent was slightly more than half of 1980 HP.

    60. Re:!HP by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      A better comparison is the beginning HP with the PC maker HP. Like a prior comment about IBM; they're still in business, just not making PCs any more. HP made audio oscillators, thermometers, and other miscellaney items for a long time before they made PCs.

      Said miscellaneous items including a line of 16-bit minicomputers, a line of 16-bit and later 32-bit multi-user computers used for, among other purposes, business computing, and a line of 32-bit and later 64-bit UNIX workstations and servers, the descendants of some of which were still being made when the test-and-measuring-equipment part was spun off as Agilent, and the descendants of the last of which are still being made.

    61. Re:!HP by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Factories are not fabs.

    62. Re:!HP by russotto · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but an argument could be made that NeXT was the "real Apple" all along, which can't be said about Compaq and HP.

    63. Re:!HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Agreed. Of course, /. being /., the pedants are having a field day with Phil's offhand remark, but c'est la vie.

      YES! Let's hear it for pedantry! ... I like my assburgers flame-broiled.

    64. Re:!HP by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Apple wouldn't exist if it weren't for Woz. Some might consider that a good thing, but I'm guessing you're not one of them.

      Apple wouldn't exist if it weren't for Jobs either - it was a joint collaboration - Woz was the brains, while Jobs was the rest of the business. Anyone who thinks differently (ha!) doesn't realize how complementary those skills are. Woz back then would've just had another "computer" on a circuit board. Jobs actually had the foresight to see that computers had a bright future, and no one was taking it beyond the expensive minicomputers or the tech geek. In other words, Jobs actually managed to sell the Apple 1. (Woz wasn't very sure about selling computers and didn't actually intend to sell the Apple I).

      Alas, had Schiller went back to the original Apple I, he would've been right - HP at the time rejected Woz's idea as it used a regular TV. HP was worried people would plug it into a TV and it wouldn't work or work poorly, so they wanted to sell a monitor for their computer. It's what freed up Woz to actually build and sell Apple I's.

    65. Re:!HP by magarity · · Score: 1

      No, those said miscellaneous items made by HP when they were started in 1939 did not acually include a line of 16 bit microcomputers. World War II code breaking would have been radically different.

    66. Re:!HP by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      No, those said miscellaneous items made by HP when they were started in 1939 did not acually include a line of 16 bit microcomputers.

      The quote to which I was responding said "HP made audio oscillators, thermometers, and other miscellaney items for a long time before they made PCs."; that sentence said nothing about 1939, given that not all of their analog products were first made in 1939.

      The person before that referred to "the beginning HP", but it would be so extraordinarily silly to, in the context of this discussion, compare HP at the time it was first founded to HP at the time when it made PCs. In 1980, for example, HP made several lines of computers, none of which were, obviously, "IBM-compatible PCs", and the computer+calculator business accounted for 49% of their sales.

      If somebody wants to insist that, when HP was founded, they didn't make computers, so the real HP isn't a computer company, they'd better do that about IBM, too. I certainly won't take either of those claims seriously, and I don't think anybody else should, either.

      I.e., comparing the HP of the '80's with the HP of today might make sense in this context; comparing the HP of the '40's with the HP of today makes no sense in this context, and is thus a worse comparison, not a better one.

    67. Re:!HP by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      The Mac Pro is a PC, and is manufactured in an Apple owned plant in the USA.

      There is no argument you can make to contradict this.

    68. Re:!HP by Gorbag · · Score: 1

      No, no... it's DEC. Digital Equipment Corporation. Bought by Compaq. Then Compaq was bought by HP. What were we talking about?

      --
      -- I speak only for myself
    69. Re:!HP by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      If all you know about HP is its computers, you might think that, because it's the last remaining bit of continuity from that time. But thirty years ago, computers were not what defined HP.

      Yes, computers only accounted for a little over half of HP's net sales and about 47% of the sum of its earnings before taxes from all four of their main business segments, so computers and instrumentation about equally defined HP thirty years ago. (In 1998, the year before they spun off Agilent, computers accounted for about 83% of orders and of net revenue.)

  4. still exist, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    HP still exists, but do they still make computers? All their systems that I know about are made by someone else like Quanta or Foxconn and have HP logos slapped on them. Does anyone know of systems HP actually makes?

    1. Re:still exist, but... by timmyf2371 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Who do you think manufactures Apple's computers, if not the likes of Foxconn and Pegatron?

      --

      Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
    2. Re: still exist, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. But Apple doesn't use standard components except the HDD. And even they are phased out for custom SSDs. All Macs are designed and engineered by Apple in Cupertino, incl the logic board. Quanta and Foxconn assemble them. They don't create them.

      HP PCs on the other hand uses standard components like everyone else.

    3. Re:still exist, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same chinese who made your Xbox and 25%+ of the world consumer electronics. What - you think your shit was farted out by unicorns faggot?

    4. Re: still exist, but... by SerpentMage · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And how is this relevant? BTW did you know that PC's way back in the days of Mac used standard components? It is only Mac that uses stupid custom components giving them some of the worst repair ratings in the industry.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    5. Re: still exist, but... by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      > True. But Apple doesn't use standard components except the HDD.

      They look standard enough on a PCI bus. They just aren't arranged in a terribly standardized (or maintainable) way.

      This is why Linux and Windows have no problem running on Macs.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re: still exist, but... by bloodhawk · · Score: 2

      True. But Apple doesn't use standard components except the HDD. And even they are phased out for custom SSDs. All Macs are designed and engineered by Apple in Cupertino, incl the logic board. Quanta and Foxconn assemble them. They don't create them.

      HP PCs on the other hand uses standard components like everyone else.

      The only non standard part Apple use is the motherboard, everything else is pretty much standard parts, memory, HDD, CPU's, GPU's etc are all stock standard parts available in whatever flavour machine you want Apple or not.

    7. Re: still exist, but... by abhi_beckert · · Score: 4, Informative

      The only non standard part Apple use is the motherboard, everything else is pretty much standard parts, memory, HDD, CPU's, GPU's etc are all stock standard parts available in whatever flavour machine you want Apple or not.

      That's not true. They usually use modified versions of standard components. The current MacBook Pro has the RAM and SSD soldered onto the motherboard, and while the CPU is standard it has a custom connector and cooling system that has forced enough physical differences in the chip that it cannot be replaced. Most macs these days don't even have a GPU, they rely on intel's latest integrated ones which are finally pretty decent.

      The Mac Pro is the only model Apple sells with fully standard CPU... but the GPU is non-standard, it's made by AMD but is a weird hybrid of two different GPUs that AMD sells, and Apple is the only company who can use it... one of the two GPUs in the mac pro even has a socket on it so you can plug in a bloody PCIe SSD card. On the GPU! They ran out of PCIe lanes on the processor, so the SSD has to share the lane of the second GPU which is actually a sensible choice since it's highly unlikely you will be maxing out the PCIe card (1.5GB/second) at the same time as doing serious computations on the GPU. That definitely is not a standard part.

      On iOS apple builds everything themselves, they are famously known to have over 1,000 engineers working on just the CPU for the iPhone. They haven't gone that far with the mac but it's standard procedure to take components from other companies like AMD and Intel and Qualcomm but then modify to suit their own needs.

    8. Re: still exist, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. Lots of ultrabook manufacturers solder in place the memory and SSD, this is common practise in space sensitive devices. having a GPU with a slightly different clock speed (what the MAC has) is NOT non standard, again this is something many do in laptops to meet heat requirements and space requirements for machines. The same goes for the cooling. Apple DO NOT build anything themselves, places like Foxconn do it for them, the same people that make all the other manufacturers devices. If you think these factories are doing special Fab manufacturing lines for apples chips then I have a bridge to sell you too.

    9. Re: still exist, but... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      And the very best user satisfaction ratings, year after year.

    10. Re: still exist, but... by abhi_beckert · · Score: 1

      It's not just a different clock speed, it has different memory architecture and so on. It has dual high-end workstation GPUs (which normally cost around $6,000) with some of the more expensive parts of the GPU replaced with cheaper consumer grade gear (bringing the price down to around $1,000 or thereabouts). For example, non-ECC memory. And if you boot the mac pro into windows you can't even use the cards properly, because AMD's drivers are not compatible at all and Apple's drivers for bootcamp only do a half assed job of supporting them. Enough to boot and run windows perfectly but not enough to actually use the GPUs to their full potential.

    11. Re: still exist, but... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      And how is this relevant? BTW did you know that PC's way back in the days of Mac used standard components? It is only Mac that uses stupid custom components giving them some of the worst repair ratings in the industry.

      I know, I know.

      It's terrible that instead of buying a part on some website everyone on Slashdot has ever heard for cheap, and then doing the work myself, I insist on going to a physical store, having them order the part, and then having them install it themselves. It's almost like I don't want to be the computer equivalent of the guy who does his own car repairs.

      Back in the real world, while you are arguing with FedEx over the location of some part I don't have to learn the name of; I will be getting work done. I will probably pay for the privilege, but not as much as you think because I;m very good at convincing the Apple Store gurus to throw in the work for free.

    12. Re: still exist, but... by Endloser · · Score: 1

      1 Soldering something doesn't make it different. 2 Apple does not make or design wafers for the Macintosh. feature request != design

    13. Re: still exist, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah and you will end up with a shit part because one of the morons working at the Apple store thought it was good.

      No thanks, I'd rather do it once and do it right. While you run into problems quickly, due to your overpriced, anaemic upgrade, I'll be happily chugging along for the next five years because I did it right. I've got real work to do, not sitting around in a coffee shop reading Facebook and pretending to be an artist. I need my upgrades to be the best and to last for a long time because my profession requires it.

      Your method is fine, if you use your computer as a consumption device, have no need for processing power and don't care about getting ripped off. My method is necessary because I actually create and build. I need much more than a toy computer that some unsavvy, zit faced child working at the Apple store has installed substandard parts into.

    14. Re:still exist, but... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      HP still exists, but do they still make computers? All their systems that I know about are made by someone else like Quanta or Foxconn and have HP logos slapped on them. Does anyone know of systems HP actually makes?

      I'm not sure - do they manufacture their Integrity servers themselves, or are those also made by contract manufacturers?

  5. He is probably correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The company that started in the garage in the picture is now called Aligent. HP that is in business now was a spin off that has little to do with the company started by the founders of HP

    1. Re:He is probably correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Agilent. Aligent is something else.

  6. You forgot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Homie forgot Poland.

  7. IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also around by darkeye · · Score: 1

    and they are still making computers...

  8. What a corporate Schill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What? We were all thinking it.

  9. According to the history page... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... HP didn't release its first PC until 1980. Apple was releasing computers years earlier. So Apple would have been correct if they said "PCs".

