The assertion that Xerox did not "invent" the GUI and that many of the
concepts had existed separately prior to their fusion at PARC is both true
and completely irrelevant, in exactly the same way that a similar assertion
could be made for the Wright Brothers, etc. No invention springs wholly
formed from teh forehead of the inventor, everything builds on previous
innovations. Xerox invented the GUI for all practical purposes.
Likewise, whether Apple was "planning" on implementing a GUI is completely
facetious. To return to the Wright Brothers analogy, lots of people were
planning on inventing an airplane. And besides, the GUI wasn't even a spark
in Apple's eye in 1979, they were just introducing the Apple II+ at that
time!
The Xerox Star was introduced in May, 1981, and the Apple Lisa 1 wasn't
announced until January, 1983. It shipped in June of that year, more than
two years after the Xerox. Two years is a freaking LIFETIME in the computer
industry. What is this columnist smoking?
In regard to Windows being a clone of the Macintosh, that's also false. The
intended competitive target for Windows 1.0 was somebody's PC based product
which in turn was intended as a competitor to IBM's TopView.
I was here in the Windows 2.x/3.0 days, in fact, I was the beta
administrator for 3.0, and I can tell you that competing with the Macintosh
was the furthest thing from our minds. Nobody in the dev group had worked
on a Mac, we didn't have any Macs anywhere in the area, and nobody ever
mentioned the Mac as we made product decisions. In those days, our
competitor was Quarterdeck's DesqView, partly GEM too, and some other things
most people have forgotten like VM/386, not the Mac.
We were not trying to compete with or clone the Mac. We were trying to (and
this is not a corporate 'line', I'm serious, I was there) 1. make the PC
easier to use, and 2. break the '640K barrier'. We didn't do a graphical
user interface because it was graphical, we did it because it was WYSIWYG --
note that the first real Windows app was Aldus PageMaker, a desktop
publishing application. People think Windows was successful because of some
big Microsoft master plan, which is ridiculous. It didn't sell hardly at
all until it really took off with 3.0, and that's just because the
incredibly small dev team (like 25 including management) just wanted to do
some really cool software. Hell, at launch, we all had buttons that said
"Windows 3.0 - It's Cool." We weren't, and aren't, Orwellian characters,
just folks trying to write software that people want to buy. Gee, I guess
it worked! So sue us!
Remember that Windows back then wasn't remotely similar to the Mac apart
>from it being graphical and using icons. Any similarity to the Mac that
grew over time was the result of tons of usability studies with people who
had never used a computer before. If implementing features via usability
studies makes Windows more like the Mac, that only means that Apple's user
interface must be genuinely easy to use and that doing things that way are
natural. There's this misperception that there's some bad blood between
Microsoft and Apple because they sued us, which couldn't be farther from the
truth. When the lawsuit came through, we weren't saying "Those bastards!",
we were saying "Huh? Why would they do that to their buddies?" And we
never held a grudge either, up to and including our recent financial
investments in Apple and our continuing successful software line for the
Mac.
Kai
(my opinions, not my employer's)
-----Original Message-----
From: Max Eskin [mailto:maxeskin@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 4:17 PM
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
Subject: cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?
I am curious as to the veracity of the article at
http://www.MacKiDo.com/DarkSide/Coates.html
It is a criticism of another article, partly quoted. The original
article says the Apple got their idea from xerox in 1979, and MS
got their ideas from Apple, and now they have copied the Mac w/Win98
The article in the link argues that Win98 is much worse than the mac,
which I agree with. I am wondering about its statement that Apple
knew all about GUI before 1979 with their Lisa. AFAIK, the lisa
is ~1982...
The author argues that the other one should get his facts and MS
propaganda in check. Is he practicing hypocrisY?
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Hey, this whole deal with Microsoft and the government anti-trust lawsuit
is pretty historic. Unless Microsoft all of a sudden decides to come back
to the table (I think at this point the egos have bloated out so far that
they are irreversibly colliding with one another) then it will be very
interesting to see what comes of this. Ten years from now we'll be
looking back, much like we did when they killed Ma Bell, and for better or
worse, lamenting on the days when Microsoft was king.
I think it went from interesting side note to full-blown event when
Microsoft said "screw it" and decided to go ahead and ship Win98. That
was a decidedly brash decision. It will be very fun to watch this unfold
over the next few weeks.
Take notes, all you amateur computer historians. This is the kind of
stuff people always refer back to when discussing the politics of business
and the forces that change industry.
Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever onward.
