A successor already? Really?

[Klumpen]

Apple wasn't a big boy until they tipped the world on its side and developed the first personal computer.

No, they didn't.
The Programma 101 by Olivetti was the first personal computer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programma_101

 

[ekianjo]

And the answer is this: when Jobs was at Apple, he made technology infused with art.

Mouhaha, so now it's not just Jobs-Jesus Christ, but it's also Leonardo deJobs This is getting better and better.

The original iPod was some awful kind of looking shit by the way: it was ugly, big, heavy, and certainly not "infused with art".

I'd rather challenge you that Apple was very lucky it was able to sell so many of these ugly looking devices in the first place. There would have been no iPhone if the iPod didn't sell in truckloads, and the first models were far from being convincing. 

 

[xiongxioi]

Execution over concept.

Apple, Nintendo and all the big guys have tried to push technology down consumers' gobs countless times, and sometime those become the standard, but most the time, they crash and burn in the most spectacular ways possible.

 

[holdoncaulfield]

Apple wasn't a big boy until they tipped the world on its side and developed the first personal computer.

No, they didn't.

The Programma 101 by Olivetti was the first personal computer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programma_101

Are you literally trying to pass that off as a computer?  The computer wasn't the computer until the GUI, mouse, and other innovations were introduced and made it what it is today.

If you want to play that game, I'll just tell you the abacus was the first personal computer.  What an obnoxious response.

And the answer is this: when Jobs was at Apple, he made technology infused with art.

Mouhaha, so now it's not just Jobs-Jesus Christ, but it's also Leonardo deJobs This is getting better and better.

The original iPod was some awful kind of looking shit by the way: it was ugly, big, heavy, and certainly not "infused with art".

I'd rather challenge you that Apple was very lucky it was able to sell so many of these ugly looking devices in the first place. There would have been no iPhone if the iPod didn't sell in truckloads, and the first models were far from being convincing. 

You wanted an answer for why NeXT was a failure and "where was the genius of Jobs then" and I gave it to you.  Now, instead of saying "Okay, but I disagree" you mock me and nitpick part of what I told you.  That's not very productive.  Taking that statement on its own just makes it seem like I'm slobbing on Jobs's knob but when you put it into its correct context it's the best explanation I have for your question.

The first generation iPod really was ugly.  They got it right with the trackwheel though.

 

[TrashyMG]

Are you literally trying to pass that off as a computer?  The computer wasn't the computer until the GUI, mouse, and other innovations were introduced and made it what it is today.

Well neither did the first apples, the mouse was on other computers well before Apple. 


Are you telling me the Apple I was much more than that?

I mean look at the Compucolor 8001, it was released the same year Apple started selling them out of their garage.. It was 10 times more capable than the Apple I

 

 

[holdoncaulfield]

No not at all.  The Apple I was not the first personal computer.  The Macintosh was.

 

[TrashyMG]

No not at all.  The Apple I was not the first personal computer.  The Macintosh was.

I think the IBM Personal Computer(1980) may have something to say about that. The mac was released in 1984.. Although the term Personal Computer was used well into the 70's when you know people started buying computers for home use.. IE Personal Computer.

 

[holdoncaulfield]

And Atari and Amiga both made "much more capable" hardware than what the Mac was at the time.  Other computers used the mouse before the Mac did.  Other computers used the GUI.  Atari and Amiga aren't around anymore, but Apple still is. 

 

[TrashyMG]

^ so you are arguing against your point now..

 

[holdoncaulfield]

The IBM PC ran MS-DOS.  No, just no.  Would you rather be having this argument using MS-DOS and command line prompts right now or would you rather be able to look at the screen and just type and press post?  That's the argument you're trying to have right now.  The personal computer wasn't the personal computer until it combined the GUI, a mouse, and all the trappings of a modern OS has like icons, window clipping, etc.  It just wasn't.  And to argue that point is just insane!

^ so you are arguing against your point now..

No.  I'm not.  None of these other machines married "personal" and "computing" like the Macintosh did.  We don't understand each other, so I'm just going to have to bow out of this argument.

