<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Mac History &#187; review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mac-history.net/tag/review/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mac-history.net</link>
	<description>The history of the Apple Macintosh - Facts, Tales and Stories about Apple and the Mac - collected and written by Christoph Dernbach</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:40:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Book Review &quot;iCon Steve Jobs: The Greatest Second Act in the History of Business&quot;</title>
		<link>http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-08-25/review-icon-steve-jobs-the-greatest-second-act-in-the-history-of-business</link>
		<comments>http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-08-25/review-icon-steve-jobs-the-greatest-second-act-in-the-history-of-business#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:24:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christoph Dernbach</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Computer History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iPhone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iCon Steve Jobs: The Greatest Second Act in the History of Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeffrey S. Young]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[William L. Simon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mac-history.net/?p=634</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Exceptionally detailed account of all of Job&#8217;s successes and failures iCon Steve Jobs: The Greatest Second Act in the History of Business, retraces the dizzying path of successes and failures of entrepreneur and life long ambassador of technology Steve Jobs. Authors Jeffrey S. Young and William L. Simon produce a detailed account of Jobs&#8217; life [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Exceptionally detailed account of all of Job&#8217;s successes and failures</strong></p>
<p><div id="attachment_635" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 188px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/cover_icon1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/cover_icon-178x280.jpg" alt="Cover iCon Steve Jobs" title="Cover iCon Steve Jobs" width="178" height="280" class="size-medium wp-image-635" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Cover iCon Steve Jobs</p></div>iCon Steve Jobs: The Greatest Second Act in the History of Business, retraces the dizzying path of successes and failures of entrepreneur and life long ambassador of technology Steve Jobs. Authors Jeffrey S. Young and William L. Simon produce a detailed account of Jobs&#8217; life and work which begins with Jobs&#8217; adoption and early childhood and ends with his (and Apple&#8217;s) success with the iPod and iTunes.</p>
<p>Young and Simon provide an in depth and seemingly unbiased thrashing and congratulatory depiction of what Steve Jobs has accomplished. There is a lot about Jobs covered in this book, and those with an interest in the man behind Apple, the I-pod, and Pixar will find this book fascinating.</p>
<p><strong>Among Steve Jobs accomplishments: </strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Created the Apple II, making Apple the first computer giant </li>
<li>Created the first windows platform with the Mac </li>
<li>Created the mouse (<a href="http://www.mac-history.net/the-history-of-the-apple-macintosh/rich-neighbour-with-open-doors-apple-and-xerox-parc">respectively made the mouse popular</a>)</li>
<li>Funded Pixar against all logic becoming the largest animator in history </li>
<li>Made more money selling a failed company than he did in the original Apple IPO </li>
<li>Current largest stockholder in Disney, Pixar, and ABC</li>
<li>Negotiated the first music store with the music industry in the wake of a long list of heavy failures by major companies to accomplish the same (and paving the way for countless since) </li>
<li>Beat cancer</li>
<li>Despite a long list of failures, is back on top </li>
<li>Created 7 blockbuster movies in a row</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among his failures: </strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Pissed off enough co workers/employees to nearly fill a stadium.</li>
<li>Blew a chance to develop the windows system for the PC &#8211; paving the way for Microsoft.</li>
<li>Wasted more money on failed projects than any computer company in history.</li>
</ul>
<p>I had written a summary after I read the book that provides a full overview of the entire account. For those already interested in the book, I suggest reading the book instead of finishing my review. For those seeking a summarization of the content of the book, the rest of my review is for you.</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8211;</p>
<p><div id="attachment_639" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 290px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/apple_founders_wozniak_jobs1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/apple_founders_wozniak_jobs-280x155.jpg" alt="Apple Founders Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs" title="Apple Founders Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs" width="280" height="155" class="size-medium wp-image-639" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Apple Founders Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs</p></div>Steve was essentially the muscle early on behind his startup, where the other Steve (Steve &#8220;Woz&#8221; Wozniak) was the schematic genius. Jobs really couldn&#8217;t build a schematic with the complexity that Woz could, but Woz could not convince, sell, market, raise money, or operate a business the way Jobs could. It was a perfect combination of skills. Early on they sold illegal boxes that permitted people to make free long distance calls. At that point, they realized there was money in developing their chips which up to that point had only been a hobby. They set out with no money to develop a computer, with Woz doing the designing and Jobs doing the business and sales. Jobs eventually sold 100 computers to a retail store, which when delivered would make them $25,000. They didn&#8217;t get paid until they delivered, so Jobs negotiated to get all the supplies on credit using the agreement he had with the store as collateral. This was the start of Apple, and quite smart money management considering Jobs was still a teenager with long hippie hair and wore only jeans and t-shirts.</p>
