Re: This guy mattered more than Jobs the Toymaker

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by otter, Oct 17, 2011.

  1. otter

    otter Guest

    On Oct 15, 7:57 pm, Rich <> wrote:
    > The underpinning of our computer world rides on this fellow's and his
    > colleague's efforts, not Apple adult toys.
    >
    > http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/tech/innovation/dennis-ritchie-obit-bell-
    > labs/index.html


    As much as I respect Dennis Ritchie and invention of the C programming
    language, it was really just one thing, and not without warts.

    Steve Jobs and Woz brought us the first useful personal computer, the
    Apple II. And then they stole some ideas and gave us the Mac, which
    led to Windows, and the windowing guis in the unix/linux world. Then
    add on the "toys" at Apple, and a few other things to get a true idea
    of the scope of Steve Jobs' accomplishments.

    No reason to put down either man, or even compare them.
     
    otter, Oct 17, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Re: This guy mattered more than Jobs

    On 10/16/2011 10:11 PM, otter wrote:

    > As much as I respect Dennis Ritchie and invention of the C programming
    > language, it was really just one thing, and not without warts.


    He is also justifiably called a co-creator of Unix, and those two
    technologies set the stage for the vast majority of computing today.

    Under Mr. Jobs leadership, on the other hand, Apple produced and
    brought to market _four_ product that created permanent cultural
    change. None of those products were "wart free" either.

    To worker bees like myself, trying to judge which giant was shook
    the earth more is an exercise in futility.

    --
    Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
    You don't have to sort of enhance reality. There is nothing
    stranger than truth. -- Annie Leibovitz
     
    Mike Benveniste, Oct 17, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. otter

    GMAN Guest

    In article <>, otter <> wrote:
    >On Oct 15, 7:57=A0pm, Rich <> wrote:
    >> The underpinning of our computer world rides on this fellow's and his
    >> colleague's efforts, not Apple adult toys.
    >>
    >> http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/tech/innovation/dennis-ritchie-obit-bell-
    >> labs/index.html

    >
    >As much as I respect Dennis Ritchie and invention of the C programming
    >language, it was really just one thing, and not without warts.
    >
    >Steve Jobs and Woz brought us the first useful personal computer, the
    >Apple II. And then they stole some ideas and gave us the Mac, which
    >led to Windows, and the windowing guis in the unix/linux world. Then
    >add on the "toys" at Apple, and a few other things to get a true idea
    >of the scope of Steve Jobs' accomplishments.
    >
    >No reason to put down either man, or even compare them.

    You are seriously disrepecting what Atari and Commodre brought to the table.
    When the mac came out , it was black and white, and a year later the Atari ST
    and commodore amiga blew out of the water what apple and the current PC world
    at the time had to offer. Add a few apple roms to a discovery cart on your ST
    and you were running mac apps fater that a real mac at the time
     
    GMAN, Oct 17, 2011
    #3
  4. otter

    GMAN Guest

    Re: This guy mattered more than Jobs

    In article <>, Mike Benveniste <> wrote:
    >On 10/16/2011 10:11 PM, otter wrote:
    >
    >> As much as I respect Dennis Ritchie and invention of the C programming
    >> language, it was really just one thing, and not without warts.

    >
    >He is also justifiably called a co-creator of Unix, and those two
    >technologies set the stage for the vast majority of computing today.
    >
    >Under Mr. Jobs leadership, on the other hand, Apple produced and
    >brought to market _four_ product that created permanent cultural
    >change. None of those products were "wart free" either.
    >


    What? the MP3 player? already out long before the iPod , Pad computing? I had
    a HP laptop/PAD PC years before the ipad came out etc... etc...


    The only cultural change i see is the millions of duchebag teens and adults
    who feel the constant need to update their stupid facebook pages with stuff
    like "eating lunch now" , "Taking shit now" etc.....