    1. Re:According to the history page... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah! Check out what the Apple suit said in the OP. He's talking about Mac (TM), not about smallish computers in general.

    2. Re:According to the history page... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2

      ... HP didn't release its first PC until 1980. Apple was releasing computers years earlier. So Apple would have been correct if they said "PCs".

      Actually, according to their history page, HP coined the term "Personal Computer" in 1968 for a large programmable desktop calculator (that looks like a prop from the set of Space:1999).

    3. Re:According to the history page... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

      Actually, according to their history page, HP coined the term "Personal Computer" in 1968 for a large programmable desktop calculator...

      But that's not what Philip Schiller is talking about.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    4. Re:According to the history page... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2

      It doesn't matter much what he was talking about because it was incorrect.

    5. Re:According to the history page... by nojayuk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sony, Toshiba, Fujitsu and Panasonic were Japanese electronics manufacturers making MSX-based personal computers in 1983 before the Mac was released and they're still manufacturing PCs today.

    6. Re:According to the history page... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter much what he was talking about because it was incorrect.

      A completely asinine statement.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    7. Re:According to the history page... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sony, Toshiba, Fujitsu and Panasonic were Japanese electronics manufacturers making MSX-based personal computers in 1983 before the Mac was released and they're still manufacturing PCs today.

      MSX aren't PC's

    8. Re:According to the history page... by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      The HP 9830A introduced in 1972 was their first programmable desktop computer with a full keyboard. The programmable 9100 calculator from 1968 was technically a computer too but lacked a full alphanumeric keyboard. Thus predating the Apple I by some years.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    9. Re:According to the history page... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NEC and Seiko also made PCs and are still around.

    10. Re:According to the history page... by laird · · Score: 1

      HP claims that the HP-85 in 1980 was their entry into the "personal computer" market. http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/about... . That's two years after the launch of the Macintosh project inside Apple, though four years before the Mac shipped (January 1984). And that "personal computer" was so obscure nobody remembers it other than whoever made that page for HP. HP didn't introduce a personal computer that sold decently well until many years after the Mac shipped.

      Remember, Apple's founders left HP because HP didn't want to make personal computers. So I'm pretty sure Apple hasn't forgotten that HP existed - they also remember that HP dropped the ball on personal computers, and didn't enter the market until after they started working on the Mac.

      That being said, I think Schiller is referring to the market consolidation (http://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2013/10/10/pc-market-consolidating-around-top-3-vendors/) where there aren't any of the old school PC companies.

    11. Re:According to the history page... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they're Japanese, so they don't count.

    12. Re:According to the history page... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      I agree, Schiller's comments were pretty asinine.

    13. Re:According to the history page... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it was, they were developed and marketed as home computers.

    14. Re:According to the history page... by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

      He said "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac"

      Development of the Mac started long before 1984.

    15. Re:According to the history page... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But development of other computers didn't? What did they do, just will them into existence? Were the IBM 5100, IBM PC and HP-85 just pulled out of a magic hat with no prior R&D?

    16. Re:According to the history page... by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      That's because the current "HP" company is only the former PC division which doesn't have any heritage before the development of PCs from the original HP, now known as Keysight.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    17. Re:According to the history page... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      That's because the current "HP" company is only the former PC division which doesn't have any heritage before the development of PCs from the original HP, now known as Keysight.

      Actually, the current "HP" company is "the former PC division" plus "the former printer division" plus "the former server division", and "the former server division" has heritage from the original HP going back at least as far as the HP 9000 workstation/server line from the mid 1980's (the HP 2100/HP 1000 and HP 3000 lines are dead, so I won't count their heritage, going back to 1966 and 1973, respectively).

      At some point in the future, the products from the first line of products HP ever had (electronic test and measurement) will be offered by a company named Keysight but, for now, that's still Agilent. However, treating electronic test and measurement equipment as the only think that's "the real HP" is rather arbitrary, given that computers were a significant part of HP's business, as in "about half of their sales", at least as far back as 1980.

      (I presume nobody here is so ignorant as to think HP was solely a test and measurement company, with no involvement in the computer business whatsoever, until they started making IBM-compatible PCs.)

  10. It makes me sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... to look at that timeline and see how it basically stopped around 2000. They haven't done anything I respect since then.

  11. And Dell by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Informative

    Michael Dell started assembling and selling PCs from his dorm room in 1984, the same year the first Macintosh was made.

    1. Re:And Dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, but he shut it down and gave the money back to the shareholders.

    2. Re:And Dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except he didnt shut it down, pretty sure I'm still employed there

    3. Re:And Dell by msauve · · Score: 2

      Apple started selling computers in 1976, 8 years before the Macintosh was introduced, 5 years before the IBM PC, and 4 years before HP's first PC according to HP's own timeline.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    4. Re:And Dell by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Apple started selling computers in 1976, 8 years before the Macintosh was introduced

      Completely irrelevant, since Schiller's claim is not that Apple was first (they weren't) but they are the only survivors from the Macintosh Era, which began in 1984.

    5. Re:And Dell by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

      He said "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac"

      Development of the Mac started long before 1984.

    6. Re:And Dell by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Why are you parsing a statement from a marketing fuck so closely? Do you want your head to explode with rage?

      "Macintosh era" could mean when it came to market in January of '84. that would still beat Dell by 10 months. But it could also mean when they started developing the damn thing in '78, or when they released the Apple Lisa in January of '83. Moreover that company wasn't called Dell. Dell-badged computers wouldn't be created until '88.

      The best way to interpret this is that he was referring to the entire late 70s/early 80s era because he's marketing and they don't remember things like dates very precisely. He was also only referring to major companies, because if you're talking about the top dozen or two PC manufacturers from any point in that era odds are the only one that's still around and selling PCs to consumers is Apple.

    7. Re:And Dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > 5 years before the IBM PC

      While the IBM PC (model 5150) may be well known, it was the 4th machine to be released in the 5100 series.

      """The IBM 5100 Portable Computer was a portable computer introduced in September 1975"""
      """The IBM 5110 was announced in January 1978"""
      """The IBM 5120 Computing System (sometimes referred to as the IBM 5110 Model 3) was announced in February 1980"""

    8. Re:And Dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We see right through you, Mr. Paid Apple Shill.

  12. Marketing guy says something untrue? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A marketing guy said something untrue? SAY IT ISN'T SO!

    I'm guessing the only reason this story is here is so they can rack a couple OMG APPLE IS SO ARROGANT FUCK THEM posts from 7-digit newcomers around here.

    God I miss the pre-Dice Slashdot.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    1. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by ttucker · · Score: 1, Troll

      I'm guessing the only reason this story is here is so they can rack a couple OMG APPLE IS SO ARROGANT FUCK THEM posts from 7-digit newcomers around here.

      They are arrogant; and indeed, fuck them.

    2. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Nimey · · Score: 2

      Aw, piss off. Those people were here before Dice, even before VA.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    3. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by oldhack · · Score: 1

      This outfit is scraping the bottom of the barrel.

      Decent submitters are mostly gone, and only ones left are click-bait trolls, dumb kids, and whinny bored geezers like me.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    4. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Sancho · · Score: 1

      Slashdot hasn't been the same in a very, very long time. But I try not to judge people by their UID.

    5. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Hardly anyone gave a shit about Apple when I joined. A tribute to their recent success I guess. Now get off my lawn newbie!

    6. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by SerpentMage · · Score: 2

      Huh Slashdot was better back then? Really? Colour me pink! I was there in the early days and it is still pretty much the same. Albeit the best improvement that was made is the rating system.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    7. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once things change, it seems like they're never the same. Even here.

    8. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by karmawhore · · Score: 2

      That's my recollection as well. Also, Bill Gates was the worst guy EVER. Linux kernel point releases were front page news. But at least we have idle now.

      --
      =kw= lurkin' to please
    9. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This place is nothing more than a fanboy circle jerk anymore. That's the reason I come here to troll. Oh, and in true form.... fuck islam or the transgenders or whatever gets your nuts tingling.

      That is flamebait, not trolling. Kindly educate yourself as to the difference.

    10. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Huh Slashdot was better back then? Really? Colour me pink!

      Some say it was better when it waspink. With ponies.

    11. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way to prove the OP right.

    12. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot hasn't been the same in a very, very long time. But I try not to judge people by their UID.

      Good. I may have a 7-digit UID, but I date back to early '98 (Damn, if I were home, I could've posted this reply on my new Pavilion, which I got from an alternate universe).

    13. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      True. There's always got to be an enemy. For the USA, once Japan and the Nazis had been defeated, they switched to considering their former allies the USSR as the new enemy. Then once they fell, they switched to various Muslim countries.

      For Slashdot, Microsoft was the big evil enemy. Apple hatred didn't come along till much later, and replaced Microsoft hatred over a fairly short time. I think it came about because Apple had a Unix was was being more successful than Linux.

    14. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by pspahn · · Score: 1

      I've been here since the 90's. Just because I was AC for some time doesn't mean I'm a "newcomer". Gee, talk about "arrogant".

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    15. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by pspahn · · Score: 2

      I think there was plenty of Apple hatred back then, it's just that there were no fanboys to defend them. Everyone pretty much nodded and said "mm hmm".

      Shit, I can remember hating Apple all the way back to the stupid ][ that sat in the corner of our elementary classroom and never got turned on because there weren't any teachers that wanted to bother teaching us how to use it.

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    16. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember Slashdot back in the 90s, when it was still respectable. We didn't have batshit insane Apple zealots like you here.

    17. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Endloser · · Score: 1

      Formula to prove my slashdot worth: 1. Count number of digits in my assigned number. 2. Add one to previous number. 3. Call out those with one digit higher.
      It doesn't matter how many digits you have. Many of us are on our second or third accounts at this point for one reason or another. And those who are newer should be welcomed along with their opinions. How I miss the pre-Dice nobody bitched about Dice Slashdot.

    18. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Endloser · · Score: 1

      I think a good deal of the Apple hate came when they stopped innovating and started suing. Then the constant releases to break functionality forcing you to buy new, technically unnecessary hardware and the "you can't modify your hardware" mentality. Apple used to be a very different company at one point.

    19. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by pspahn · · Score: 1

      The hate I remember had nothing to do with litigation or lawyers or anything. It simply had to do with the fact that Apple made shitty stuff.

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    20. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Chapium · · Score: 1

      Dude, its just a number. It'll be ok. Calm down.

    21. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Shit, I can remember hating Apple all the way back to the stupid ][ that sat in the corner of our elementary classroom and never got turned on because there weren't any teachers that wanted to bother teaching us how to use it.

      Most Apple hatred is irrational, but that one may be the ultimate.

    22. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Doubly irrational. Apple products are consistently at the top of consumer satisfaction surveys.