<p>Apple was selling a lot of basic kits, but nothing of any great magnitude. With Woz being the brains behind the design of the actual computers, Jobs then took it up a notch. He would go to computer fairs all the time and he began to recognize what people were becoming impressed with. Most of the buyers of computers were what he considered computer geeks who had tech knowledge, so they designed the Apple I to suit them. Jobs recognized that these guys liked to get into the circuitry and see what was going on, so he had Woz design all the wiring in very organized straight lines, as opposed to soldering wires haphazardly, which was common at the time. It was the right call, and they sold enough circuit boards to get the Apple name out there. Next they designed the Apple II, based on Jobs view of what it would take to get into homes. For the early 80&#8242;s, the Apple II was such a hit that the company went public and Jobs was worth $300 million by age 24.</p>
<p>At this point, Jobs could do no wrong. Things would change however. He was a visionary in one major way; he focused all his energy on what consumers wanted. This led to his products being known for their quality and design&#8230;something Apple is still known for to this day. The problem was that this often times took the focus away from budgeting, producing some fairly unrealistic costs. Apple eventually would put out products that were much better than anything out there but were not priced for the market they aimed at, thus becoming failures. This was evident in the next two huge leaps Apple made at Job&#8217;s direction. He was so shrewd that he made a deal with <a href="http://www.mac-history.net/the-history-of-the-apple-macintosh/rich-neighbour-with-open-doors-apple-and-xerox-parc">Xerox</a> to view what they were doing behind closed doors in exchange for some big discounts on services Apple was working on for Xerox (Xerox was also an investor/owner). What they discovered was a user interface that inspired Jobs to come up with what we now know today as windows and a mouse. This was revolutionary.</p>
<p><center><div id="attachment_907" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 450px"><a href="http://www.mac-history.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/apple_lisa.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/apple_lisa-440x329.jpg" alt="Apple Lisa" title="Apple Lisa" width="440" height="329" class="size-medium wp-image-907" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Apple Lisa</p></div></center></p>
<p>Apple went ahead with a windows style computer&#8230;two of them. The first, the Lisa, was the beginning of problems with Jobs. He was a visionary, but he also was at times a complete disaster when dealing with people. He was so convinced that what he was working on was the future of computers (which in hindsight is interesting) and thus refused to accept anyone else&#8217;s opinion about anything. This resulted in two revolutionary computers being developed, and two total flops. The Lisa had a sales price of $10,000 and never sold. The Macintosh, the computer that is still revered as the most revolutionary breakthrough in computers, although a big seller, never sold what it needed to live up to its reputation as a smashing success. Essentially, the computer was viewed by the public as the best thing since sliced bread, but the cost prevented it from outselling more than IBM PC&#8217;s.</p>
<p><center><a href='http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-07-12/1984-the-famous-super-bowl-spot'><img src="http://www.mac-history.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/ad_tv_420.jpg" alt="The famous Super Bowl Ad" title="The famous Super Bowl Ad" width="420" height="386" class="aligncenter" /></a></p>
<p><a href=http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-07-12/1984-the-famous-super-bowl-spot">“1984” &#8211; The famous Super Bowl Ad</a></center></p>
<p>Job&#8217;s had been spot on about what the computer meant to Apple and the computer industry, but as a result had totally blew the cost analysis of what it would take to become profitable. At this point, people in Apple disagreed so vehemently with him that the board was split about what to do to, and he was eventually voted out. This was the same board of course that was 100% against his view on using the Superbowl commercial Jobs liked to much to present the Mac, which is still the most famous SB commercial ever. Again, Jobs was right, but his total inability to give any focus to cost analysis or people skills got him ousted.</p>
<p>Jobs then went on to start Next. At this point, his net worth was about $90 million (because Apple stock had dropped). He cashed out and used it to fund Next and eventually to buy Pixar, a failing computer company trying to sell computers for artistic design. Both companies were trying to create new computers, something Jobs did at Apple. For years he poured money into both companies, with neither ever developing any notable profit. Early on at Next, IBM approached him about using their operating system to run on IBM computers. They had been negotiating and were coming to an agreement, but Jobs was so difficult to deal with that it caused significant delays. Eventually, the exec at IBM that was interested in Next&#8217;s system left the company, and IBM chose to look elsewhere. They went with Microsoft, and the rest of that story is history. This was an eye opener for Jobs, a lesson he would not easily forget.</p>
<p>Jobs eventually was finally willing to admit temporary defeat, and that neither company was producing a computer that was going to challenge on the market. Although Next sold hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue, this was nothing compared to what Apple and leading PC retailers were doing, so while considered a success to most, this was a failure for Jobs who was known as a revolutionary. Thus, Jobs stopped all computer sales in both companies and focused on software. This changed everything.</p>
<p>With Next, the company was in the brink of bankruptcy when Jobs decided he would make an effort to sell the software to Apple (the software what Mac OS X today is based on). When he went to Apple, he found them surprising receptive because the software was very good, and one of Job&#8217;s biggest strengths was presentation. Jobs identified that Apple was interested and took the negotiation up a notch. He said that if Apple was interested in the software, they would best be served by gaining all the technology and staff of the whole company, essentially they should buy Next. They did, and paid nearly $1 billion which put half a billion in profit right into Job&#8217;s pocket. This was remarkable considering the company didn&#8217;t have enough revenue to support itself. In terms of sales, this was among the greatest of all time. But it worked out for Apple as well, because that software was the future of the industry.</p>