    >To worker bees like myself, trying to judge which giant was shook
    >the earth more is an exercise in futility.
    >
     
    GMAN, Oct 17, 2011
    #4
  5. Re: This guy mattered more than Jobs

    On 10/17/2011 1:42 PM, GMAN wrote:

    > What? the MP3 player? already out long before the iPod , Pad computing? I had
    > a HP laptop/PAD PC years before the ipad came out etc... etc...


    Building the technology is one thing, but history shows that "if
    you build it they will come" is a lousy business strategy. What Mr.
    Jobs excelled at was bringing technology to the market in a way
    which took it out of the realm of the technophiles/geeks/nerds/etc
    and into mainstream culture. That's a very different skill than
    Mr. Ritchie.

    There were several microcomputers marketed before the Apple ][,
    including some based on 8-bit Motorola chips. Today, they are
    historical footnotes.

    Computers with GUI's existed before the Macintosh, including Apple's
    own Lisa. You can assert the technical superiority of Atari and
    Commodore's offerings as much as you want, but they never made
    it into mainstream use. The same is true of various 8088 and 8086
    machines that were superior to the IBM PC. Footnotes all.

    Laser printers existed before the Apple LaserWriter. I don't count
    this one as one of the 4, but if you remember what it was like
    dealing with fonts with the early HP LaserJet's, you might well
    put it on the list. Without the LaserWriter, desktop publishing
    would have taken a far different path.

    As you point out, MP3 players existed before the iPod. The combination
    of the iPod, iTunes, and the iTunes store legitimized digitally
    downloaded music and brought it into the mainstream.

    Finally, smartphones existed before the iPhone, and today Android
    phones outsell iPhone's rather handily. But if you take a look at
    other smart phones before and after the iPhone, you can see how
    the iPhone was a game changer. If you need a reminder of that, compare
    the amount of press given the iPhone 4s's release as compared to any
    other mobile related technology. There's an app for that.

    I think the jury is still out on the iPad. After the iPhone, it
    was clear we'd see a spectrum of device sizes, even though UMPC's
    had failed miserably. On the plus side, none of the other tablets
    so far have made a dent in iPad sales or market share. On the
    minus side, the iPad is currently too expensive and is suboptimal
    as a book reader.

    --
    Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
    Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
    everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain
     
    Mike Benveniste, Oct 17, 2011
    #5
  6. otter

    Charles Guest

    Charles, Oct 17, 2011
    #6
  7. otter

    Whisky-dave Guest

    Re: This guy mattered more than Jobs

    On Oct 17, 6:42 pm, (GMAN) wrote:
    > In article <>, Mike Benveniste <> wrote:
    > >On 10/16/2011 10:11 PM, otter wrote:

    >
    > >> As much as I respect Dennis Ritchie and invention of the C programming
    > >> language, it was really just one thing, and not without warts.

    >
    > >He is also justifiably called a co-creator of Unix, and those two
    > >technologies set the stage for the vast majority of computing today.

    >
    > >Under Mr. Jobs leadership, on the other hand, Apple produced and
    > >brought to market _four_ product that created permanent cultural
    > >change.  None of those products were "wart free" either.

    >
    > What? the MP3 player? already out long before the iPod ,


    So why weren;t people buying them then ?.

    > Pad computing?  I had
    > a HP laptop/PAD PC years before the ipad came out etc... etc...


    Yes and clive sinclair had a portable TV in the 1970s, so what.

    >
    > The only cultural change i see is the millions of duchebag teens and adults
    > who feel the constant need to update their stupid facebook pages with stuff
    > like "eating lunch now" , "Taking shit now"    etc.....


    Yep and most of those seem to use PC's, that's not a fault of the
    person that invented the first computer.

    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >To worker bees like myself, trying to judge which giant was shook
    > >the earth more is an exercise in futility.
     
    Whisky-dave, Oct 18, 2011
    #7
  8. otter

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Oct 17, 9:12 pm, "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    > otter wrote:
    > > On Oct 15, 7:57 pm, Rich <> wrote:
    > >> The underpinning of our computer world rides on this fellow's and his
    > >> colleague's efforts, not Apple adult toys.