    23. Re:Marketing guy says something untrue? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Slashdot hasn't been the same in a very, very long time. But I try not to judge people by their UID.

      Good. I may have a 7-digit UID, but I date back to early '98 (Damn, if I were home, I could've posted this reply on my new Pavilion, which I got from an alternate universe).

      Pavilion? Heck, right now, I wish I had an HP 9000/7xx so I could post from it just to have fun with the folks who seem to think HP's sole involvement in the computer business was making PC's. (For real lulz, I'd like to post from it using Internet Explorer, assuming Slashdot would work with IE 5.)

  13. IBM by MXB2001 · · Score: 1

    Ouch, hurts to be reminded that IBM stopped. Or to think back on the short lived but glorious Commodore and Atari. Still have one of each.

    --
    01/01/01
    1. Re:IBM by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      I'm a relative young buck when it comes to these things, but I remember my first computer (received when I was 8) was a 386 running Windows 3.1 with a 32MB HDD and IIRC 8MB of RAM...back then PC's that weren't Macs were called "IBM-compatible." Just reflecting out loud on how old I feel these days, lol.

    2. Re:IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to not understand why "IBM stopped." They simply didn't want to be in a commodity business nor selling to the guy on the street. So, they sold off their PC business, just as they did with their typewriters and printers.

  14. It USED to be Agilent... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 5, Informative

    They just split the company yet again, and the electronics test/measurement operations (the descendant of the original HP business) got rebranded as "Keysight Technologies":

    http://www.nasdaq.com/article/...

    A company called "Hewlett-Packard" still exists, but they sell printers and PCs. Nothing to do with the company that Bill and Dave started in the Palo Alto garage....

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    1. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A company called "Hewlett-Packard" still exists, but they sell printers and PCs. Nothing to do with the company that Bill and Dave started in the Palo Alto garage....
      Oh, if we are going that way, then I think there are companies called Foxconn that make computers, but there is no company called "Apple" that makes computers. It went away at least 5 years ago (but I think its closer to 10). FTFY.

    2. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by egcagrac0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      A company called "Hewlett-Packard" still exists, but they sell printers and PCs.

      Don't forget ink. They make a lot of money selling ink.

    3. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by Guspaz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Apple is currently manufacturing the new Mac Pro in the US, but it's true that they didn't do any manufacturing themselves for a number of years.

    4. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they are assembling all those modular components in the US.

    5. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      They just split the company yet again

      According to the article you linked they haven't actually done it yet, just announced that they intend to do it.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    6. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by Endloser · · Score: 0

      Steve Jobs is dead and Wozniak isn't a part of the company. Or we could choose to not split hairs. HP developed the first personal computer.

    7. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by lot3k · · Score: 1

      Well the brand still exists, and i have to work on an hp elitebook; so im going to say the statement tests as false. Irrespective of trends in market and a conpanies direction changing.

    8. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the majority of their profits are from ink and paper. Been true since the 1990s. HP is NOT a tech company at all based on this.

    9. Re:It USED to be Agilent... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      A company called "Hewlett-Packard" still exists, but they sell printers and PCs.

      ...and some other machines that are neither printers nor PC nor "IBM-compatible PC architecture servers".

      Nothing to do with the company that Bill and Dave started in the Palo Alto garage....

      ...except for that third set of machines, which date back to computers Bill and Dave's company did back in the 1980's (Itanium started out as a "PA-RISC NG" project), and arguably earlier (PA-RISC first showed up in an HP 3000, which was a line of computers dating back to 1973).

  15. Think I found the source of confusion by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

    I clicked on that timeline link, using my iPad. Thing is, that page doesn't work well with touch devices. Schiller probably did the same thing I did, and naturally came to the conclusion HP's history ended in 1966.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  16. HP-150 in 1983. Who knew? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HP was selling the HP-150 MS-DOS computer starting in November, 1983.

    At nearly $3000 it wasn't on my radar.

  17. Re: IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also aro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    IBM doesn't make PCs anymore. Sold to Lenovo.
    Neither does DEC or Sun. They are dead and sold.

    None of these qualify as counter argument.

  18. Re:IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also arou by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

    IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also around and they are still making computers...

    The Apple statement was about PCs HP markets PCs, but I don't think Sun does, and IBM sold off their PC/Laptop business to Lenovo, recently divesting themselves of their x86 server business as well.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  19. Re:IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also arou by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't IBM sell off pretty much all their personal computing stuff to Lenovo?

    And being bought out and having all of you tech rebranded is not the same as still being around. DEC and Sun are gone.

  20. Transformer, or Chinese Electronics Company? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    Foxconn
    Megatron
    Alpha Trion
    Pegatron
    Computron

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  21. Dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dell was around then. They were called Austin Microcomputers.

  22. What he meant to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What he meant to say is that since the early days of the Mac, Apple CRUSHED any and all competition, which apparently makes Apple the only survivor in the twisted logic of a Mac user anyhow.

    1. Re:What he meant to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Q32013 Market Share Apple 13.4%, behind both HP and Dell. That percentage is nearly a full percentage point behind Apples Q32012 share (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/10/09/apple-again-trails-u-s-pc-market-in-key-back-to-school-quarter-as-tablets-continue-to-eat-into-pc-sales/). So Apple is still a minor player in the PC market.

    2. Re:What he meant to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They still haven't produced a system as good or innovative as the Amiga was though. My old Mac is sitting on a shelf in the back of the basement, which the C64 and Amiga still get used.

      I'll take the Apple IIgs over the Mac any day.

  23. Re:IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also arou by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personal Computers (PC).

    HP counts; although, they merged Compaq and I used to really hate those and HP seemed to make that crap afterwards. I got out of IT work before I had a chance to see if their PCs were Compaq rebranded or HP. Servers are not PCs. If they are really Compaq PCs and their killed their PCs only to remain building servers-- then are they really still a PC maker?

  24. Not only HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's still Dell.

  25. A couple of others, one well known, one not so. by shippo · · Score: 5, Informative

    I can think of a couple of other manufacturers who are still going, and were producing machines at the the time of original Mac. One of these is a major name, another is obscure, even in it's own country. The first is of course Toshiba, who were producing CP/M systems in 1980, if not earlier. The other is the British manufacturer Research Machines, who produce exclusively for the UK educational sector. Their RM 380Z, another CP/M box, appeared in 1977. RM are still producing PCs for education today, but I believe that they will soon be moving out of hardware whilst continuing with their software and support services.

    1. Re:A couple of others, one well known, one not so. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trivial information on demand, but can't tell it's from its. Engineer? Software retard?

    2. Re:A couple of others, one well known, one not so. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      I was eye rolling through this entire article's comments until you mentioned the British and it made me think of a little company called Acorn.

      Who went on to make an Acorn RISC Machine.

      Funny that.

      (Funnier still, typing this out on an ipad)

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    3. Re:A couple of others, one well known, one not so. by JanneM · · Score: 1

      Panasonic also made computers in 1980 and earlier, and still have a good line of PC notebooks today.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    4. Re:A couple of others, one well known, one not so. by Xest · · Score: 1

      How are RM not dead already? Software that makes Windows infinitely more buggy and far more difficult to fix when things go wrong, and hardware that turns up without the PSU plugged into the motherboard and other such stupid mistakes.

      God I don't miss dealing with them.

  26. Look at 1995 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well if you think about Apples market that home personal computer. HP claims to have entered the home personal computer market in 1995 with the HP Pavilion PC. So while they did make "computers" before that, if you look at the home PC, it was 1995. So the question begs, when the statement was made, did he mean home PC market?

    1. Re:Look at 1995 by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you nailed it. 30 years ago HP didn't have a computer line for home users. IBM did, but they don't now. Apple did then, and they still do now. Their claim is really quite defensible. The guy should have said "Of all the companies that were making consumer computers in 1984, we're the only one left that's still doing it." But I think it's not a stretch to interpret his sentence in just this way.

    2. Re:Look at 1995 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I totally get what Schiller is saying. You don't have to be an Apple fanboy to get it; just someone who grew up in the 70s or 80s. The only company that was part of the PC revolution, that is *still* part of it, and that is still *all* about personal computing devices, is Apple. Remember those days watching The Computer Chronicles and hearing about all the new machines? That feeling of nostalgia you get when you watch them now? Well Apple is still making Macs. Is HP or IBM still trying to roll out the next amazing PC? No. You can name loads of companies from that era that still may make computers like a Sony or an IBM but Sony is not a PC company and IBM is not about PCs anymore either. You can parse the hell out of what Schiller said but try to understand his intent and it becomes clear what he means. He misses the old days. The only other company that you can really included from the early Mac era is Microsoft. They're still in the personal computing game hardcore; it's in their DNA. They just never made PCs. But Apple and Microsoft; those are the only two companies that are left from that golden era of early personal computing that still invoke that early 80s feeling of "What else can we do with the PC?"

  27. who's next? by beefoot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Does that mean Apple is the next to go?

  28. If He Means Apple Won and IBM Lost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then he's forgotten about Microsoft or the fact he's now swinging from Intel's tit.

  29. ARM - Acorn RISC Machine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Acorn are still around but sure they only license designs...

    1. Re: ARM - Acorn RISC Machine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ARM was found by Apple and Acorn. Acorn is dead. ARM never made PCs.

      Don't be an idiot.

  30. And Dell... by Slartibartfast · · Score: 1

    Granted, it had a name change, but it's been around since "Mac days."

    1. Re:And Dell... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      If you're gonna be so pedantic that you don't assume he was referring to major PC manufacturers from those days (and Dell wasn't major until the 90s), you're still wrong. Dell's predecessor company from 1984 wasn't founded in January.

      moreover the "Mac days" arguably started in '78 when development started, or in '83 when the Lisa came out.

  31. HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1, Troll

    Dell (1984), IBM (1981, now owned by Lenovo), Gateway (1985, now owned by Acer), and Acer (1981).

    But go on, tell us more about how you are the only ones left from that time making personal computers. And how you created the GUI. And the portable music player. And the smartphone. And the tablet computer. Oh yes, tell us more...

    1. Re:HP and... by laird · · Score: 1

      When they started working on the Mac was 1978.

    2. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      1979, and that date is relevant only upon him meaning the date they started working on it versus the date it was released. The quote is unclear. The IBM-PC started development at roughly the same time, as did Acer's development of the Micro-Professor MPF-I. He doesn't specifically say "personal computers", so if you want to be a stickler, both HP and IBM had "computers" long before Apple even existed, let alone started development of the Mac.

    3. Re:HP and... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      IBM (1981, now owned by Lenovo)

      Interesting. I know I can buy a Lenovo branded PC. But where can a buy a new IBM PC?

    4. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      You buy a Lenovo and slap an IBM sticker over the Lenovo logo. You'll never know the difference.