<p>With Pixar, Jobs was putting up to a million a month into the company to keep it afloat. He was making so many cuts that the only thing left in the company was its division on animation with 3D graphics. Jobs eventually pressed Disney to do a movie for them, at Disney&#8217;s cost. This was the beginning of what became the most profitable venture in Job&#8217;s life. After creating Toy Story, they went on to develop seven blockbusters in a row, bringing the company public, and making Job&#8217;s far richer than Apple or Next ever did. He was finally a billionaire.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_642" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 214px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/ultimatetoyboxcover1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/ultimatetoyboxcover-204x280.jpg" alt="Pixar Blockbuster: Toy Story" title="Pixar Blockbuster: Toy Story" width="204" height="280" class="size-medium wp-image-642" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Pixar Blockbuster: Toy Story</p></div>In addition, the seven straight blockbusters gained Pixar so much revenue that they became the biggest studio (based on revenue) in Hollywood history, bigger than Paramount, bigger than Lucasfilm, bigger than them all. The bigger they got, the harder Job&#8217;s negotiated, and eventually they were more powerful than Disney in the animation department. Disney had no other choice left except to buy Pixar, making Jobs the current largest shareholder in all of Disney, Pixar, and ABC all at once. With that purchase, he became more powerful in the media industry than Ted Turner.</p>
<p>Back at Apple, they were facing serious issues ever since the failure of the Mac. Nothing had worked out, and they decided to try giving Jobs another shot. They never looked back. He cut so many Apple projects that he made the company profitable in six months. However, they were no longer a dominant in the market, taking a huge backseat to other major players. Job&#8217;s sold the Next software to Microsoft to get some profits back and Microsoft went on to use it to design Windows 95. Steve was so focused on quality though, that eventually Apple would regain its reputation. He focused on giving to schools, and got all the kids in the current generation using Macs&#8230;what would be a brilliant move for the future. Every school in California was given countless Macs and thus all the kids these days using are Macs&#8230;as are the teachers.</p>
<p>The hand held market was taking off in the early 2000&#8242;s and Job&#8217;s had to decide what direction to go. He made an unprecedented move by totally discontinuing all Apple&#8217;s interest in the hand help market. He said he just didn&#8217;t see a future in it and decided he wanted to go in the direction of music applications. At this point, there were many companies in music that were announcing failures. The invention of Napster had upset the music community so badly that it was near impossible to create anything profitable. Jobs had a different idea. He assessed what the music industry wanted and decided it was a good point to begin negotiations. The music industry feared losing its ability to make residuals because of theft and duplication. They were proposing some of the most ridiculous software which had chased out weaker negotiators, but not Jobs. The music industry wanted features such as monthly subscriptions but no downloads, or, downloads but only onto a single computer, or, downloads that would expire meaning music you bought disappeared after a while. Essentially, the concept of a music store with this type of guidelines would be a ridiculous venture. Steve took the initiative and went to all the top producers and many major labels and bands and presented his case for being able to offer the store with downloads that would have protection, meaning they could not be copied on to other computers or shared, but could be downloaded onto a single music player. In addition, if there was an attempt to transfer the music, it would automatically delete all music on that computer (a feature long gone). This was what Jobs had to doin order for the music industry to agree, and the only way he could offer this was to develop his own software with all these protections. Counter to what is believed to be manipulative marketing strategy to sell his I-pods, this was the reason I-tunes was designed in the limiting manner.</p>
<p>What would happen next changed the industry. Selling music for 99 cents each created billions for the industry, and the music industry eased up considerably as they saw internet sales as a viable way to sell their music and still make a lot of money on residuals. Essentially, Job&#8217;s had negotiated so hard with so many restrictions that initially the success of I-tunes meant that the music industry would lessen their desire to have so many restrictions, setting the table for many other music stores with FAR less restrictions.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_645" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 400px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/firstipod1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/firstipod1.jpg" alt="The first iPod (2001)" title="The first iPod (2001)" width="390" height="306" class="size-full wp-image-645" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">The first iPod (2001)</p></div>The iPod sold on its own merit. Jobs had a goal to make a player that was the easiest to use on the market. If you had to hit more than three buttons to reach any song, it would not be acceptable. He designed the pinwheel approach and the iPod sold on its own accord, and became the bedrock of digital music. Job&#8217;s was also brilliant in negotiating music legends to do their advertisements for free. He convinced them that the advertisements were just as much an endorsement for them as it was for Apple, so they agreed. .</p>
<p>At this point, he has been spot on for many projects in a row. Surprisingly, it was Pixar that made Job&#8217;s the most money, but his comeback at Apple making it one of the major players and viable competition for Microsoft&#8217;s dominance may end up being the ultimate story.</p>
<p>Text by <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/AG7R3MMF8QLDT/ref=cm_cr_rdp_pdp">Todd Arone</a> (Thanks for the kind permission)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471787841/mrgadge-21">iCon Steve Jobs: The Greatest Second Act in the History of Business (Paperback)</a><br />