    >
    > >>http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/tech/innovation/dennis-ritchie-obit-bell-
    > >> labs/index.html

    >
    > > As much as I respect Dennis Ritchie and invention of the C programming
    > > language, it was really just one thing, and not without warts.

    >
    > > Steve Jobs and Woz brought us the first useful personal computer, the
    > > Apple II.  And then they stole some ideas and gave us the Mac, which

    >
    > I don't think the Woz had much (if anything) to do with the Mac, though
    > apparently the Apple II was almost entirely his creation.
    >
    > The Mac, as I recall, was originally intended to be just an economy version
    > of the $10,000 Lisa -- which was a flop.
    >
    > > led to Windows, and the windowing guis in the unix/linux world.  Then

    >
    > I think the first version of Windows appeared at about the same time as the
    > Mac,


    About a year after the first mac.

    though that Windows was unworkable for practical purposes and pretty
    > much remained so for a few years, until 3.0.


    Yep.

    >
    > But at least Windows had color from the beginning, unlike the early Macs
    > with their funky little blue monochrome screens.

    #
    I was usiong colour on my BBC micro in 1982. 4 years before windows.
    Those macs had monochrone screens not blue.
    I could print in colour fromm a Macplus.
    The first PCs we had were green and black or orange and black displays
    no real colour.



    >
    >
    > > add on the "toys" at Apple, and a few other things to get a true idea
    > > of the scope of Steve Jobs' accomplishments.

    >
    > > No reason to put down either man, or even compare them.
     
    Whisky-dave, Oct 18, 2011
    #8
  9. otter

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Oct 18, 2:22 am, "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    > Savageduck wrote:
    > > On 2011-10-17 13:12:45 -0700, "Neil Harrington" <> said:

    >
    > >> otter wrote:
    > >>> On Oct 15, 7:57 pm, Rich <> wrote:
    > >>>> The underpinning of our computer world rides on this fellow's and
    > >>>> his colleague's efforts, not Apple adult toys.

    >
    > >>>>http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/tech/innovation/dennis-ritchie-obit-bell-
    > >>>> labs/index.html

    >
    > >>> As much as I respect Dennis Ritchie and invention of the C
    > >>> programming language, it was really just one thing, and not without
    > >>> warts. Steve Jobs and Woz brought us the first useful personal computer,
    > >>> the Apple II.  And then they stole some ideas and gave us the Mac,
    > >>> which

    >
    > >> I don't think the Woz had much (if anything) to do with the Mac,
    > >> though apparently the Apple II was almost entirely his creation.

    >
    > > Correct. However Woz returned to Apple's development team in 1983
    > > after recovering from his aircrash injuries and completing his degree
    > > at UC Berkeley, and had a hand in a fair part of "de-Lisa-ing" the
    > > Lisa.

    >
    > Ah. That I didn't know.
    >
    >
    >
    > >> The Mac, as I recall, was originally intended to be just an economy
    > >> version of the $10,000 Lisa -- which was a flop.

    >
    > > Correct again. It became obvious the Lisa was not going to succeed
    > > against the DOS machines and Jobs had divorced himself from refining
    > > it further, but still needed to make an impact within the corporate
    > > hierarchy. So he had the Lisa concept simplified and invented "Steve
    > > Jobs" the promotional guru (his one true invention)

    >
    > Heh. I always thought Jobs was overrated (or over-self-promoted). His main
    > contributions to the Apple II, as I recall, were fanlessness (because he
    > thought the sound of a fan would make people think it too machine-like,


    yes he wanted people to use the computer not just programmers.
    I remmeber being able to drag a window to where I wanted it on a Mac
    rather than having to program the co-ordinates of where I wanted a
    window to be on a Xerox system.


    > which might make them afraid of it) and the funky 52-key keyboard with no
    > provision for caps.
    >
    > Both these ideas reflected Jobs's concern that above all, the computer must
    > be non-threatening to ordinary people.


    Yep, a goodmove and quite original at the time.