    5. Re:HP and... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      1979, and that date is relevant only upon him meaning the date they started working on it versus the date it was released. The quote is unclear. The IBM-PC started development at roughly the same time, as did Acer's development of the Micro-Professor MPF-I. He doesn't specifically say "personal computers", so if you want to be a stickler, both HP and IBM had "computers" long before Apple even existed, let alone started development of the Mac.

      Actually he did say PCs. You just didn't bother reading the actual quote in MacWorld, because you were too busy fuming.

      So please, continue to educate us with your deep analysis of a quote you clearly haven't bothered to read.

    6. Re:HP and... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Dell (1984), IBM (1981, now owned by Lenovo), Gateway (1985, now owned by Acer), and Acer (1981).

      But go on, tell us more about how you are the only ones left from that time making personal computers. And how you created the GUI. And the portable music player. And the smartphone. And the tablet computer. Oh yes, tell us more...

      WTF did you expect from a marketing VP? A sober, reasoned, and totally fair-minded assesment of Apple's place in computing history.

      Hell, if you actually read Schiller's quote (which you clearly have not done), you'll note that it's quite accurate for BS from a marketing drone. He's saying that in the era when Apple was creating the Mac (late 70s/early 80s) there were a lot of computer companies selling PCs to the public. None of the major ones except Apple is still selling PCs to the public. Of the 15-20 I could name from that era, Acer is the closest thing I can think of to an exception, and it's not exactly a titan of the computing field. Slashdot certianly wouldn't publish a blurb from their VP of marketing.

      Of the current major ones Dell almost makes it (his first company was founded 10 months after the mac's release), but he wasn't a major player at the time. HP, according to the timeline linked to in this very article, didn't "enter the home computing market" until 1995. Half the remainder were big in their Asian home markets in the early 80s, but not the US market, and the remainder are newish Chinese companies.

    7. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      From MacWorld.com:

      “Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they’re all gone,” said Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of worldwide marketing, in an interview on Apple’s Cupertino campus Thursday. “We’re the only one left. We’re still doing it, and growing faster than the rest of the PC industry because of that willingness to reinvent ourselves over and over.”

      Fact is they're not gone. As has been pointed out a number of companies that made computers either during the conception or debut of the Mac are indeed still here, like HP, Dell, Acer, IBM, and Sony (tho they did take a brief hiatus at one point). They're not the only one left, and I have no idea what he thinks they're still doing. And while they may be seeing some growth in an otherwise stagnant PC market, their marketshare is what, less than 10%? Whoopee. Believe it or not there are more machines running Windows 8 than there are MacOS. Let that sink in for a few minutes.

      And now that I've sullied myself by reading MacWorld, I need a shower.

    8. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Well, no, I never expect anything truthful or accurate from anyone at Apple. They're simply not capable of it.

      And I did read his quote, and I certainly do not need your inaccurate transcription. He very clearly said that Apple was the only company from the late 70s/early 80s still making computers. He is wrong. HP, IBM, Sony, Dell, and Acer were all very active in computer manufacturer during that time period and are still active today in one form or another. HP's first IBM-PC compatible clone may not have come to market till 1995, but they were making "personal computers' since the early 70s, before Apple even existed.

      So if what he meant to say is "we are the only US maker of personal computers that are either Macs or IBM-PC compatible machines that are still around since 1980-ish" he STILL technically wouldn't be right, because IBM's PC division, started roughly the same time the Mac was in development, lives on today via Lenovo, and Dell was founded shortly after the Mac's release. So even when his statement is highly refined and constricted he's still wrong. When his words are taken at face value he's not just wrong, but grossly inaccurate.

      I don't think it's too much to ask for people who make speeches for a living actually fact-check their statements to ensure they're not just making shit up or pulling it out of their asses. But I know, I ask too much.

    9. Re:HP and... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      You'll never know the difference.

      You mean they are identical to the ones that IBM last shipped YEARS ago? Oh dear.

      So it's a computer that's not from IBM, and isn't branded IBM. In what way are you saying that this proves Schiller wrong?

    10. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      I don't recall him saying anything about it having to be branded in any particular way -- he simply said "made computers". IBM still exists and makes computers. Their division that makes PCs still exists and is thriving. What they're called is irrelevant. Ergo, Schiller is wrong.

    11. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      He claims it's all about evolving and innovation. IBM evolved and innovated when they sold off their floundering PC division to a company that was prepared to give it the attention that IBM wasn't. And now it's the #1 maker of PCs. I'd say that's pretty damned impressive and smart. Apple isn't the only company that knows how to evolve and stay competitive in an ever-changing technological world, despite what Schiller would like people to think. So he was wrong on that point too.

    12. Re:HP and... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      If HP was making personal computers in the 70s how did IBM get the trademark?

      Really if you were any good at this trolling thing, you wouldn't be using some of the most ridiculous BS a marketer ever concocted to attack a statement that is among the most reasonable marketers have ever concocted.

    13. Re:HP and... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      So you're a troll.

      And a really shitty one. I mean terrible. I'm almost positive you're a paid Apple shill, because frankly any human who could read your post and not be more pro-Apple at the end has no soul.

      Read the quote. Schiller is clearly saying that no major PC company in the US from the late 70s/early 80s is still a major PC company except Apple. He's not saying IBM has been destroyed by the hand of god, he's saying they're gone from the PCs-to-ordinary Americans industry. Which they are, because they sold it to Lenovo. Neither HP nor Dell shipped millions of computers prior to 1985. Sony did, but they were almost all in Japan. Which means your list of counter-examples is Acer.

      Acer's not nothing, but it's also got even worse market-share then Apple.

      For the record, no Mac user gives a damn about market-share. We give a damn about profitability. And Apple has that.

    14. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Blah blah blah I'm an iPhanboi blah blah blah this is what Schiller really meant but didn't in any way shape or form actually say blah blah blah Apple is wonderful blah blah blah you're a troll blah blah blah...

      You do realize you now sound like the adults on Charlie Brown, right? Whomp whomp... whomp whomp whomp whomp...

    15. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Because HP didn't file a trademark for the term? Really, are you that stupid? Oh, you're an iSheeple, of course you are.

      And if you had an ounce of intelligence you'd stop defending what was clearly an incorrect statement made by a PR person from a company infamous for making incorrect statements regarding their accomplishments.

    16. Re:HP and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot moderators. How about Painful Truth rather than troll?

    17. Re:HP and... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      IBM don't make PCs, since they sold the rights to the IBM PC brand to Lenovo.
      Lenovo only used the IBM brand for a few years, then reverted back to their own brand name. Lenovo don't make anything with the IBM brand anymore.

      What is it you are not understanding? Neither company makes IBM PCs any more. Nor does anyone else.

    18. Re:HP and... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      IBM evolved and innovated when they sold off their floundering PC division to a company that was prepared to give it the attention that IBM wasn't. And now it's the #1 maker of PCs.

      Lenovo do not make IBM PCs any more. They haven't for years. And even if they did, they were not doing so back in the days when the Mac came out.

      There are counter-examples to Schiller's off-hand remark. But neither IBM nor Lenovo qualify.

    19. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter what they're called. What matters is where they come from. The division that made IBM-PCs, once owned by IBM still exists and still makes PCs. Just because it's owned by and the products are branded Lenovo is irrelevant. What part of that can't you understand? So while IBM themselves do not make PCs anymore (but they certainly still make computers) the part of IBM that did make PCs is still making them. Got it?

      Mind you they didn't sell the rights, they sold the division. So it wasn't a matter of Lenovo just buying the rights to put the IBM name to put on their own products, they bought the division of IBM that made IBM-PCs and continues to make those PCs even though they now put their name on them. When you buy a Lenovo Thinkpad it's made by the same division that used to make IBM Thinkpads -- the same division that's been making PCs since 1981.

    20. Re:HP and... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter what they're called. What matters is where they come from. The division that made IBM-PCs, once owned by IBM still exists and still makes PCs. Just because it's owned by and the products are branded Lenovo is irrelevant. What part of that can't you understand?

      The part where you are claiming that IBM PCs are still made. They are not.

      So while IBM themselves do not make PCs anymore

      Indeed. Therefore there's no contradiction of Schiller's comment here.

      When you buy a Lenovo Thinkpad it's made by the same division that used to make IBM Thinkpads -- the same division that's been making PCs since 1981.

      It's made by Lenovo, in China.

    21. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      And where do you think Apple products are made? Hint, they're not made in the US anymore. They're actually not even made by Apple at all. So...

    22. Re:HP and... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Because HP didn't file a trademark for the term? Really, are you that stupid? Oh, you're an iSheeple, of course you are.

      And if you had an ounce of intelligence you'd stop defending what was clearly an incorrect statement made by a PR person from a company infamous for making incorrect statements regarding their accomplishments.

      Classic troll. Instead of responding to arguments with arguments you respond with ad hominem attacks. And very bad trolling because the ad hominem to fact ratio is way to high. It should be about 50%. Like this post.

      As for the one actual thought in your poorly written series of ad hominems, in trademark law you can only get a trademark for a specific geographic market and a specific industry. that's why there can be Jim's Burgers and a Jim's Electrical Supply. If HP's Personal Computers had actually been in the same market as current personal computers IBM's trademark would have been invalid.

      BTW, I'm leaning away from 'trolling' and towards 'paid Apple shill,' because if you simply said the word "Acer" I would have been forced to agree with you. But since that would actually have involved making Apple's critics look like human beings with minds of their own you didn't do it, instead you're focusing on the easily dismissed claims of HP.

    23. Re:HP and... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      And this is even worse trolling them the other three posts of yours I responded to. No facts at all. It's pure ad hominem.

      What are you thinking? That you'll make me run home and cry to my mommy? How much is Apple paying you?

      I'm serious. You're bothering to respond to posts, which takes time, but you're not actually saying anything at all. This post admitted that you have no argument, because it included no argument, but you're still bothering to make the post. That means either you're a psycopath or somebody is paying you. It's clearly not HP paying you, because with the anti-bullying fad going around this post has got to cost them a couple pennies worth of brand equity. But OTOH since it makes all critics of Apple look like schoolyard bullies it raises Apple's brand equity.

    24. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Because it's impossible to have a discussion with an idiot, so I'm not even bothering to try.

    25. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      You're not making any arguments, therefore there is nothing to respond to. Nothing you've said is cogent in any way. You're defending a guy who clearly made an inaccurate statement and refuse to acknowledge he was dead wrong. If you cannot see the truth, then what's to discuss? You're living in a fantasy land.

    26. Re:HP and... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      And where do you think Apple products are made? Hint, they're not made in the US anymore. They're actually not even made by Apple at all. So...