by Jeffrey S. Young (Author), William L. Simon (Author)<br />
Paperback: 368 pages<br />
Publisher: Wiley; 1 edition (April 14, 2006)<br />
Language: English<br />
ISBN-10: 0471787841<br />
ISBN-13: 978-0471787846</p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471787841/mrgadge-21">Amazon-Link USA</a><br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471787841/mrgadge-21">Amazon-Link UK</a><br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471787841/mrgadge-21">Amazon-Link Germany</a></p>
<g:plusone href="http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-08-25/review-icon-steve-jobs-the-greatest-second-act-in-the-history-of-business"  size="standard"   annotation="none"  ></g:plusone>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-08-25/review-icon-steve-jobs-the-greatest-second-act-in-the-history-of-business/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Macintosh &#8211; The many facets of a slightly flawed gem</title>
		<link>http://www.mac-history.net/mac/2008-08-17/the-macintosh-the-many-facets-of-a-slightly-flawed-gem</link>
		<comments>http://www.mac-history.net/mac/2008-08-17/the-macintosh-the-many-facets-of-a-slightly-flawed-gem#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:22:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christoph Dernbach</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apple Macintosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Byte]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Macintosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[review]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mac-history.net/?p=87</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reprinted from Byte, issue 8/1984, pp. 238-251. The Apple Macintosh computer Few computers – indeed, few consumer items of any kind – have generated such a wide range of opinions as the Macintosh. Criticized as an expensive gimmick and hailed as the liberator of the masses, the Mac is a potentially great system. Whether it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reprinted from Byte, issue 8/1984, pp. 238-251.</p>
<p><strong>The Apple Macintosh computer</strong></p>
<p>Few computers – indeed, few consumer items of any kind – have generated such a wide range of opinions as the Macintosh. Criticized as an expensive gimmick and hailed as the liberator of the masses, the Mac is a potentially great system. Whether it lives up to that potential remains to be seen.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_89" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 256px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/apple_macintosh1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/apple_macintosh-246x300.jpg" alt="The Apple Macintosh" title="The Apple Macintosh" width="246" height="300" class="size-medium wp-image-89" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">The Apple Macintosh</p></div>Personally, I think the Macintosh is a wonderful machine. I use one daily at work, and then at night I play with the one I have at home. Or, at least, I try to play with it. You see, my wife – who for years resisted all my attempts to introduce her to computers – has fallen in love with the Mac (her words, not mine). She uses it to type up medical reports, notes on her clients, and personal letters. In fact, she’s suggested that we get a second Macintosh so that we won’t have to fight over the one we have.</p>
<p>The Macintosh is not without its problems. Resources are tight – it needs more memory and disk space – and software has been slow in coming to market. Many have criticized its price ($2495). In fact, there are indications that Apple considered a lower price ($1995) and then rejected it. It doesn’t seem to have hurt the Mac’s market – people are still buying them faster than Apple can make them – but there’s the potential for backlash if the machine doesn’t deliver on all its promises.</p>
<p>Whatever its problems and limitations, the Mac represents a breakthrough in adapting computers to work with people instead of vice versa. Time and again, I’ve seen individuals with little or no computer experience sit down in front of a Mac and accomplish useful tasks with it in a matter of minutes. Invariably, they use the same words to describe it: “amazing” and “fun.” The question is whether “powerful” can be added to that list.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_91" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macintosh_dot_matrix_printer1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macintosh_dot_matrix_printer-300x180.jpg" alt="The Macintosh dot-matrix printer" title="The Macintosh dot-matrix printer" width="300" height="180" class="size-medium wp-image-91" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">The Macintosh dot-matrix printer</p></div>In an industry rapidly filling up with IBM PC clones, the Macintosh represents a radical departure from the norm. It is a small, lightweight computer with a high-resolution screen, a detached keyboard, and a mouse (see photo 1). It comes with 128K bytes of RAM (random-access read/write memory), 64K bytes of ROM (read-only memory), and a 400K-byte 3½-inch disk drive. If you throw in an Imagewriter printer (see photo 2 and figure 1) the system costs $2990. The processor is a Motorola 68000, running a name-less operating system (see the text box, “A Second Opinion” on page 248 for a fit description). It has absolutely no IBM PC/MS-DOS compatibility, and it would appear Apple plans none.<br />
<span id="more-87"></span></p>
<p><strong>The Display</strong></p>
<p>The display is small (9-inch diagonal), but it has very high resolution (512 by 342 pixels). Every pixel is crisp. Several things make the display unusual. First, the Macintosh has no “text mode.” Instead, the display is always bit-mapped graphics. Second, the display is black-on-white rather than amber-, green- or color-on-black, giving it an ink-on-paper effect. Third, the pixels are equally dense both horizontally and vertically, eliminating the “aspect ratio” problem that plagues other graphic systems. (In other words, a box 20 pixels wide and 20 pixels high will be a square.)</p>