    > And both only served to limit the
    > computer in some way.


    everything has limits.

    > Most other Apple II owners I knew promptly bought a
    > Kensington System Saver fan to put on it, since they didn't trust convection
    > cooling to do the job.


    I think I only saw two of these where I worked, I don;t remmebr any
    PCs of that era othe rthan ther PET
    which was commador

    > The limited keyboard was more of a problem,
    > obviously.


    I don;t remmber that being much of a problem as most programming
    languages
    only used uppercase, and these computers wee far to expensive for
    secarataries
    to type up memos on. I remmebr asembly language beingn written using
    them.

    >There was some sort of hardware modification that would enable
    > capitalizing, obviously a necessity when word processing software appeared
    > for it.


    yes but the cost of these machines made it beetr to buy secaratries
    typewriters,
    or rather we had tehm on hire (typewriters)

    > But these were just dumb mistakes on Jobs's part.


    or a Necessity to keep costs and complexitiy down.

    >My own Apple was
    > the IIe which had a much more complete keyboard.


    Mine was a BBC model A in 1982, it could still manage 8 colours
    something none of our PC type computers could do.

    >
    > I've read that when Woz and the other guy (whose name I've long forgotten)
    > were rushing to get the Apple II prototype ready for a demonstration,
    > Wozniak asked Jobs to design the (then essential) tape recorder port. Jobs
    > simply replied, "That's analog. I don't do analog,."


    yes that sytem was pretty bad, my BBC used a similar system but was
    much beetr as it loaded in blocks
    so all you had to do was rewind the tape a little.

    >
    > > leading to the
    > > "1984" ad.
    > > Remember the target of that ad was IBM, not MS.

    >
    > >>> led to Windows, and the windowing guis in the unix/linux world. Then

    >
    > >> I think the first version of Windows appeared at about the same time
    > >> as the Mac, though that Windows was unworkable for practical
    > >> purposes and pretty much remained so for a few years, until 3.0.

    >
    > > Both Jobs/Wozniak and the weasel Gates lifted the GUI concept from
    > > Xerox PARC.

    >
    > And the mouse too, isn't that right? Or was that from somewhere else?


    Well it's on wiki...
    Independently, Douglas Engelbart at the Stanford Research Institute
    invented the first mouse prototype in 1963,[4] with the assistance of
    his colleague Bill English.

    Just a few weeks before Engelbart released his demo in 1968, a mouse
    had already been developed and published by the German company
    Telefunken. Unlike Engelbart's mouse, the Telefunken model had a ball,
    as it can be seen in most later models until today.

    The second marketed integrated mouse shipped as a part of a computer
    and intended for personal computer navigation came with the Xerox 8010
    Star Information System in 1981. However, the mouse remained
    relatively obscure until the appearance of the Apple Macintosh, which
    included an updated version of the original Lisa Mouse.



    > >> But at least Windows had color from the beginning, unlike the early
    > >> Macs with their funky little blue monochrome screens.

    >
    > >>> add on the "toys" at Apple, and a few other things to get a true
    > >>> idea of the scope of Steve Jobs' accomplishments.

    >
    > >>> No reason to put down either man, or even compare them.

    >
    > > Agreed.

    >
    > > Also, many folks forget that Edison's practice after his initial
    > > successes, was to throw concepts at his Menlo Park team of researchers
    > > for them to come up with the products and "inventions" for which he
    > > held patents. That practice certainly makes the comparison between
    > > Edison and Jobs valid.

    >
    > Interesting.
     
    Whisky-dave, Oct 18, 2011
    #9
  10. otter

    Bruce Guest

    Bruce, Oct 18, 2011
    #10
  11. otter

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Oct 18, 8:11 pm, "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    > Whisky-dave wrote:
    > > On Oct 17, 9:12 pm, "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    > >> otter wrote:
    > >>> On Oct 15, 7:57 pm, Rich <> wrote:
    > >>>> The underpinning of our computer world rides on this fellow's and
    > >>>> his colleague's efforts, not Apple adult toys.