      But the ones contracted out to China, are both designed and labelled "Apple". Unlike Lenovo's PCs which are neight designed nor badged IBM, nor in fact have anything to do with IBM.

      However, you have also overlooked that Mac Pros are manufactured by Apple in the USA. For sure that's a minority of Apple products, but it's not nothing.

    27. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      But you realize a label is just a label, and is otherwise meaningless, right? Most Apple products are made by Foxconn, in Foxconn factories, by Foxconn workers, using mostly Foxconn parts and then an Apple label is slapped on it and shipped to the US. Not really much different than having your products made by Lenovo, in Lenovo factories, by Lenovo workers. The only difference is the label. Fun fact, Lenovo did indeed keep the IBM label for 3 years after buying the division. So the only difference between those products made by the IBM division of Lenovo and the ones made today by the IBM division of Lenovo is the label. Which doesn't in any way negate the pedigree of the product.

      If Apple sold their iPod division to Foxconn, who continued to make and sell iPods, would it be any different if they had an Apple label or Foxconn label on them if they were otherwise made with the exact same parts at the exact same factory by the exact same workers? In case you're struggling for the answer, it's "no".

    28. Re:HP and... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      So the only difference between those products made by the IBM division of Lenovo and the ones made today by the IBM division of Lenovo is the label.

      If that were true they wouldn't be selling many of them. Nobody wants a PC that hasn't progressed in years.

      But you realize a label is just a label, and is otherwise meaningless, right?

      But we're not just talking about the label. Every aspect of the PCs is Lenovo, not IBM.

      Is a can of beans still Heinz beans, if the label says Del Monte Pineapple, and the contents of the can are Del Monte Pineapples?

      Lets be clear, IBM neither own the rights, contract out nor assemble Lenovo's PCs, nor is the label IBM. IBM has literally nothing to do with Lenovo's PCs and hasn't for years. It's a can of Del Monte Pineapples that you are trying to pass off as Heinz Baked Beans. It's ridiculous.

      If Apple sold their iPod division to Foxconn, who continued to make and sell iPods, would it be any different if they had an Apple label or Foxconn label on them if they were otherwise made with the exact same parts at the exact same factory by the exact same workers?

      Apple progresses the design of iPods every year to 18 months. In the situation you describe, 3 years or more on, they'd be Foxconn iPods and Apple would no longer be in the iPod market. Just as IBM is no longer in the PC market.

    29. Re:HP and... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Well I'm not going to continue to argue with you since you're clearly insistent on being obstinate.

      When the can of Heinz beans goes from being made in America to being made in Mexico and is called Ole Beans, guess what? It's still Heinz beans. The fact they're called something else and made somewhere else doesn't mean the technology, talent, patents, recipe, etc. of the Heinz product ceases to exist simply because it's made somewhere else. The same is true of IBM PCs. They live on in the form of Lenovo. I don't know why that's so difficult for you to understand. But whatever, no point in continuing to argue about it. Believe whatever you makes you happy.

      And you never answered my question in regard to the iPod hypothetical. Because according to you, the iPods that are made by Foxconn (using Apple-designed tech) in Foxconn factories are Apple products because they say Apple, but would be Foxconn products if they said Foxconn, despite the devices being exactly the same. That of course makes no sense. If Foxconn bought the division from Apple, and continued to use Apple's designs, and made them the same way they used to make them but called them Foxconn iPods, they'd still be exactly the same device, just owned by someone else with a different name on them. So again, it makes no sense, as the technology behind the product, that's the core of the product, is still Apple tech. It's no different from Lenovo. They make PCs based upon the technology, patents, and architecture they bought from IBM. There is no difference in the product. The only difference is who owns the division.

      It's all irrelevant anyway, because even if you exclude IBM, Schiller is still wrong.

    30. Re:HP and... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      And yet you continue to respond. Again, without any ideas, just ad hominem.

      Smart 12-year-olds pretend not to be 12.

    31. Re:HP and... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      So you say HP built PCs because they had a product they called PC, I point out that logic only works if IBM can't get a trademark on the term for their PC, and I'm the one not making sense?

      If you want to prove a statement is de3ad wrong you might actually have to prove it. You know think a little.

    32. Re:HP and... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      When the can of Heinz beans goes from being made in America to being made in Mexico and is called Ole Beans, guess what? It's still Heinz beans.

      So these beans are neither made by Heinz, nor made for Heinz, nor labelled as Heinz, nor sold by Heinz. No they are certainly not Heinz Beans.

      And you never answered my question in regard to the iPod hypothetical.

      Yes I answered your question. And in your very next sentence you misrepresent my answer, meaning that you know I answered it. What you mean is you don't agree with my answer to your question. Big difference.

      It's all irrelevant anyway, because even if you exclude IBM, Schiller is still wrong.

      Yeah, I already said that in an answer to you 5 days ago.

      http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

  32. Cray by drkim · · Score: 1

    Cray is still around building computers...

    http://www.cray.com/Products/P...

    ...and they started in "72 when Jobs was just 17 years old.

    They installed their first system at Los Alamos National Laboratory in 1976

    1. Re:Cray by Megol · · Score: 1

      Not really. What is now called Cray is the remains of Cray Research acquired from SGI by Tera Computer Company which then renamed themselves Cray. Not much of the original remains IIRC - AFAIK most people jumped ship if not when Seymour Cray started the Cray Computer Company (~1985) then when SGI acquired them. But IBM still manufactures computers having starting long before Cray Research even existed. There are many more remaining if one doesn't try to skew history. Including PC companies.

    2. Re:Cray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when is a Cray a personal computer? (And yes if you read the full quote he does says *personal* computer.

    3. Re:Cray by drkim · · Score: 1

      Since when is a Cray a personal computer? (And yes if you read the full quote he does says *personal* computer.

      Where did you see that?

      "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they’re all gone,” said Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of worldwide marketing, in an interview on Apple’s Cupertino campus Thursday. “We’re the only one left. We’re still doing it, and growing faster than the rest of the PC industry because of that willingness to reinvent ourselves over and over."

      From:
      http://www.macworld.com/articl...

  33. Hey, Johnny-come-lately... by Slartibartfast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I thought the story was a reasonable one. While I do miss the pre-Dice days, the days I really miss are the pre-Y2K days. Taco commentary, movie reviews, "quickies," Hemos, Cowboy Neal poll options... I just enjoyed the by-the-seat-of-their-pants feel. And that has been gone for quite some time. Certainly before you registered. ;-)

    1. Re:Hey, Johnny-come-lately... by gweilo8888 · · Score: 1

      That makes two of us. Guess the "7-digit newcomers" comment was way off base, eh MachineShedFred?

    2. Re:Hey, Johnny-come-lately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be new here :)

    3. Re:Hey, Johnny-come-lately... by jareth-0205 · · Score: 1

      Funnily enough, *I* miss the days before people started telling everyone that the site was better in the old days...

    4. Re:Hey, Johnny-come-lately... by hawk · · Score: 1

      That was approximately when the accounts became required for posting, and we complained about cookies. (well, those that caved in right away, some of us stubbornly held out and ended up with these high ids)

      hawk

  34. The title is wrong by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1, Informative

    The quote is

    "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone, we're the only one left. We're still doing it, and growing faster than the rest of the PC industry because of that willingness to reinvent ourselves over and over." said Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing

    As far as making personal computers before Apple and still doing it, I think it's a stretch to count HP because of a calculator, and I'm not even counting HP's attempt to get out of the PC market recently. The HP-150 that came out after they started working on the Mac... is that even in the same ballgame as the 1984 Mac, I don't think so.

    Apple started on the Mac in 1980 from what I can tell.

    The nitpicking is really skewing his point - HP is ALSO still around because they've had to reinvent themselves over and over.

    1. Re:The title is wrong by Arker · · Score: 1

      "Apple started on the Mac in 1980 from what I can tell."

      Eh, the 128k came out in '84.

      Some of the ideas that eventually got included might have been floating around in someone's head at Apple in 1980, but little if anything more than that.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    2. Re:The title is wrong by laird · · Score: 1

      Apple started the competing Macintosh and Lisa projects in 1978, funded, with teams building hardware and writing software, etc., so not just "ideas". The Lisa made it out first in January 1983, the Macintosh in January 1984. So if "when we started the Mac" is when they started working on it, he's right.

    3. Re:The title is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was reading that the concept was first pitched in '79, and this protoype is clearly from '81.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Early_Macintosh_Prototype_Computer_History_Museum_Mountain_View_California_2013-04-11_23-45.jpg

      This is from Feb '81
      http://www-sul.stanford.edu/mac/primary/docs/genesis.html

      SUMMARY AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

      Macintosh is designed as a stable base for our low-end product line. By limiting expandability we will have a product that will be free to grow to new heights of mass marketing--for which it is essential that all Macintoshes be identical (the secret of mass marketing of software is having a very large and extremely uniform hardware/software base).

      While it seems that current production plans for Macintosh may violate some of the basic principles outlined here, Mike Scott and Steve Jobs have agreed (in the Apple spirit of leading technology instead of following it) that I will continue designing and implementing the software design to the point of being able to demonstrate some of the software concepts discussed here so that the company can evaluate them.

      I think it's fair to say the project began in 1980.

    4. Re:The title is wrong by lord_mike · · Score: 1

      The original idea for the Macintosh was not even remotely close to what it eventually became. The original machine was an 8-bit machine that the user navigated around via the function keys on the keyboard. The only idea from the mac that held over to the final design was the idea of a computer "appliance".

    5. Re:The title is wrong by Solandri · · Score: 1

      As far as making personal computers before Apple and still doing it, I think it's a stretch to count HP because of a calculator, and I'm not even counting HP's attempt to get out of the PC market recently. The HP-150 that came out after they started working on the Mac... is that even in the same ballgame as the 1984 Mac, I don't think so.

      HP and Compaq merged; they just decided to go with the HP name instead of Compaq. This wasn't like DEC, which atrophied to a fraction of its former self before being bought by Compaq. Or SGI which went bankrupt and the remains were bought by Rackable Systems who changed their name to Silicon Graphics. Compaq was suffering like all computer companies due to the dot-com bubble bursting, but it was still fundamentally sound and capable of running on its own when it merged with HP in 2002. HP even changed its stock ticker to HPQ to reflect that the new company was a combination of the two, not HP taking over Compaq.

  35. He's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HP and Compaq merged in 2002, breaking the line.

    1. Re:He's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then Apple aren't Apple of old as they had to have a reverse takeover by NeXT to save themselves.

  36. Schiller On Crack! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hewlett-Packard / Compaq

    Gateway 2000 now Gateway

    Packard Bell

    As always, you're not nearly as fabulous as you think you are, Apple.

    1. Re:Schiller On Crack! by Arker · · Score: 2

      Oh please no, dont tell me that Packard Hell is still around.