<p><div id="attachment_93" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/sample_printout_macintosh_dot_matrix-printer1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/sample_printout_macintosh_dot_matrix-printer-300x201.jpg" alt="A sample printout from the Macintosh using its printer and the MacWrite word-processing program. The printout was obtained using MacWrite’s high-quality output mode, as opposed to the draft and ordinary quality modes. The output here is shown at 100 percent of actual size" title="A sample printout from the Macintosh using its printer and the MacWrite word-processing program." width="300" height="201" class="size-medium wp-image-93" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><small>A sample printout from the Macintosh using its printer and the MacWrite word-processing program. The printout was obtained using MacWrite’s high-quality output mode, as opposed to the draft and ordinary quality modes. The output here is shown at 100 percent of actual size.</small></p></div>The effect is excellent. The display is clear, crisp, easy to read, and easy on the eyes. Because all text is graphically generated, the “what you see is what you get” word processing is available (with multiple fonts, sizes, and styles). Embedded drawings and proportional spacing are also possible. Some criticism has been made about the lack of a color-graphics capability. Frankly, I am unconvinced of its necessity. Most applications I have seen use color graphics as a substitute for detail, and the Mac can give you lots of detail. (An interesting footnote: the QuickDraw graphics routines in the Mac’s ROM do provide for color, although Apple has not announced any intentions for supporting such.)</p>
<p>The Mac’s display does create a problem. Computer graphics are memory-intensive, once you start drawing pictures, you start using up lots of memory. The video display itself consumes about 22K bytes (or about one-sixth) of the total RAM. Any off-screen manipulation (windows) or information (fonts) chews up additional memory quickly.</p>
<p><strong>The Keyboard</strong></p>
<p><div id="attachment_96" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macintosh_keyboard1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macintosh_keyboard-300x200.jpg" alt="The Macintosh keyboard." title="The Macintosh keyboard." width="300" height="200" class="size-medium wp-image-96" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">The Macintosh keyboard.</p></div>Note the absence of a control key, but the presence insteaf of a “cloverleaf” key just to the left of the space bar. This key performs several of the functions usually performed by a control key<br />
Like the rest of the machine, the keyboard is significantly different from those found on other systems (see photo). It’s smaller than most and has only 58 keys. It is detached but the 3-foot coiled cord has lots of give to it so you don’t have to wrestle the computer for the keyboard. The full printable ASCII American National Standard Code for Information Interchange) set is available, and the layout of alphanumeric and punctuation keys is pretty standard. There are no function keys, no cursor keys, and no control key. Instead, you will find two Option keys and a Command key. The Option keys, located directly under either Shift key, are used to generate special text characters (Greek letters, math symbols, and the like). The Command key, whose symbol looks like a freeway cloverleaf, is an alternative to the mouse. For example, if I’m typing along and wish to underline some text, I can type Command-U instead of stopping and using the mouse to select Underline in the Style pull-down menu.</p>
<p>All in all, I like the keyboard. I’m a fast touch-typist and occasionally I overrun the two-key “rollover” (the number of keys you can press down simultaneously), but I never lose characters because of buffer overflow. The keyboard’s layout is compact, so I can easily reach any key – well, almost any key. The Command key, located between the left Option key and the space bar, is in an awkward position. often hit the Shift key or Option key instead. I don’t like function or cursor keys and the mouse renders them fairly useless, so their absence doesn’t bother me at all. A separate numeric keypad is available for $99 (it plugs in between the keyboard and the Mac). This keypad has cursor keys on it, but I wonder how many applications will recognize them.</p>
<p><strong>The Mouse</strong></p>
<p><div id="attachment_97" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/rear-of-the-mac1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/rear-of-the-mac-300x231.jpg" alt="The rear of the Mac. Note the icon labels. The bottom row of connectors is for (from left) the mouse, second floppy disk, printer, modem and speaker." title="The rear of the Mac. Note the icon labels. The bottom row of connectors is for (from left) the mouse, second floppy disk, printer, modem and speaker." width="300" height="231" class="size-medium wp-image-97" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><small>The rear of the Mac. Note the icon labels. The bottom row of connectors is for (from left) the mouse, second floppy disk, printer, modem and speaker.</small></p></div>The Macintosh has a standard, one-button, mechanical-tracking, optical-shaft-encoding mouse (again a departure from industry norms). The mouse has a 3½-foot cord, its own port in the back, and full support from the ROM routines and the operating system. In other words, almost every application on the Macintosh will use the mouse. (I say “almost” because someone is bound to come out with a program that ignores it altogether.) Before buying my Macintosh, I used a mouse on an IBM PC and was not impressed. The Macintosh mouse impresses me. In some applications, such as MacPaint, I seldom touch the keyboard, except to hold the Shift, Option, or Command key down with my left hand while moving the mouse with my right. I find using the mouse faster, easier, and less disruptive than using function and cursor keys. Function and cursor keys do not fall within the standard touch-typing layout because they vary in size, number, position, and function. To use them, I have to stop and think about what key I need, look down at the keyboard, find it, hit it, and look up again. Often this process has to be repeated several times. With the mouse, I never take my eyes off the screen. I just reach to my right, grab the mouse, and do what I need to do.</p>
<p>Of course, the mouse isn’t always a perfect solution. Some commands can be tedious to perform via the mouse and pull-down menu. For example, deleting text to the right of the cursor in MacWrite can only be done with the mouse. This is a nuisance if you have only one or two characters to delete. I’d also like the mouse’s cord to be a little longer and sometimes I have trouble finding enough surface area to work the mouse, but these are minor complaints. The mouse is an excellent feature of the Macintosh.</p>
