21 Jul
2016
21 Jul
'16
4:42 p.m.
Possibly the rarest Apple 1 ever is up for auction.
The seller is working through CharityBuzz, which will display the
computer at VCF West next month.
CB's auction site: http://apple1.charitybuzz.com/
MacRumors covered it:
http://www.macrumors.com/2016/07/21/charitybuzz-auctioning-unique-celebrati…
21 Jul
21 Jul
9:46 p.m.
On 7/21/2016 3:42 PM, Evan Koblentz wrote:
Possibly the rarest Apple 1 ever is up
for auction.
The seller is working through
CharityBuzz, which will display the
computer at VCF West next month.
CB's auction site:
http://apple1.charitybuzz.com/
MacRumors covered it:
http://www.macrumors.com/2016/07/21/charitybuzz-auctioning-unique-celebrati…
The article doesn't appear to say, but
does anyone know where this Apple came from?
- J.
10:26 p.m.
The article doesn't appear to say, but does anyone
know where this Apple
came from?
Go to http://apple1.charitybuzz.com/ and click "provenance".
10:54 p.m.
"Original owner believed to be an early Apple employee ". You have the
current owner who has a receipt from the previous owner who had said he got
it from "maybe" an Apple employee back in 1977.
-----Original Message-----
From: Evan Koblentz
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 10:26 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Possibly rarest Apple 1 ever for auction
The article doesn't appear to say, but does anyone
know where this Apple
came from?
Go to http://apple1.charitybuzz.com/ and click "provenance".
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
22 Jul
22 Jul
8:25 a.m.
The key to this board is the evidence it wasn't part of either of the two known
production runs. It was assembled at a different time.
corey cohen
u??o? ???o?
On Jul 21, 2016, at 10:54 PM, TeoZ <teoz at
neo.rr.com> wrote:
"Original owner believed to be an early Apple employee ". You have the current
owner who has a receipt from the previous owner who had said he got it from
"maybe" an Apple employee back in 1977.
-----Original Message----- From: Evan Koblentz
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 10:26 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Possibly rarest Apple 1 ever for auction
The article doesn't appear to say, but does
anyone know where this Apple
came from?
Go to http://apple1.charitybuzz.com/ and click "provenance".
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
10:24 a.m.
> "Original owner believed to be an early Apple
employee ". You have the
> current owner who has a receipt from the previous owner who had said he
> got it from "maybe" an Apple employee back in 1977.
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016, Corey Cohen wrote:
The key to this board is the evidence it wasn't
part of either of the
two known production runs. It was assembled at a different time.
So, somebody, perhaps an Apple employee, walked off with a board and
assembled it.
The first gray/black market unauthorized Apple.
Every company has a moment when they realize that they need to tighten up
inventory control.
12:57 p.m.
There were no blank boards. That's the key. The sockets were wave soldered by the
PCB manufacturer according to Woz. There were 2 runs of 100 boards each.
This is also an early layout board (Non NTI) but with different wave soldered sockets than
the two known production runs which both used TI sockets even though they were from a
different PCB house. This board is from the 1st PCB house that made the "byte
shop" boards but has the more expensive and reliable RN sockets. Which implies it
predates the Byte Shop boards because of all the evidence.
Cheers,
Corey
corey cohen
u??o? ???o?
On Jul 22, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
>
"Original owner believed to be an early Apple employee ". You have the current
owner who has a receipt from the previous owner who had said he got it from
"maybe" an Apple employee back in 1977.
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016, Corey Cohen wrote:
The key to this board is the evidence it wasn't part of either of the two known
production runs. It was assembled at a different time.
So, somebody, perhaps an Apple employee, walked off with a board and assembled it.
The first gray/black market unauthorized Apple.
Every company has a moment when they realize that they need to tighten up inventory
control.
3:01 p.m.
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016, Corey Cohen wrote:
There were no blank boards. That's the key. The
sockets were wave
soldered by the PCB manufacturer according to Woz. There were 2 runs of
100 boards each.
Then, there were blank boards before the shop making the boards populated
them. A bord could have been pulled aside at that time.
Obvious possibilities include:
1) It failed some form of quality control, even if just cosmetic or
repairable?
2) Sample pulled aside before population for more testing.
3) An Apple technician who was fed up with trying to troubleshoot with
crappy sockets requested/demanded/bribed the shop to populate xx of them
with half decent sockets. Surely Woz,himself, was fed up with the time
that he had wasted due to the bad sockets!
4) the VERY first board got pulled aside for testing, populated
with real sockets, wave-soldered, and then, when it passed testing, word
was given to put crap sockets on the rest.