September 26 & 27...Vintage Computer Festival 2
See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
[Last web page update: 05/11/98]
I am curious as to the veracity of the article at
http://www.MacKiDo.com/DarkSide/Coates.html
It is a criticism of another article, partly quoted. The original
article says the Apple got their idea from xerox in 1979, and MS
got their ideas from Apple, and now they have copied the Mac w/Win98
The article in the link argues that Win98 is much worse than the mac,
which I agree with. I am wondering about its statement that Apple
knew all about GUI before 1979 with their Lisa. AFAIK, the lisa
is ~1982...
The author argues that the other one should get his facts and MS
propaganda in check. Is he practicing hypocrisY?
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
A few questions:
Recently acquired a Heathkit computer. Looks to be a pc compatable (din
keyboard plug, 1/2 height 5 /14, etc). Plate on back says model U 148. Any
clues?
This is not quite a classic, but almost there. I have a few Mac Portables (the
original model 5120). Inside one was a add-on card in the ROM slot (not the
RAM expansion). The card has two roms on it labeled: Esprit Rom 1.087"
dated 7/14/89. The card itself says Esprit Rom. Anyone know what this could
be. The Mac doesn't seem to behave any differently with or without the card.
Also, I have another portable that has no identification silkscreened on to the
bottom where it would normally be. Could this be some type of prototype,
since it looks like it never did have anything printed there (i.e. no one removed
it).
Totally off-topic. I also just got a Code-A-Phone 700 from Western Electric.
It's an old answering machine that uses some sort of funky reel to reel to store
messages. I think it was only meant to be used at CO's as it says "not for
resale" on the bottom. The power connector is a weird three prong male
connector with two cylindrical prongs and one flat prong (the opposite of todays
common connector). This unit is from the 70's. Again, any clues? Or any
pointers to where (other lists, web sites, books) I might look.
And finally, anyone know of a good way to remove the dark brown adhesive left
on my the metallic inventory tags used by some companies? I've try rubbing
alcohol, wd40, and goo gone. I'm afraid to try anything too strong as it might
hurt the case.
TIA
George
From: Daniel A. Seagraves [mailto:DSEAGRAV@toad.xkl.com]
Wait a minute! ECC uses 2 bits?
That leaves 9.
9, 18, 27, *36*.
Hmm!
Something 36 bits maybe?
-------
There were several types of ECC schemes. Some worked at the byte level,
some by the word. PDP memory boards commonly uses 22 bit words (16 data
+ 6 ECC), or accessible as 11 bit byte (8 data + 3 ECC). Memory boards
based around Intel 256K DRAM controllers also supported this type of ECC
(I think it was the 8206/8207 chipset?). The Intel ECC scheme was neat
because it would scan for errors during refresh cycles, "bit scrubbing".
Memory is vague, but I believe the 11 bit ECC byte was a Reed-Solomon
type ECC pattern?
Jack Peacock
On May 21, 14:46, Daniel A. Seagraves wrote:
> Subject: What does an M8579 go into?
> The book says 11-bit MOS RAM. What's 11 bits?
To a first approximation, 2 more than 9 :-)
It's probably ECC memory; ie one step better than parity in that it can
correct (not just detect) single-bit errors. ECC memory was used on 11/44
and 11/83, 11/93. How big is the M8579? QBus? Unibus? I can't find it
in my guide.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
IBM didn't beat the DOJ as much as President Regan dropped the suit in
the
early 80s (82 or 83 I think) as part of his ``Smaller Government'' or
``Business Friendly Government'' or something like that. Before that,
it
had been going on for 10 years.
That's what I mean, the DOJ can't sustain long lawsuits, the
administrations change and the zealots get the rug pulled out from under
them. Same may happen here, DOJ gets something started but when Steve
Forbes tales office in 2001, the DOJ suit is history the next day.
Jack Peacock
A coworker and I are both interested in acquiring some surplus color NeXT
pizza-boxes which a neighboring company has. However there is only one
of the DSP/speaker/ADB breakout boxes. They have also been gutted of
hard drives and memory. So do any of you know where I could find extras?
Especially the speakers and the NeXT OS - I'm assuming I could use normal
FP-mode 72-pin SIMMS (that looks like the size slot they used) and a SCSI-II
hard drive. Also, the monitor connection looks just like Sun's so I'm
wondering if they are interchangeable - same res., refresh rate, etc.? They
look like 21" monitors.
Please reply to "all" since my coworker is probably not on this list.
--
_______ KB7PWD @ KC7Y.AZ.US.NOAM ecloud(a)goodnet.com
(_ | |_) Shawn T. Rutledge on the web: http://www.goodnet.com/~ecloud
__) | | \__________________________________________________________________
* Linux * Khoros * sci fi * 808 State * Gravis Ultrasound * VRML * X window *