<p><strong>User Interface</strong></p>
<p><div id="attachment_102" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macos11-12.png"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macos11-1-300x200.png" alt="User interface Macintosh 1.1" title="User interface Macintosh 1.1" width="300" height="200" class="size-medium wp-image-102" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">User interface Macintosh 1.1</p></div>Macintosh’s user interface is far different from those of other personal computers. Strictly speaking, it is not all that new. The original concepts were pioneered at Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) several years ago. Apple used them heavily in the original Lisa machine, released a year before the Mac. However, that Lisa sold for $10,000, and the Xerox machines for much more. The people who most needed the interface were those who could least afford it: small business people, students, etc. The Macintosh is still a bit expensive, but it’s within the reach of far more people than any of its predecessors.</p>
<p>In creating the Macintosh’s unique user interface, Apple has attempted to make the abstract seem concrete. Few things are as abstract as the data and programs stored and used on a computer. The Mac takes that abstraction and presents it as something familiar a desktop cluttered with pencils, papers manila folders, and even a wastebasket. Do you want to put a document in a folder? Pick it up with the mouse and put it in the folder. Do you want to throw something away? Pick it up and put it in the wastebasket. Abstractions take on real forms that we can understand and use without obscure commands or bizarre syntax.</p>
<p>Another important aspect of this user interface is the way in which the Macintosh makes commands available to the user. As I write this review with MacWrite, the top of my screen has an Apple symbol and six words (File, Edit Search, Format, Font, and Style) written across the top. If I point at any of the items with the mouse and press the button, a menu of options appears on the screen. When I release the button, the menu disappears. All available commands appear in the menus. I haven’t had to memorize or learn much; in fact, I opened my MacWrite manual only once or twice, briefly. The same is true at the “desktop” level. Any actions can be performed via the pull-down menus or by direct “physical” manipulation of the objects shown. The best feature of the Mac documentation is that I almost never have to refer to it.</p>
<p>My one complaint about the user interface is that it’s slow. Sometimes running a program or opening a file seems to take longer than it should. File copying on a one-drive system is also tedious.</p>
<p>A special disk-copy utility is now available that lets you copy an entire disk in just four swaps – not too shabby when you realize that this utility uses nearly 80 percent of the total RAM just to hold the data. Unfortunately, this utility won’t solve the problem of copying several files onto a disk that’s already formatted and in use. There is a simple solution: more RAM.</p>
<p><strong>Memory Limitations</strong></p>
<p><div id="attachment_99" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.mybing.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/top-of-the-mac-with-the-cover-removed1.jpg"><img src="http://www.mac-history.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/top-of-the-mac-with-the-cover-removed-300x240.jpg" alt="The top of the Mac with the cover removed. The disk drive and digital circuitry are below the cathode-ray tube; the analog circuitry is to its left" title="The top of the Mac with the cover removed. The disk drive and digital circuitry are below the cathode-ray tube; the analog circuitry is to its left" width="300" height="240" class="size-medium wp-image-99" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><small>The top of the Mac with the cover removed. The disk drive and digital circuitry are below the cathode-ray tube; the analog circuitry is to its left.</small></p></div>The 68000 is a powerful microprocessor but it has a limited environment in the Macintosh. The Mac comes with 128K bytes of RAM: less than 1/100th of the 16-megabyte RAM the 68000 could use, and there’s no way to expand it. True, Apple is planning to upgrade the Mac to 512K bytes sometime in the future, but that still leaves 97 percent of the potential memory space unused and unusable. The Mac has no provisions for expanding memory beyond replacing the 64K-bit chips it currently uses with 256K-bit chips as they become available. It has no expansion slots and no external bus. And remember, this is a graphics-intensive environment where memory often gets eaten up rather quickly.</p>
<p>So the question arises: why did the Macintosh design team so limit their machine? The most common reason I’ve come across is that the Macintosh team wanted to provide a standard environment for software developers and users (although the latter is less often cited). In other words, software developers know that a Mac will always have 128K bytes of RAM and users will never have to worry about software requiring more RAM than they have. The idea is sound, but it causes two problems. First, 128K bytes is not enough RAM for a standard, especially in the Macintosh environment, where graphics chew away at your free space. Second, there will be no standard for software developers when the 512K-byte upgrade becomes available. Many software developers are ignoring (or unable to use) the 128K-byte machine and will release the packages for 512K-byte machines only. Unless Apple plans a free update to all Mac owners, the standard environment will no longer be standard.</p>
<p>Another argument I’ve heard to support the concept of such limited memory is that the expansion slots were dropped to avoid power and cooling problems and to keep the user out of the machine. Again, this is a good idea if you provide sufficient resources in the unexpandable model. I have no complaints with Apple’s choice of two RS-422A ports, an external disk port, the mouse port, and audio output. External video would be nice, but it isn’t critical. But there’s just not enough memory.</p>
<p>Others argue that 128K bytes of RAM is enough because so much of the work is done for you in the 64K-byte ROM. The ROM toolbox (the optimized 68000 machine-language routines that handles all aspects of the user interface) is truly a marvelous thing, but it doesn’t change the fact that large, complex programs need lots of memory, especially if the displays are all graphical. A supporting argument points to MacPaint and MacWrite, saying, “See, these work fine!” Yes, they do, but both have easily reached limits. Furthermore, these programs were developed over a long period of time, concurrently with the Macintosh. The authors of these programs knew a lot about optimizing code for the Mac. Software developers with less time and more ambitious designs will find the lack of RAM a serious roadblock.</p>