This is also an early layout board (Non NTI) but with
different wave
soldered sockets than the two known production runs which both used TI
sockets even though they were from a different PCB house. This board is
from the 1st PCB house that made the "byte shop" boards but has the more
expensive and reliable RN sockets. Which implies it predates the Byte
Shop boards because of all the evidence.
None of THAT explicitly implies PREdates.
Consider, after completion, it was noticed that there was one more board.
Maybe they had run out of, or dumpstered, all of the crap sockets.
Or Apple employee or board shop employee simply wanted something better.
Although, in #3 above, if it were ME, I would have populated a testing
board with Augat.
With any of these scenarios, LATER ON, when no longer needed in testing,
or Apple lab work, the board could have been given away or sold, such as
at Computer Swap America. With, or without, official authorization.
There was no attempt to affix a serial number to all of the boards?
"At some point, every company realizes the need to tighten inventory."
7:54 p.m.
It was not someone at the PCB manufacturer. They would not have had access to the prom
software.
This was a pre-NTI board so Apple at the time was only a handful of people, the only
technician was Dan Kottke and he was asked about the board already.
BTW, The only known defective board is Woz's personal NTI board which was repaired by
cutting a short under the green coat between two address lines.
Cheers,
Corey
corey cohen
u??o? ???o?
On Jul 22, 2016, at 3:01 PM, Fred Cisin <cisin at
xenosoft.com> wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016, Corey Cohen wrote:
There were no blank boards. That's the key. The sockets were wave soldered by the
PCB manufacturer according to Woz. There were 2 runs of 100 boards each.
Then, there were blank boards before the shop making the boards populated them. A bord
could have been pulled aside at that time.
Obvious possibilities include:
1) It failed some form of quality control, even if just cosmetic or repairable?
2) Sample pulled aside before population for more testing.
3) An Apple technician who was fed up with trying to troubleshoot with crappy sockets
requested/demanded/bribed the shop to populate xx of them with half decent sockets.
Surely Woz,himself, was fed up with the time that he had wasted due to the bad sockets!
4) the VERY first board got pulled aside for testing, populated with real sockets,
wave-soldered, and then, when it passed testing, word was given to put crap sockets on the
rest.
This is also an early layout board (Non NTI) but
with different wave soldered sockets than the two known production runs which both used TI
sockets even though they were from a different PCB house. This board is from the 1st PCB
house that made the "byte shop" boards but has the more expensive and reliable
RN sockets. Which implies it predates the Byte Shop boards because of all the evidence.
None of THAT explicitly implies PREdates.
Consider, after completion, it was noticed that there was one more board. Maybe they had
run out of, or dumpstered, all of the crap sockets.
Or Apple employee or board shop employee simply wanted something better.
Although, in #3 above, if it were ME, I would have populated a testing board with Augat.
With any of these scenarios, LATER ON, when no longer needed in testing, or Apple lab
work, the board could have been given away or sold, such as at Computer Swap America.
With, or without, official authorization.
There was no attempt to affix a serial number to all of the boards?
"At some point, every company realizes the need to tighten inventory."
5:03 p.m.
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016, Corey Cohen wrote:
There were no blank boards. That's the key. The
sockets were wave
soldered by the PCB manufacturer according to Woz. There were 2 runs of
100 boards each.
This is also an early layout board (Non NTI) but with different wave
soldered sockets than the two known production runs which both used TI
sockets even though they were from a different PCB house. This board is
from the 1st PCB house that made the "byte shop" boards but has the more
expensive and reliable RN sockets. Which implies it predates the Byte
Shop boards because of all the evidence.
TBH, I'm not sure why people get hung up on wave soldering vs hand
soldering. My own hand soldering is practically indistinguishable from a
properly wave soldered board and it wouldn't be unreasonable for someone
working at Apple to be able to hand solder boards similarly, or even for a
prior owner of the board to have retrofitted those sockets.
When I stuff boards, I use an assembly jig and form/pre-cut component
leads before soldering. This is how I was (re)taught to solder when I
began working with high reliability gear (cutting leads after soldering
can cause microfractures in the joint) and I continue to use those
techniques. I also use supplemental flux because the flux in cored solder
is really only sufficient for bright/clean pads and leads. I consistently
get better results with the extra flux.
2994
days inactive
2995
days old
9 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
applecorey＠optonline.net -
cctalk＠snarc.net -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
js＠cimmeri.com -
teoz＠neo.rr.com -
tothwolf＠concentric.net