 

[TrashyMG]

You are totally flipping wrong.

I owned personal computer back in the early 80's my first one I owned was a Timex Sinclair ZX81 it was A FUCKING PERSONAL COMPUTER. It ran BASIC and that was about it. The GUI or OS or mouse has nothing to do with it.

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

OMG! This holdoncaulfield is on drug!  No wonder Apple sells shit loads of iProducts...

 

[holdoncaulfield]

Similarly, you all seem set in your ways in regards to Apple yourselves.  I don't think it's any different. 

 

[MaxNormal]

My amstrad 464 and 6128 were personal computers.

The IBM 286 that replaced them was a personal computer even though it did not run windows for the first couple of years we had it.

A gui does not a computer make.

We played games, used word processors, did programming etc on them. It what they're used for not the user interface.

 

[TrashyMG]

Similarly, you all seem set in your ways in regards to Apple yourselves.  I don't think it's any different. 

I've used my fair share of Apple products through out my years of computing.. Hell throughout school there was always some flavor of Apple II floating around. I still have a Mac Classic.. But I still have a solid grasp of computing in it's early days.. 

The IBM PC ran MS-DOS.  No, just no.  Would you rather be having this argument using MS-DOS and command line prompts right now or would you rather be able to look at the screen and just type and press post?

As someone that's on IRC everyday I don't see why that would be a problem.. it would be more efficient than all this mouse flailing around.

 

[lingenfr]

It is shocking how much time people have wasted on the troll. This is a great example of why there needs to be a clean break of forums for the new device. Any talk of Craig, OPL, etc. should be banned and these type trolls booted. It is a wonder that anyone buys a Pandora with all this crap. For those who do their research, they get a shitty first impression.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[ekianjo]

And Atari and Amiga both made "much more capable" hardware than what the Mac was at the time.  Other computers used the mouse before the Mac did.  Other computers used the GUI.  Atari and Amiga aren't around anymore, but Apple still is.

oh shut up and go back to your rosy mac world.


Survival of a platform does not change hard facts.

 

[ekianjo]

The IBM PC ran MS-DOS.  No, just no.  Would you rather be having this argument using MS-DOS and command line prompts right now or would you rather be able to look at the screen and just type and press post?  That's the argument you're trying to have right now.  The personal computer wasn't the personal computer until it combined the GUI, a mouse, and all the trappings of a modern OS has like icons, window clipping, etc.  It just wasn't.  And to argue that point is just insane!

^ so you are arguing against your point now..

No.  I'm not.  None of these other machines married "personal" and "computing" like the Macintosh did.  We don't understand each other, so I'm just going to have to bow out of this argument.

you have no whatsoever understanding of what a computer is. Come back once you read wikipedia or something.

 

[Exophase]

holdoncaulfield, if you want to talk about the achievement and significance Apple made with GUIs in home computers that's fine (although how you got yourself onto that topic in this thread is anyone's guess). But waving around your hands shouting that there's no way anyone could call something a personal computer if it didn't have those features is pointless and really obnoxious. Plenty of people used computers in the 80s just as productively without a windows-like GUI driven by a mouse. And you shouldn't go around demanding people follow a completely arbitrary and highly non-standard definition of your own creation. Pretty much any relevant literature on the matter doesn't agree with you.

And it's pretty weird that a huge Apple fanboy like yourself would credit the Mac as the first home computer with a mouse driven GUI and not the Lisa. Furthermore, mice were available for PC before the Lisa and software was available that utilized it. There was at least one mouse driven graphical environment released on PC before Macintosh, as well. Your argument that running things on MS-DOS means submitting all actions through the command line is pretty silly as well, but even the argument that you'd be using the keyboard for everything isn't fitting.

 

[God Ginrai]

"dynamic" keyboard

This?
https://www.youtube.com/embed/nNnGpIEa3AU?feature=oembed

That's not dynamic. The way Tactus works is to set a configuration when the screen is built. Then you can get it to pop out when you want it to. It can not, however, dynamically change where those physical buttons are after the product is in the consumers' hands.

-God Ginrai