      It's been years since I saw one of them and the memories still bring on cold sweats.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    2. Re: Schiller On Crack! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HP's PC line debuted in 1995

      Gateway was founded in 1985 (more than 1 year after the Macintosh)

      Packard Bell in 1986. More than 2 years after the Macintosh

      If there is one on crack it's you.

  37. Re: IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also aro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "IBM doesn't make PCs anymore."

    They still build computers...workstations, servers, business systems...just like they did before Woz cobbled together some Fairchild opAmps around 1974. Which incidentally was a copy of a device from Popular Electronics.

  38. Re:IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also arou by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't see anything about a personal computer qualifier in the FA. Schiller said "computers".

    “Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they’re all gone,” Schiller told Macworld

  39. HP isn't a computer company. by Dr_Marvin_Monroe · · Score: 2

    HP doesn't have the tradition of a "Computer Company". They make computer hardware, but that doesn't put them in the same league as Apple, IBM, Microsoft, Intel and Oracle. Same goes for Dell and Lenovo.

    Full disclosure, I've purchased 2 HP laptops in the last two years, so I'm not bashing on HP. They made/make the best calculators and they used to make electronic test equipment. Those were rugged (as much as test equipment can be outside Fluke), accurate and high performance. They also used to make the best laser printers you could buy ( at a reasonable cost). Moving into the commodity PC market and selling off their test equipment branch was a huge mistake. They've had some really bad leadership over the years and they seem to keep killing their best products just at the point when it could really make a positive difference for them.

    They're not a computer company, they just happen make computer hardware...this month...next month may be something else.

    1. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by plopez · · Score: 1

      They have a pretty good storage and cloud systems management software products. I think they should dump their PC division and focus on the infrastructure and services distributed cloud services will need.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    2. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      HP doesn't have the tradition of a "Computer Company".

      Yeah, they've only been making computers since 1966.

    3. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they've only been making calculators since 1966.

    4. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So like Apple, who dropped "computer" from their name in 2007? Didnt they also predict the "demise of the PC" in favour of tablets?

      Their "comeback story" was the IPOD (Back when they were in financial difficulty).

    5. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they've only been making calculators since 1966.

      A minicomputer is not a calculator (unless you consider any computer a "calculator", in which case, well, just replace all occurrences of "computer" with "calculator" in this story, all articles to which this story refers, and all comments on this story, and the point remains that HP is as much of a computer^Wcalculator company as IBM, DEC, etc.), and an HP 2100 is definitely a minicomputer. (Yes, HP made a line of calculators using a processor with an HP 2100-derived instruction set, but that's a different matter.)

    6. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Full disclosure, I've purchased 2 HP laptops in the last two years, so I'm not bashing on HP.

      Laptops don't count. Almost none of the laptops sold today are designed or made by the brand name they carry (including Apple). They're almost all made by a handful of little-known Taiwanese companies called ODMs (D is for design, as they also do the design work, not just the manufacturing like an OEM). Based on unit sales, they are the biggest PC companies, not HP or Lenovo or Dell. Even the 5th largest is bigger than HP.

    7. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not listening. They make computer hardware but they're not a computer company. Are you deliberately being obtuse?

    8. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      You're not listening. They make computer hardware but they're not a computer company. Are you deliberately being obtuse?

      In what way are they not a computer company? They have made minicomputers, and operating systems for them, since 1966, including the 2100 series and the 3000 series, the latter being sold as business computers, and have made UN*X systems for both technical and business use since the 1980's.

      What does a company have to do to be "a computer company"?

    9. Re:HP isn't a computer company. by ralphsiegler · · Score: 1

      Everyone here is so desktop-computer focused. HP indeed has a long tradition as a computer company. In 1972 they introduced the HP 3000 minicomputer line, which had a 31 year run until 2003. Its MPE operating system is time sharing. These machines are still running at manufacturing plants, office management companies, and local insurance companies. In 2012 Stromas made an emulator for x86, and HP sells an "HPA/3000" license to run MPE on it.

  40. Not Apple, neither by AJWM · · Score: 1

    If you want to limit it to PCs (which the original quote did not), then you might as well rule out Apple too.

    They build (or rather, subcontract offshore companies to build) phones and tablets, neither of which by any stretch could be considered general purpose computers the way PCs could, and an increasingly shrinking line of computing appliances, ditto. Of course that's pretty much true all the way back to the original Mac, except for a brief period when Jobs wasn't around.

    Indeed, arguably Apple isn't around either. They got assimilated by Jobs's NeXT which then changed their name, same way Southern Bell is now AT&T. The original AT&T isn't around. (Of course, the Jobs Reality Distortion Field was such that Apple paid him to be assimilated.)

    On the flip side, if you want to talk about companies that are still around which made PCs back in the day, then add Radio Shack and Texas Instruments. Arguably, TI still does make PCs, given what some of their hand-held calculators are capable of.

    --
    -- Alastair
    1. Re:Not Apple, neither by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2

      If you want to limit it to PCs (which the original quote did not), then you might as well rule out Apple too.

      They build (or rather, subcontract offshore companies to build) phones and tablets, neither of which by any stretch could be considered general purpose computers the way PCs could, and an increasingly shrinking line of computing appliances, ditto.

      They also build Macs, which

      1. come, by default, with an OS that lets you pop up a terminal window and run the usual UN*X command-line interface;
      2. put the initial account in the "admin" group by default, so that the user can, in that terminal window, use sudo;
      3. offer development tools for that OS for free, and don't prevent you from writing code for it and letting others run that code (you can't go through the App Store without jumping through hoops, but it's as yet undemonstrated that they'll go the App Store-only route);
      4. can run Windows or Linux if you want;

      so, in addition to the phones, tablets, and computing appliances (I assume you're referring there to the iPods other than the iPod touch, but they're even more appliance-like than the iOS machines), they do still manufacture a line of personal computers.

    2. Re:Not Apple, neither by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      No. The real irony here is that Apple started out as something distinct and then ultimately ended up as just another PC vendor before they started neglecting that in favor of personal electronics.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:Not Apple, neither by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      If you want to limit it to PCs (which the original quote did not)

      Do your own research. Follow it back to the original article and you'll find he was speaking about the "PC industry". But even reading that article, we don't know what the entire sentence that this "quote" came from said.

      Thus claiming he was wrong because he didn't limit it to PCs, as you and several others have, is just plain misinformed.

      They build (or rather, subcontract offshore companies to build) phones and tablets, neither of which by any stretch could be considered general purpose computers the way PCs could, and an increasingly shrinking line of computing appliances, ditto.

      Which makes no sense. Apple still manufactures Macs, and the Mac is neither a phone nor a tablet. And some of those Macs are even assembled in the USA.

      On the flip side, if you want to talk about companies that are still around which made PCs back in the day

      AND STILL MANUFACTURE PCS. Neither Radio Shack not TI qualify.

    4. Re:Not Apple, neither by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Dude, why are you making this so complicated?

      It's a statement from a marketing VP, not an essay by George Washington on the true meaning of the Second Amendment.

      It's also clear you didn't read the quote, because the quote says computer but quickly clarifies by using the acronym "PC" in the next sentence. You just read the article summary, clearly written by an HP marketing flak, and then rather then spending five minutes tracking down the actual Apple marketing quote you spent five minutes over-analyzing the HP marketing spin.

      What Schiller meant is that in the late 70s early 80s a lot of companies sold computers to consumers. Today almost none of them do. Except Apple. None of the top companies from that era still sell PCs to consumers.

      HP may have technically been one of those companies, because they did have a PC-style product, but given that almost nobody used it I suspect it was only sold to businesses.

    5. Re:Not Apple, neither by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The third sentence was a completely separate thought. It had nothing to do with the first sentence in which he claims that nobody making computers at the time of the Macintosh exist now.

      Shiller indeed.

    6. Re:Not Apple, neither by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      No. The real irony here is that Apple started out as something distinct and then ultimately ended up as just another PC vendor

      ...except that they were and are one of the few x86-based PC vendors who has their own OS (or acquired it from NeXT and then continued to work on it, if you will) and sells it as the primary OS, rather than just licensing Windows and offering that as the primary OS.

  41. kinda off topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember the Tandy computers from Radioshack. I didn't own one, but I remember seeing them in the stores. I forgot when Radioshack discontinued their computers.

  42. Apple has never made PCs by plopez · · Score: 1

    If PC means "Pocket Calculator" :)

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  43. Re:Only Toshiba by nojayuk · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sony Viao L-series all-in-one desktops PCs.

    http://www.sony.co.uk/product/...

    Fujitsu (no longer Fujitsu-Siemens) Esprimo desktop PCs.

    http://www.fujitsu.com/uk/prod...

    Panasonic tablet-based PCs running Windows 8.1

    http://www.panasonic.com/busin...

  44. Re:IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also arou by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    I didn't see anything about a personal computer qualifier in the FA. Schiller said "computers".

    Wrong. If you go to the ORIGINAL SOURCE of the quote, a story at MacWorld, you find that Schiller is in fact talking about PCs:

    "Every company that made computers when we started the Mac, they're all gone," said Philip Schiller, Appleâ(TM)s senior vice president of worldwide marketing, in an interview on Apple's Cupertino campus Thursday. "Weâ(TM)re the only one left. We're still doing it, and growing faster than the rest of the PC industry because of that willingness to reinvent ourselves over and over."

    That may or may not be an accurate opinon, none the less, the subject here is PCs.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  45. HP PCs are from original Compaq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HP purchased Compaq and this became their PC line. IBM sold PC (laptop) to Lenovo. So, if you are only considering PC/Laptop that is still sold under the original name, then Dell may be the only competition to Apple for this timeframe.

    1. Re:HP PCs are from original Compaq by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      HP purchased Compaq and this became their PC line.

      Prior to that, they had their own PC line.

    2. Re: HP PCs are from original Compaq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. The Pavilion series was introduced in 1995. 11 years after the Macintosh.

    3. Re:HP PCs are from original Compaq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HP vectra wasn't until 10/85

    4. Re: HP PCs are from original Compaq by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The Pavilion series was introduced in 1995. 11 years after the Macintosh.

      The fact that the Pavilion was introduced in 1995 proves the claim, from my posting, that "Prior to [HP's purchase of Compaq], [HP] had their own PC line" false? I don't think so.

      (No, I didn't claim, in any posting, that HP was in the PC business when the Mac was introduced.)

    5. Re:HP PCs are from original Compaq by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      HP vectra wasn't until 10/85

      Which was even earlier than 1995, so it even further emphasizes that the title of the comment to which I responded, that "HP PCs are from original Compaq", is at best misleading (HP had PCs before the purchase of Compaq).