<p>I also have heard that the upgrade to 512K bytes will eliminate all such problems because there will be more than enough RAM for any application. Again, I disagree. You can never have enough RAM. I think it’s no accident that the Commodore 64, with 64K bytes, has dominated the low-end market over machines that have (or had) 8K, 16K, or 24K bytes. Apple gave the IIc, which uses an 8-bit 6502 chip, 128K bytes of RAM. Why the company limited the 68000, a 32-bit chip, to the same initial amount of memory is beyond me. Even the fourfold upgrade is too limiting. Apple delights in stating how much better the 68000 is than the 8086/8088 chips used in the IBM PC and compatibles, yet most of those systems can use more RAM than the Mac. Where’s the advantage?</p>
<p>Obviously, I think that 128K bytes is not enough RAM to make the Macintosh a truly powerful machine. My attempt to run the Sieve of Eratosthenes benchmark on the Mac provides one indication of its RAM limitations. Once BASIC was loaded into the Mac, there was too little space left in memory for the Sieve program. To fit the program into memory, I had to declare all variables integer. This will, of course, speed the execution time considerably. Thus, the speed of the Mac Sieve is not commensurable to the other two systems. (If you are curious, the modified benchmark took 96.4 seconds on the Mac.) The upgrade to 512K bytes will help considerably, but it’s still an inexcusable limit. I am convinced that this limited RAM has held up the release of Mac software. As I write this, it has been three months since the Macintosh was released, and all the Apple dealers in town have only three software packages for the Mac besides MacPaint and MacWrite, which are still bundled. Mac should have had at least double the initial and upgrade RAM, i.e., 256K bytes and 1 megabyte, respectively. It may be that Apple will release yet another upgrade when 1-megabit chips become available in mass quantities, or they may just release a new machine.</p>
<p>Although the RAM is a limitation of the Macintosh, the ROM is a tremendous strength. In what is undoubtedly one of the marvels of modern programming, the Macintosh design team crammed an unbelievable amount of power into the 64K bytes of ROM in the form of tightly written, highly optimized machine code. In doing so, the team provided standard user interfaces, so that most application programs on the Mac will be used in similar forms. I tried some prerelease programs with no documentation and I was able to use them almost immediately. Try that under CP/M or MS-DOS. The ROM toolbox is a vital facet of the overall amazing nature of the Macintosh.</p>
<p>The Macintosh also lacks adequate mass storage. At first, it doesn’t look bad: it consists of one single-sided 3½-inch built-in disk drive (made by Sony) holding 400K bytes. Having only one disk drive can be a nuisance, but it’s acceptable if the drive holds enough data and if you can copy it easily. However, the system files on a Macintosh disk take up over 200K bytes, or half the disk. Even with trimming, you only have about 220K bytes of usable space on a bootable disk. If any other company marketed a CP/M or MS-DOS system with a single disk drive with only 220K bytes of free space, no one would buy it. It takes a lot of time and disk swapping to copy files or to back up a disk. The Mac’s only saving grace on this point is that it automatically ejects the disk and prompts you for a new one.</p>
<p>The 128K-byte Macintosh with one single-sided drive is not a powerful machine. You can do useful work with it, and the user interface beats all other cold. But for the same price or less you could go out and buy, for example, a Compaq with 256K bytes of RAM and two 360K-byte disk drives. And I could get lots of software for it – programs that can handle larger, more difficult tasks than the Mac currently can. The upshot is this: a $3000 Macintosh with 128K bytes of RAM, a 400K-byte disk drive, and an Imagewriter printer, is an amazing machine but not really a powerful one. A 512K-byte Mac with two 400K-byte disk drives is both amazing and powerful, but it is also expensive ($3500, including printer and not counting any cost for the RAM upgrade). In the two-and-a-half months that I’ve owned my Mac, I’ve often wondered if I should have bought one so quickly. However, the arrival of MacFORTH (see the text box “Software for the Mac” on this page) has done much to quell my reservations. I can now create my own windows, graphics, and pull-down menus, and the “fun quotient” of my Mac has made a quantum leap. Besides, I suspect that by the time this sees print, prices will have dropped and the software base will have expanded considerably.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p>
<p>You won’t find another machine that’s as easy to use or as much fun as the Macintosh. In the right configuration, it can do as much as any microcomputer on the market. However, you should go for a 512K-byte system with two disk drives and a printer. Anything less and you’ll find yourself frustrated by the machine’s limits.</p>
<p>I have no doubt that I would have bought a Macintosh sooner or later, and I have no intention of getting rid of the one I own. The Mac’s a gem – rough, slightly flawed, but a gem nonetheless.</p>
<p><em>by Bruce F. Webster</em></p>
<p><small>Bruce F. Webster (7909 Ostrow St., Suite F, San Diego, CA 92111) is vice-president of FTL Games and Oasis Systems. He received his B.S. in computer science from Brigham Young University and did graduate work at the University of Houston. His hobbies include reading and war-gaming, especially science-fiction and fantasy war games.</small></p>
<g:plusone href="http://www.mac-history.net/mac/2008-08-17/the-macintosh-the-many-facets-of-a-slightly-flawed-gem"  size="standard"   annotation="none"  ></g:plusone>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mac-history.net/mac/2008-08-17/the-macintosh-the-many-facets-of-a-slightly-flawed-gem/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Apple Macintosh &#8211; At a glance</title>
		<link>http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-08-17/apple-macintosh-at-a-glance</link>