    >
    > >>>>http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/tech/innovation/dennis-ritchie-obit-bell-
    > >>>> labs/index.html

    >
    > >>> As much as I respect Dennis Ritchie and invention of the C
    > >>> programming language, it was really just one thing, and not without
    > >>> warts.

    >
    > >>> Steve Jobs and Woz brought us the first useful personal computer,
    > >>> the Apple II. And then they stole some ideas and gave us the Mac,
    > >>> which

    >
    > >> I don't think the Woz had much (if anything) to do with the Mac,
    > >> though apparently the Apple II was almost entirely his creation.

    >
    > >> The Mac, as I recall, was originally intended to be just an economy
    > >> version of the $10,000 Lisa -- which was a flop.

    >
    > >>> led to Windows, and the windowing guis in the unix/linux world. Then

    >
    > >> I think the first version of Windows appeared at about the same time
    > >> as the Mac,

    >
    > > About a year after the first mac.

    >
    > >  though that Windows was unworkable for practical purposes and pretty
    > >> much remained so for a few years, until 3.0.

    >
    > > Yep.

    >
    > >> But at least Windows had color from the beginning, unlike the early
    > >> Macs with their funky little blue monochrome screens.

    > > #
    > > I was usiong colour on my BBC micro in 1982.  4 years before windows.

    >
    > I don't know what a BBC micro is.


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

    >
    > > Those macs had monochrone screens not blue.

    >
    > Monochrome and blue. Black writing on a pale blue screen. That's what it was
    > on every early Mac I ever saw.


    Then you're colour blind ;-)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_128K
    The built-in display was a one-bit black-and-white, 9 in (23 cm) CRT
    with a resolution of 512×342 pixels, establishing the desktop
    publishing standard of 72 PPI



    >
    > > I could print in colour fromm a Macplus.
    > > The first PCs we had were green and black or orange and black displays
    > > no real colour.

    >
    > IBM quickly brought out the CGA card for the PC to compete with Apple's
    > color. The CGA card provided "eight colors," but normally only four at any
    > one time, same as the Apple II. And those eight colors included two blacks
    > and two whites, again the same as Apples. For example, on the Apple II you
    > had a choice of red, blue, black and white -- or the other palette: green,
    > purple, black and white. And for both makes, only at horrible resolution --  
    > 320 x 200 for the PC, and less than that for the Apple.


    I really don;t remmeber PCs being able to print graphics at that time,
    the first laser printer
    we hadt was an AppleLaserwriter , anyone that wanted anything other
    than text at
    standard res. came to me., I used to do all the notices as PCsd could
    print much beyond 18pt
    I could get 144pt quite easily then emlarge that on teh print dialogue
    if need be.
    I could print 1 character per A4 sheet.


    >
    > A PC with the new EGA card was the most amazing thing I'd ever seen. Sixteen
    > colors on the screen all at the same time, and in 640 x 350 resolution. Wow!
    > That was in 1985.


    With my BBC I had what was called 16 colours abefore the end of 1982
    after upgrading from 16K to 32k
    you had an extra 8 flashing colours (8 stanbdard 16k) which meant for
    games you could make things appear and disapear
    much faster by changing their logical colour rather than redrawing the
    image.
    I could also play the 'close encounter of the 3rd kind' beeps through
    ther internal speaker, all PCs could do at the time was beep.
    It had 4 programmable sound channels, outp[uts for RS423 adn a
    modulator so you could connect it to a TV.
     
    Whisky-dave, Oct 20, 2011
    #11
  12. On 10/20/2011 1:39 PM, Neil Harrington wrote:

    >> I really don;t remmeber PCs being able to print graphics at that time,

    >
    > I don't remember them having that ability either.


    The ability to print graphics was sort of introduced in MS- and PC-DOS
    2.0. You had to load a terminate-and-stay-resident utility named
    GRAPHICS.COM, and then you could print in various modes at least with
    the "IBM Graphic Printer" (a rebadged Epson MX-80).