      If you want to say "HP didn't enter the PC market until the Mac came out", mention the HP Vectra, not Compaq; HP's purchase of Compaq is utterly irrelevant to HP's entry into the PC market.

  46. Going home. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1995 - HP enters the home computing market with the HP Pavilion PC.

    Isn't that 11 years after the Mac was launched?

  47. Granularity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's all about granularity. HP does plenty of design, just with components that are more standardized. To extend your argument, Apple doesn't really do the design work because someone else developed the theories behind their logic boards.

    Tl;Dr Putting existing things together to create a new thing is still creating a new thing

  48. Re:Cray -- not the same company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cray was bought out by SGI, and the name got sold to Tera Computer, which rebadged their older machines, and then tried a few other approaches. Unlike Apple and HP, there is zero continuity between the stuff that got sold then and now under this name.

  49. HP Vectra in October 1985 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Vectra

    "The HP Vectra was a line of business-oriented personal computers manufactured by Hewlett-Packard. It was introduced in October 1985 as HP's first IBM compatible PC."

  50. They're still around and own Gatewy as well. While Schiller was probably correct in the sense most of the dozens of PC makers of any size from the early Mac era have come and gone he was not correct in saying none still exist. Of course, what constitutes still existing is a bit vague since many have been acquired or exit but have exited the PC business.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  51. design vs assembly by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    Who do you think manufactures Apple's computers, if not the likes of Foxconn and Pegatron?

    I'm not defending outsourcing or bad labor practices, but there's a big difference between **assembly** and **design**

    Parent is right to say that HP's computers are designed and assembled in China w/ a logo slapped on them. That's different than what Apple does.

    As someone else pointed out below, the architecture is designed by Apple's engineers in Cuppertino. They issue *specifications* that manufacturers must meet.

    Big difference.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:design vs assembly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean "specifying" installing an ATI (or Nvidia) video card because they use the industry standard buses, but not like how others use the same industry standards?

    2. Re:design vs assembly by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Fundamentally they have to buy the key components from Intel (processor and PCH) and ATI or NVIDIA (GPU) and connect them together in pretty much the standard way. They may have a bit more leverage to request design tweaks than some vendors and they do use custom board layouts to fit their form factor demands but I highly doubt they have enough leverage to specify a major redesign of the core comonents.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    3. Re:design vs assembly by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      You do realize that if they can't use Intel's parts there's no reason for them to try? These are the people who design their own processors for their phones. They don't need Intel or Nvidia or anyone else.

      If Intel/NVidia/etc. wants to be a dick about not redesigning a part then Intel/AMD/etc. won;t get the contract and they know it. So as long as Apple is willing to pay them for then inconvenience of re-designing said part they will do so.

  52. Occupational Surnames by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Under old occupational surnames model, "Schiller" was the surname for the marketing profession.

  53. Understandable - I've been forced to use a few HPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Understandable - I've been forced to use a few HPs and they sucked.

    Mac suck too, just in a different way.

    Let's be fair, Mac servers suck big donkey penises, but that is due to the software.

    HP's HP-UX servers work forever - almost too long.  Their PC servers suck.

  54. Re:Only Toshiba by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

    You need to get out more. While the Fujitsu and Panasonic ones can be tough to find, Sony PC's and laptops are in just about every major electronics store.

  55. HP is a zombie... by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

    ... so technically dead. From cutting edge, high quality products to scammy consumer crap in 2 decades. It was amazing to watch.

  56. While I agree about comments... by Slartibartfast · · Score: 1

    I *do* think that the content was better back then. I really felt like Rob not only had a vested interest, but really put part of himself into the site. I strongly feel that Roblimo's entrance was a direct correlation with a diminishment in fun. I can't put my finger on it, but something about the guy just rubs me the wrong way -- though if I'm honest, it probably started with the Alex Chiu story (http://tech.slashdot.org/story/01/06/01/1250257/ask-internet-icon-alex-chiu). And damn, but that was 2001.

    Time's flying.

    1. Re:While I agree about comments... by hawk · · Score: 1

      There was a crossover point in the vary late 90s. I started seeing things posted that I'd already read in the print version of the WSJ. Before that, you were likely to find things earlier here than any other single place.

      hawk

  57. Only micros? by Thomasje · · Score: 1

    I know I'm showing my age, but when I was little, computers were these huge things that sat in climate-controlled rooms. Unless that kind of hardware is now removed from the definition of "computer", I can think of a few pre-Apple manufacturers that are still around, like IBM, NCR, and Unisys.

  58. Can't blame him... by binarybum · · Score: 1

    I've forgotten about HP too. I think we all should.

    --
    ôó
  59. Still Valid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From HP's own timeline: "1995, HP enters the home computing market with the HP Pavilion PC." Which is more than 10 years after the launch of the Macintosh. So, the point is still valid.

    1. Re:Still Valid by ralphsiegler · · Score: 1

      not valid at all, the claim was about "computer systems" not PC HP huge in mid range systems from early 70s onward

  60. Whoooosh! by AnotherAnonymousUser · · Score: 1

    Must not be so high up there that the joke goes over your head :).

  61. Re:Only Toshiba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fujitsu PCs were ubiquitous in Germany when they were still sold under the name "Fujitsu-Siemens".

  62. Eat De Poo Poo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come meirda y morir, pendejo.

    1. Re: Eat De Poo Poo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No habla espagnol.

      Write English or stfu&gfto.

    2. Re: Eat De Poo Poo by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Write English or stfu&gfto.

      Go Fuck The Oatmeal?

  63. Don't forget Radio Shack... by beaverdownunder · · Score: 1

    After all, Radio Shack introduced its first line of PCs in 1977. Sure, they stopped making their own clones in the mid-90s, but they still kept on selling them.

  64. HP Doesn't count. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HP doesn't count because buying their computers is like buying the cheapo, home brand flour that's full of weevils or moths at your local budget supermarket.
    Nobody who is serious about computing buys HP these days, only really dumb people.
    In the interests of full disclosure, I am "platform agnostic". I don't hate on things because I don't like them, I hate on them because they're crap.

  65. Who cares by Chaneera · · Score: 1

    Don't give a shit if they started making computers in 1822, would still not waste my money on one of their polished, overpriced turds.

  66. Trolls as news by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Seriously?

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    1. Re:Trolls as news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      News for nerds

    2. Re:Trolls as news by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      News for nerds

      Good point.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  67. Re:IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also arou by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The PC reference is about growing faster the PC industry, it is not about being the only PC computer company around. In fact, Texas Instruments, Radio Shack, and Timex all made personal computers when Apple started the Macintosh. And IBM is still around. Sure, they sold off their PC division, their entry systems division, which predates the Macintosh.

    Schiller probably has no clue about the history of computers, especially those that predated the Macintosh. He is a marketing person, I am sure he was not into that scene in the late 70s and early 80s.

  68. Also Nintendo (sort of)... by beaverdownunder · · Score: 1

    ...if you were to loosely identify video game cabinets and consoles as computers (which of course they are.)

  69. Why is this new that "matters"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? This guy lied or is clearly and willfully ignorant. So what. So. What. Moving on. Meanwhile, someone somewhere just made a discovery or invented a tool or machine that will revolutionize our lives. That's why I came to slashdot to read and discuss with like-minded people. Crappy discussions like this need to stay on reddit and not here. : (

  70. HP??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That doesn't count.

  71. We have an HP at work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems HP forgot about HP as well.

  72. Daniel Radcliffe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does He have to do with this?

  73. Re:Cray -- not the same company by pspahn · · Score: 1

    Speaking of SGI, they're still selling hardware (despite being sold and rebranded ... as ... themself?)

    I'd count SGI for the sake of this argument.

    --
    Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
  74. Fuck Apple. Typical delusional narcissism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The amazing/sad part is that I'm sure many of Apple's people really believe their own mind control, reality distorting hype.

    Many big companies from that era still make excellent home computers. They're called LAPTOPS. Miniaturization is the essence of computer engineering advancement. Duh.

    PC towers are old news, for many an outmoded form factor with little to offer over the basic portable computer. And if anybody really wants a tower PC, and there remain some excellent uses for such machines, (high power gaming rigs come to mind), why, we build them from OEM parts or buy them from resellers who do that for us. Gone are the days when big companies like IBM need to put their muscle into designing the innards of such machines. That problem is solved and the market shrunk to make way for the machines which everybody else actually needs and uses on a daily basis.

    That Apple still has a stick in the tower PC fire speaks more to their astonishing ability to bamboozle people into bowing before their sticker logo, (regardless of the same OEM parts they use as everybody else. Apple doesn't make anything themselves. Bloody Foxcon and others make all that stuff, and everybody buys from them).

    But that doesn't stop Apple from somehow believing that they are special. It's DIFFERENT when *they* contract out their designs to Asia. (And sell copies of broken Unix). Why is it different? Because, Apple is M*A*G*I*C.

    Apple is so utterly out of touch with reality, it disgusts me. But more disgusting are the legions of people who buy into the illusion. Since Wozniak, (Steve Jobs, let us not forget, was never a programmer or an engineer; he's nothing but a marketing guy), the days of revolutionary engineering in PCs is long gone and Apple remains little more than a pyramid marketing scheme.

  75. Re: IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also aro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM discontinued their workstations years ago.

  76. I Was There Brother by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the Late 70's as Apple Computer was getting started, HP sold the best RPN calculators and engineering equipment.

    In the late 80s as Apple Computer was selling Macs and Laserwriters, HP was selling Injet and laserwriter printers and acquiring talent by buying smaller start up companies.

    In the 90s when Apple Computer was burning through CEOs like a hot knife through butter HP was burning over its acquisitions and becoming a IP Patent warehouse without a business plan.

    In the 00s when Apple Computer change to Apple Inc. and invented the iMac, iPod, iTunes, iPhone and iPad HP bought Compaq (who had bought DEC in 1998, a Real Computer Company that they did not know what or how to do with) and finally became a "Computer Business" in name only.

    In the 10s Apple Inc. is running out of gas under CEO Cook and will probably jettison him when the stock tanks by 90% around 2016 for lack of new gear, HP will still be sucking shit and still have no where to go but to become a litigation company for other legitimate corporations.

  77. When you looked at that time line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    did you realize that HP didnt start selling PC's until 1995... over 10 years after the macintosh was released?

    1. Re:When you looked at that time line by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      did you realize that HP didnt start selling PC's until 1995... over 10 years after the macintosh was released?

      I guess the folks who did that timeline didn't consider the HP Vectra, released in 1995, very important, perhaps because it wasn't aimed at "the home computing market", which is what the timeline says HP entered in 1995. (I also guess they didn't consider usability very important, either, unless it works better than it did on Safari.)