		<comments>http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-08-17/apple-macintosh-at-a-glance#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 06:42:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christoph Dernbach</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Computer History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apple Macintosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Byte]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Macintosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[review]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mac-history.net/?p=154</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A sidebar to the Apple Macintosh review published in Byte, issue 8/1984, pp. 241-242. At a glance Name Macintosh Manufacturer Apple Computer Inc. 20525 Mariani Ave. Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 996-1010 Components Size: 13.5 by 9.7 by 10.9 inches (main unit) 2.6 by 13.2 by 5.8 inches (keyboard) Weight: 19.5 pounds Processor: Motorola 68000 (7,8336 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>A sidebar to the Apple Macintosh review published in Byte, issue 8/1984, pp. 241-242.<br />
</em></p>
<p><strong>At a glance</strong></p>
<p><div id="attachment_977" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 430px"><a href="http://www.mr-gadget.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/apple-macintosh-byte-review.jpg"><img src="http://www.mr-gadget.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/apple-macintosh-byte-review-420x489.jpg" alt="Apple Macintosh Review Byte" title="Apple Macintosh Review Byte" width="420" height="489" class="size-medium wp-image-977" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Apple Macintosh Review Byte</p></div><strong>Name</strong><br />
Macintosh</p>
<p><strong>Manufacturer</strong><br />
Apple Computer Inc.<br />
20525 Mariani Ave.<br />
Cupertino, CA 95014<br />
(408) 996-1010</p>
<p><strong>Components</strong><br />
Size: 13.5 by 9.7 by 10.9 inches (main unit)<br />
2.6 by 13.2 by 5.8 inches (keyboard)<br />
Weight: 19.5 pounds<br />
Processor: Motorola 68000 (7,8336 MHz)<br />
Memory: 128K bytes of RAM; 64K bytes of ROM<br />
Display: 9-inch built-in monitor; high-resolution bit-mapped display (512 by 342 pixels); adjustable<br />
Keyboard: 58 keys, detached, standard layout, no function keys, software-mapped<br />
Mouse: single button, mechanical tracking, optical shaft encoding<br />
Mass storage: built-in single-sided 3½-inch Sony drive (400K bytes)<br />
Sound generator: four-voice sound<br />
Interfaces: two RS-422A serial ports (230.4K bps transfer rate); external-disk interface for second (optional) disk drive; mouse interface; synchronous serial keyboard bus</p>
<p><strong>Operating System</strong><br />
Proprietary unnamed</p>
<p><strong>Optional Hardware</strong><br />
Imagewriter dot-matrix printer: $595<br />
Numeric keypad: $99<br />
Carrying case: $99<br />
Modem (300 bps): $225<br />
(300/1200 bps): $495<br />
Security Accessory Kit: $49<br />
Second floppy-disk drive: $495</p>
<p><strong>Optional Software</strong><br />
See text box</p>
<p><strong>Documentation</strong><br />
160-page user’s manual</p>
<p><strong>Price</strong><br />
$2495 ($2990 with Imagewriter)</p>
<p><div id="attachment_976" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 429px"><a href="http://www.mr-gadget.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macintosh-benchmarks-1-1218797721.jpg"><img src="http://www.mr-gadget.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macintosh-benchmarks-1-419x321.jpg" alt="Apple Macintosh Review Byte - Benchmark 1" title="Apple Macintosh Review Byte - Benchmark 1" width="419" height="321" class="size-medium wp-image-976" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Apple Macintosh Review Byte - Benchmark 1</p></div>The Memory Size graph shows the standard and optional memory available for the computers under comparison. The Disk Storage graph shows the highest capacity of a single floppy-disk drive for each system. The Bundled Software graph shows the number of software packages included with each system. The Price graph shows the list price of a system with two high-capacity floppy-disk drives, a monochrome monitor, graphics and color-display capability, a printer port and a serial port, 256K bytes of memory (64K bytes for 8-bit systems), the standard operating system for each system, and the standard BASIC interpreter for each system. The Mac’s price includes 128K bytes of memory only.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_975" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 430px"><a href="http://www.mr-gadget.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/apple-macintosh-review-byte-benchmark-2.jpg"><img src="http://www.mr-gadget.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/macintosh-benchmarks-2-420x332.jpg" alt="Apple Macintosh Review Byte - Benchmark 2" title="Apple Macintosh Review Byte - Benchmark 2" width="420" height="332" class="size-medium wp-image-975" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Apple Macintosh Review Byte - Benchmark 2</p></div>The graph for Disk Access in BASIC shows how long it takes to write a 64K-byte sequential text file to a blank floppy disk and how long it takes to read this file (For the program listings, see “The Chameleon Plus,” by Rich Krajewski, June 1984, page 327.) The BASIC Performance graph shows how long it takes to run one iteration of the Sieve of Eratosthenes prime-number benchmark. In the same graph, the Calculations results show how long it takes to do 10,000 multiplication and division operations using single-precision numbers. The System Utilities graph shows how long it takes to transfer a 40K-byte file using the system utilities. The Spreadsheet graph shows how long the computers take to load and recalculate a 25- by 25-cell spread-sheet where each cell equals 1.001 times the cell to its left. The spreadsheet program used was Microsoft Multiplan. The time for the format/disk copy test on the Macintosh reflects using the disk-copy utility on a single-drive system. Four disk-swaps are required for the complete disk copy, the time for which is included in the benchmark.</p>
<p>* The Sieve benchmark couldn’t be run on the Mac (see text for details).<br />
** The new Disk Copy program was not available at press time.</p>
<g:plusone href="http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-08-17/apple-macintosh-at-a-glance"  size="standard"   annotation="none"  ></g:plusone>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2008-08-17/apple-macintosh-at-a-glance/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->