    Until Windows, however, each program had to provide its own printer
    drivers, so whether a particular application could print graphics
    on any given printer was strictly hit or miss.

    --
    Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
    Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
    everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain
     
    Mike Benveniste, Oct 20, 2011
    #12
  13. On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:22:33 -0400, Mike Benveniste
    <> wrote in rec.photo.digital:

    >
    >Until Windows, however, each program had to provide its own printer
    >drivers, so whether a particular application could print graphics
    >on any given printer was strictly hit or miss.


    Autocad cultivated that yet through several versions of their program
    - and of Windows.

    Time will show if Apple's customers will tolerate the forced alignment
    to the one-make-no-choice policy with the leader character missing.

    Cheers,
    U.
     
    Ulrich G. Kliegis, Oct 21, 2011
    #13
  14. otter

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Oct 20, 8:32 pm, Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    > On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:00:18 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > >On Oct 18, 8:11 pm, "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    > >> Whisky-dave wrote:
    > >> > On Oct 17, 9:12 pm, "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    > >> >> otter wrote:
    > >> >>> On Oct 15, 7:57 pm, Rich <> wrote:
    > >> >>>> The underpinning of our computer world rides on this fellow's and
    > >> >>>> his colleague's efforts, not Apple adult toys.

    >
    > >> >>>>http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/tech/innovation/dennis-ritchie-obit-bell-
    > >> >>>> labs/index.html

    >
    >    --- snip ---
    >
    > >I really don;t remmeber PCs being able to print graphics at that time,
    > >the first laser printer

    >
    > I've seen an early Apple Imagewriter used for outputting CAD from an
    > Apple computer.


    We did a similar thing but used an HP7550 pen plotter that was
    primmally designed for VLSI circuit design.
    I was using macdraw and macdraft, I had to make a 80ft lead to connct
    them as they were in differnt rooms.
    I also used the mac as a terminal to 3 metheus computers (£80k each)
    that did the designs for VLSI.(very large scale intergration).
    they had massive 80-Mb hard discs specially formated using voice coil
    technology something to do with the platters getting hot so
    the drive need specail compensations software.


    > >we hadt was an AppleLaserwriter , anyone that wanted anything other
    > >than text at
    > >standard res. came to me., I used to do all the notices as PCsd could
    > >print much beyond 18pt
    > >I could get 144pt quite easily then emlarge that on teh print dialogue
    > >if need be.
    > >I could print 1 character per A4 sheet.

    >
    > >> A PC with the new EGA card was the most amazing thing I'd ever seen. Sixteen
    > >> colors on the screen all at the same time, and in 640 x 350 resolution.. Wow!
    > >> That was in 1985.

    >
    > Well before then was the 1976 Cromemco 'Dazzler' color system which
    > was used to generate many of the US weather reports on TV.
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromemco_Dazzler
    >
    > >With my BBC I had what was called 16 colours abefore the end of 1982
    > >after upgrading from 16K to 32k
    > >you had an extra 8 flashing colours (8 stanbdard 16k) which meant for
    > >games you could make things appear and disapear
    > >much faster by changing their logical colour rather than redrawing the
    > >image.
    > >I could also play the 'close encounter of the 3rd kind' beeps through
    > >ther internal speaker, all PCs could do at the time was beep.
    > >It had 4 programmable sound channels, outp[uts for RS423 adn a
    > >modulator so you could connect it to a TV.

    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Eric Stevens
     
    Whisky-dave, Oct 21, 2011
    #14
  15. otter

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mike Benveniste
    <> wrote:

    > >> I really don;t remmeber PCs being able to print graphics at that time,

    > >
    > > I don't remember them having that ability either.

