22 Apr
2004
22 Apr
'04
7:02 a.m.
Time Magazines calls him "the force behind the
Macintosh"... I wonder what Jef Raskin would make of
that comment.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/americas/04/16/jobs/
22 Apr
22 Apr
7:26 a.m.
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, evan wrote:
Time Magazines calls him "the force behind the
Macintosh"... I wonder what Jef Raskin would make of
that comment.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/americas/04/16/jobs/
Jobs met Wozniak when he was still in high school (introduced to each
other by Bill Fernandez). Wasn't it Jobs who got the job for Woz at
Atari?
I'll have to go back and read some notes. Anyway, niggling little
details.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
7:50 a.m.
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, evan wrote:
Wozniak was at HP - IIRC he tried to get HP interested in the home
computer market - they just laughed and told him to get back to work...
Ya readin' this, Carly???
Cheerz
John
Time Magazines calls him "the force behind
the
Jobs met Wozniak when he was still in high school (introduced to each
other by Bill Fernandez). Wasn't it Jobs who got the job for Woz at
Atari? 
8:15 a.m.
I remember the story about Jobs telling Woz about a programming contest
that they were going to split the prize money 50/50 on. Woz got his $1K,
said to be half, and later found that Jobs got lots more.
Folkloric, and, IIRC.
Woz+Jobs was possibly the most amazingly simple corporation
in history. Brains+Greed, neither viable on their own.
John A.
Ya readin' this, Carly???
Thank-you for that
remark.
2:14 p.m.
Wozniak was at HP - IIRC he tried to get HP
interested in the home
computer market - they just laughed and told him to get back to work...
I've seen this comment before, and it's rather unfair on HP.
At the time, HP were known for making some of _the best_ measuring
instruments. They were not really interested in the mass market. Their
aim was to sell the best, albeit at a high price.
They'd been making desktop computers that ran BASIC for
about 5 years when the Apple ][ came out. Having used the HP's of that
period and the Apple ][, I am convinced that the HP was the better
design, better built, although it probably cost 10 times as much.
I can therefore understand why HP were not interested in the Apple. It
would have been like showing them the $10 pocket calculator and expecting
them to be interested in making it, when at the time they were making
machines like the HP67 (a machine, BTW that I still use regularly).
This may, in retrospect, have been a silly decision on HP's part, but I
am not convinced. Personally I wish they still made top-quality stuff
(instead of cheaply-made printers and digital cameras) with prices to
match. Because that's what they were really good at!
-tony
5:56 p.m.
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 00:14:28 +0100 (BST)
ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell) wrote:
The Apple 1 is likely what HP turned down. The Apple 2 came later.
The Apple 1 was a plain single-board computer. It shipped with no keyboard, no power
transformer as a bare circuit board. It shipped this way because Apple deemed it too
expensive to ship a heavy power transformer, and expected their typical customer to be
able to source their own. It had the linear regulator and everything else for the power
supply on the main board.
The keyboard interface provided was a bare 'strobed parallel ASCII' keyboard
input. There was a 'scratchpad' area on the board to add an inverter or needed
logic if your keyboard had the wrong logic polarity.
The Apple 1 was NOT the 'hacker proof' design that Jobs boasted about with the
Macintosh (words which made me boycott the Mac entirely for over a decade after hearing
Jobs speak them at a press event). Apple had already become a 'different company'
by the Mac Launch. The Apple 1 was something totally different, and it was nothing that
Hewlett-Packard could have sold. It was actually the sort of 'cool stuff' that
many of us on this list would have liked. I would have bought one if I could have
afforded it at the time.
Wozniak was
at HP - IIRC he tried to get HP interested in the home
computer market - they just laughed and told him to get back to work...
I've seen this comment before, and it's rather unfair on HP.
At the time, HP were known for making some of _the best_ measuring
instruments. They were not really interested in the mass market. Their
aim was to sell the best, albeit at a high price.
They'd been making desktop computers that ran BASIC for
about 5 years when the Apple ][ came out. Having used the HP's of that
period and the Apple ][, I am convinced that the HP was the better
design, better built, although it probably cost 10 times as much.
7397
days inactive
7397
days old
6 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
allain＠panix.com -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
evan947＠yahoo.com -
geneb＠deltasoft.com -
jpl15＠panix.com -
sastevens＠earthlink.net -
vcf＠siconic.com