      And, as long as we're beating up marketoons making misleading claims, HP didn't "create RISC architecture" all by themselves in 1986; the first Berkeley RISC processor and the first Stanford MIPS processors were developed in the early 1980's, and IBM were working on the 801 in the late 1970's. Perhaps the first PA-RISC-based HP 3000 was the first commercial RISC-based machine, but that's a different matter.

  78. Apple is Doomed! by jpatters · · Score: 1

    Apples SVP of Marketing indulged in a bit of uninformed hyperbole, surely this means Apple is doomed. DOOMED I tell you!

    --
    "Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
  79. Re:Cray -- not the same company by drkim · · Score: 1

    Speaking of SGI, they're still selling hardware (despite being sold and rebranded ... as ... themself?)

    I'd count SGI for the sake of this argument.

    I guess in a lot of these cases we end up on a semantic discussion of what constitutes a 'company.'

    Is it the people? Jobs=dead; Wozniak=gone; Wayne=long gone.

    Is it their primary business?
    In that case, Apple is now a phone company.
    http://cdn-static.zdnet.com/i/...

    ..or see p. 25
    http://files.shareholder.com/d...

  80. Re:Only Toshiba by Patch86 · · Score: 1

    Fujitsu brand is still common in the UK. Possibly related to their relationship to old UK giant ICL- which (I think) used to sell rebadged Fujitsu PCs, and was later taken over by Fujitsu.

    In any case, they're still a common enough brand. I have a Vista-era Fujitsu laptop on my desk right now, albeit not in working order.

  81. What he meant is... by jcrada · · Score: 1

    that Apple Is the Last PC Maker From the Mac Era that is *actually* worth it.

  82. IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time I checked, IBM existed as well (and they have not sold their server business to Lenovo yet).

  83. Digital Video comments by Apple fans! by lesuth · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of the 90s and 2000s when Apple and Apple fans would incorrectly state how Apple's digital video was the first when http://www.truevision.com/ with their Targa boards, were the true pioneers of digital video.

  84. Touche! by Slartibartfast · · Score: 1

    Well played, sir. Well played.

  85. Re:Who cares - get something for that money by ralphsiegler · · Score: 1

    I use a company Apple laptop, must say it's very solid and robust compared to other leading laptop brands, and I sure appreciate having BSD on there as opposed to the other alternative my employer would have handed me, a windows thing. Don't have to worry about driver configuration issues either, the hardware designed for an OS and driver set. I drive two other screens with it on my desk, nice to have three total screens that work well together. Major softwares in the business/professional world can run on it, for some things there just aren't alternatives yet in the open source world. Now at home I run GNU/Linux, on the two systems under my desk nvidia and radeon driver issues sometimes a pain. But there are things I have to do for work that just can't run on that platform, so I have to fire up windows 7 under vmware workstation. ew.

  86. HP appears to be in violation ... by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 1

    ... of Apple's historical representation patents.

  87. Yes, yes they do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MSX was a standard set by Japanese computer manufacturers to reduce fragmentation in the home PC market. Microsoft parterned with them and provided the BASIC language for them as well.

    They were sold here in the States. I remember seeing them in electronics departments in late 83 and well into 84. Furthermore, after they crashed the could be bought from vendors like DAK and others in the back of COMPUTE! or Creative Computing until 86.

    They failed not because they weren't capable but because they had no games.

    I almost got one in early 84, because I love quirky tech...but I came to my senses and bought a C64.

    They were extremely popular in Japan and in South America.

  88. Good for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish I still had my C64, 128 or Amiga 500...

    Those were they days... Looking at 1040STs and Amiga 1000s... Looking at the new brown and white line from Atari.

  89. Commodore still kickin' by Comboman · · Score: 1

    And in the '78-'84 era he's referring to the major companies who made computers do not have a good survival rate. Wang, Compaq, Osborn, Commodore, Tandy

    The Commodore 64 was the best selling personal computer of all time and you can still buy a new model today, so suck it Mac.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    1. Re:Commodore still kickin' by petteyg359 · · Score: 1

      If it doesn't have a SID, and I can't POKE its SYS, it's not a Commodore.

    2. Re:Commodore still kickin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The linked piece of shit is also missing PETSCII, has the symbols above the numbers in the wrong order, has improperly placed F-keys, and lacks a RUN STOP / RESTORE key.

  90. HP? by IndieVoter · · Score: 1

    HP took a shitty terminal product, and made it run a DOS, in 1981. It was a PoC and the salesforce blew it off. I know, I was there. Their PCs where nothing more than a collection of off the shelf parts, no innovation. No better than Dell or no-name Asian junk. Nothing innovative has come out of HP computer systems since 1980. Laser printers were OEMed from Canon, PCs were just clones, UNIX stuff was mediocre and overpriced. The great company that I had started with when I graduated from college became a collections of old, bitter men and people who couldn't get a job anywhere else. Good luck, Meg.

  91. Re: IBM, Sun (as Oracle), DEC (as HP) are also aro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM is selling off the remainder of their server business to Lenovo just like their PCs were 10 years ago. What's left is only services and some military HW.

  92. i would have worked for hp for free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    back in the '80's, but i don't know who they are any more.

  93. Wrong. It was Packard Bell back then by Gallomimia · · Score: 1

    It's merged so many times with other corporations that you really can't say it "still exists".

    --
    Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
    1. Re:Wrong. It was Packard Bell back then by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      It's merged so many times with other corporations that you really can't say it "still exists".

      The only question is whether to rate this -1, Confused or -1, Troll (i.e., either you know that the common name substring "Packard" is insufficient to equate the two companies and are just trolling or you don't know and are confused).

  94. Huh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Such is the hubris of Apple.

  95. This entire subject is nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gosgog:
    Schiller is nothing more than a PR guy for Apple. Who gives a fuck, want a computer, there's HP, Acer, Toshiba, Fujitsu, Samsung etc., etc. All at any good IT store.
    I just recently bought a new PC box, put in AMD stuff, etc, have a nice 19 " samsung monitor...its MY COMPUTER.
    SLASHDOT, please stop wasting time with dumbass Shit like this.

  96. Apple doesn't make PC's either... by RandomStr · · Score: 1

    I would point out that technically Apple doesn't make PC's any more either(and perhaps never did), they are Intel(PC) boxes running a bsdSkin(OSX) rather than Windows.
    They only thing that differentiates them from, say, Dell, is that they adopt closed standards and have vertical branding(but certainly not vertical integration)...

    In fact, I'd go so far as to say that, Intel/IBM/Motorola(the three company's that have supplied them with chips) are essentially the only "PC" makers in the world, and are still going strong.
    Apple and almost every other brand just make the boxes containing the said company components.

    1. Re:Apple doesn't make PC's either... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      I would point out that technically Apple doesn't make PC's any more either(and perhaps never did), they are Intel(PC) boxes running a bsdSkin(OSX) rather than Windows. They only thing that differentiates them from, say, Dell, is that they adopt closed standards and have vertical branding(but certainly not vertical integration)...

      ...and that they develop their own OS for them (yes, the lower levels are based on Mach and BSD code, but it's not as if they just take off-the-shelf Mach and BSD code and slap a thin GUI skin over it).

      In fact, I'd go so far as to say that, Intel/IBM/Motorola(the three company's that have supplied them with chips) are essentially the only "PC" makers in the world, and are still going strong.

      Neither IBM nor Motorola make processor chips used in any significant personal computers these days (unless you have your own personal IBM Power System, IBM System z, or IBM BlueGene supercomputer :-)), so neither of them are "PC makers" any more.

    2. Re:Apple doesn't make PC's either... by RandomStr · · Score: 1

      I would point out that technically Apple doesn't make PC's any more either(and perhaps never did), they are Intel(PC) boxes running a bsdSkin(OSX) rather than Windows. They only thing that differentiates them from, say, Dell, is that they adopt closed standards and have vertical branding(but certainly not vertical integration)...

      ...and that they develop their own OS for them (yes, the lower levels are based on Mach and BSD code, but it's not as if they just take off-the-shelf Mach and BSD code and slap a thin GUI skin over it).

      I do concede that OSX so more than just a skin, perhaps comparing it to Metro/ModernUI sitting on top of the NT Kernel might be a better comparison... ...just kidding. It's more like Gnome/KDE/Android/Chrome sitting on each's respective flavour of UNIX. :)

      Ultimately I think UNIX is a solid core for any OS, and that if Microsoft hadn't dropped their flavour, we wouldn't have had to endure the growing pains of 95/XP/Vista. But that's another story.

      In fact, I'd go so far as to say that, Intel/IBM/Motorola(the three companies that have supplied them with chips) are essentially the only "PC" makers in the world, and are still going strong.

      Neither IBM nor Motorola make processor chips used in any significant personal computers these days (unless you have your own personal IBM Power System, IBM System z, or IBM BlueGene supercomputer :-)), so neither of them are "PC makers" any more.

      Yes ok(and not really), but my point is that the chip is the computer, and that each generation of Apple(Moto/IBM/Intel) has had "Less Apple", this current, Intel, and the next, ARM, are little more than reference designs, configured to fit in the box...

      • XBOX360/PS3/Wii/WiiU/WiiU2 all contain PowerPC chips, many Tablets/Phones/ChromeBooks?/etc. contain Moto chips; the line of distinction of what a PC is these days has blurred, but they all have their roots in the PC concept...
      • And since the vast majority of Apples business is those other non-PC devices...
      • Also until this new Lenovo deal goes through, IBM still make Intel workstations too...

      Perhaps the line from the Apple guy should have been, "While you can't run software from any previous generation(or our next) of our PC's, well still sell you something called that.". I know I'm being cynical, but hey the original story/line was from a PR guy...

  97. Apple and Hubris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple showing signs of hubris? Say it ain't so!

  98. Depends if you count Compaq acquisition by mbkennel · · Score: 1


    Compaq computer starts shipping in March 1983.

    http://oldcomputers.net/compaqi.html

    However, it was started in 1982, after Apple started the Macintosh project.

  99. What about Toshiba? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think Toshiba was making IBM AT compatibles, including laptops, back then, and is still in the business.

  100. When Apple make II HP is not making PC yet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He is correct, but not from mac

  101. HP didn't make PC's in 1984 by gig · · Score: 1

    This is sad nerd semantics, even for Slashdot. A rational human can tell by the context that Phil Schiller was talking about “personal computers” when he said “computers.” Today, Ford makes “computers” but Ford has never made PC's. Same with HP in 1984.

    Further, what was HP in 1984 was sold off around 2000 or so. Trying to say there is continuity between the 1984 HP and today's HP is a real stretch. It's like today's AT&T — same name, totally different company.

    And the stupidest part of this is that Steve Wozniak used to work for HP, and offered the Apple II to HP and was turned down. HP took a pass on PC's and that didn't change until the 1990's when HP was just another Mac cloner.