    >
    > The ability to print graphics was sort of introduced in MS- and PC-DOS
    > 2.0. You had to load a terminate-and-stay-resident utility named
    > GRAPHICS.COM, and then you could print in various modes at least with
    > the "IBM Graphic Printer" (a rebadged Epson MX-80).
    >
    > Until Windows, however, each program had to provide its own printer
    > drivers, so whether a particular application could print graphics
    > on any given printer was strictly hit or miss.


    on a mac, the printer was basically another window. anything you could
    draw on screen you could 'draw' to the printer. adding print support to
    an app was trivial.
     
    nospam, Oct 21, 2011
    #15
  16. otter

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Neil
    Harrington <> wrote:

    > >>> Those macs had monochrone screens not blue.
    > >>
    > >> Monochrome and blue. Black writing on a pale blue screen. That's
    > >> what it was on every early Mac I ever saw.

    > >
    > > Then you're colour blind ;-)
    > >
    > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_128K
    > > The built-in display was a one-bit black-and-white, 9 in (23 cm) CRT

    >
    > Yes, one-bit black and white, but the "white" was pale blue.


    it was a standard monochrome b/w display. there was no blue. do you see
    blue on a b/w tv set (if you can find one)?

    > Look at that 128K Mac photo again. That screen doesn't look pale blue to
    > you? I'll agree the higher intensity parts look closer to white.


    look at an *actual* mac 128k, not a photo.
     
    nospam, Oct 21, 2011
    #16
  17. On 10/21/2011 2:14 PM, nospam wrote:

    > on a mac, the printer was basically another window. anything you could
    > draw on screen you could 'draw' to the printer. adding print support to
    > an app was trivial.


    It is true that to write to the printer, you opened it as a window
    and made the same API calls that you would to display on the screen.
    Unfortunately, the Imagewriter driver made some "interesting"
    optimizations, such as writing in a square aspect ratio in landscape
    mode but a non-square aspect ratio in portrait mode. If one needed
    to change that behavior, it made for "interesting" times.

    But there was nothing trivial about writing an early Mac application.
    The API was documented in three loose leaf notebooks, and contained
    stuff that worked, stuff that didn't work, and some components, such as
    CoreEdit, that either were vaporware or that Apple decided to keep for
    itself.

    The Mac's original native language was Pascal, with the expected weird
    I/O extensions. But there wasn't a Pascal compiler which ran on the
    Mac at release. Instead, you had to compile and link your programs on
    a Lisa, write the result on to a floppy and then run it on one of
    your Macs. I say one of your Mac's, because you needed a second Mac
    to run an assembly level debugger.

    --
    Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
    You don't have to sort of enhance reality. There is nothing
    stranger than truth. -- Annie Leibovitz
     
    Mike Benveniste, Oct 22, 2011
    #17
  18. otter

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mike Benveniste
    <> wrote:

    > > on a mac, the printer was basically another window. anything you could
    > > draw on screen you could 'draw' to the printer. adding print support to
    > > an app was trivial.

    >
    > It is true that to write to the printer, you opened it as a window
    > and made the same API calls that you would to display on the screen.
    > Unfortunately, the Imagewriter driver made some "interesting"
    > optimizations, such as writing in a square aspect ratio in landscape
    > mode but a non-square aspect ratio in portrait mode. If one needed
    > to change that behavior, it made for "interesting" times.


    i don't recall that being an issue. there was a small issue with
    printing to the laserwriter because it converted everything to
    postscript and it wasn't always a perfect conversion.

    > But there was nothing trivial about writing an early Mac application.
    > The API was documented in three loose leaf notebooks, and contained
    > stuff that worked, stuff that didn't work, and some components, such as
    > CoreEdit, that either were vaporware or that Apple decided to keep for
    > itself.


    it was significantly easier than writing for other platforms at the
    time. the looseleaf documentation was *very* early. the phonebook
    version of inside macintosh came out shortly after the mac did as
    everything was finalized and the hardcover version not long after that.

    inside macintosh was one of the best developer documentation i've ever
    seen. apple's current developer documentation is nowhere near as good,
    nor is any other platform i've seen.

    > The Mac's original native language was Pascal, with the expected weird
    > I/O extensions. But there wasn't a Pascal compiler which ran on the
    > Mac at release. Instead, you had to compile and link your programs on
    > a Lisa, write the result on to a floppy and then run it on one of
    > your Macs. I say one of your Mac's, because you needed a second Mac
    > to run an assembly level debugger.


    that changed very quickly. microsoft released basic for the mac shortly
    after the mac came out and after forcing apple to kill a substantially
    better basic. not long after that, a number of companies came out with
    mac native pascal, c, assembly, forth and more.

    development could be done *entirely* on a mac with no lisa required
    using development environments that blew everything else away.
    macintosh pascal which later became lightspeed pascal was amazing.
    lightspeed c was also very good too.
     
    nospam, Oct 22, 2011
    #18
  19. On 10/22/2011 12:34 AM, nospam wrote:

    > it was significantly easier than writing for other platforms at the
    > time. the looseleaf documentation was *very* early. the phonebook
    > version of inside macintosh came out shortly after the mac did as
    > everything was finalized and the hardcover version not long after that.


    For values of of "not long" which approach two years, I suppose that's
    true. The 1st printing of the hardcover edition was in November of
    1985, and with shipping delays most copies didn't hit the streets
    until early 1986. (Yes, I still have my copy.)

    With the exception of Microsoft Basic, which could only use a fraction
    of the Mac's abilities, the same "not long" caveat applies to the other
    development environments.

    This is certainly the wrong forum to expound at length about the
    reality of early Mac development. I opined "upstream" that the
    Macintosh was a culturally changing product, and I hold to that. But
    as with many cultural icons, "golden age syndrome" tends to downplay
    the less exciting and less admirable parts of history.

    --
    Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
    You don't have to sort of enhance reality. There is nothing
    stranger than truth. -- Annie Leibovitz
     
    Mike Benveniste, Oct 22, 2011
    #19
  20. otter

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mike Benveniste
    <> wrote:

    > > it was significantly easier than writing for other platforms at the
    > > time. the looseleaf documentation was *very* early. the phonebook
    > > version of inside macintosh came out shortly after the mac did as
    > > everything was finalized and the hardcover version not long after that.

    >
    > For values of of "not long" which approach two years, I suppose that's
    > true. The 1st printing of the hardcover edition was in November of
    > 1985, and with shipping delays most copies didn't hit the streets
    > until early 1986. (Yes, I still have my copy.)


    i remember getting it in early 1985. the company i was at bought a
    bunch of macs in late 1984 and development started shortly thereafter.
    they had the looseleaf stuff, but there was a real inside macintosh
    (not the phone book).

    > With the exception of Microsoft Basic, which could only use a fraction
    > of the Mac's abilities, the same "not long" caveat applies to the other
    > development environments.


    like i said, microsoft forced apple to cancel a *far* better basic. ms
    basic came out in spring 1984 or so (maybe summer), and by fall 1984
    the first of the native mac dev tools started to appear. by early 1985
    the floodgates had opened.

    > This is certainly the wrong forum to expound at length about the
    > reality of early Mac development. I opined "upstream" that the
    > Macintosh was a culturally changing product, and I hold to that. But
    > as with many cultural icons, "golden age syndrome" tends to downplay
    > the less exciting and less admirable parts of history.


    yes it is the wrong group to discuss it.
     
    nospam, Oct 23, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Dr.Zonk

    No More Mr. Nice Guy

    Dr.Zonk, Feb 14, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    427
    Pookie
    Feb 14, 2005
  2. Guy Macon (Guy Macon)

    GUY MACON HAS NO COLLEGE DEGREE (Guy Macon, pseudo-engineer Guy Macon)

    Guy Macon (Guy Macon), Feb 4, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    460
    Guy Macon (Guy Macon)
    Feb 4, 2005
  3. Whisky-dave

    Re: This guy mattered more than Jobs the Toymaker

    Whisky-dave, Oct 17, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    562
    PeterN
    Dec 22, 2011
  4. RichA

    Re: This guy mattered more than Jobs the Toymaker

    RichA, Oct 17, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    247
    John Turco
    Dec 22, 2011
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    247
    Joe Makowiec
    Feb 6, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page