Apple History At folklore.org 223
oaklybonn writes "Andy Hertzfeld seems to be the primary author on this fascinating site, which details many of his experiences in the Macintosh (Bicycle??) development efforts. It includes such choice commentary as: "we were amazed that such a thoroughly bad game could be co-authored by Microsoft's co-founder, and that he would actually want to take credit for it in the comments.", on a page describing a game bundled with the original IBM PC." Reader themexican adds "As a plus, Hertzfeld notes in the faq that the python code running the well-designed and easy to navigate site will be made public in the near future."
Bicycle (Score:5, Informative)
Apparently there was a story in Scientific American, or Popular Science, or some such magazine where the scientists were trying to determine what was the most efficient of animals in terms of locomotion. Which creature moved with the least amount of calories burned? Well, humans were waay down the list, pathetic in terms of other creatures. The top animal with the most efficient means of movement was an eagle or something. Then, one guy had this idea to measure how efficient a human being is on a bicycle. It was awesome, he was drastically more efficient, able to go further and without burning as many calories. It knocked the bird out of first place.
So, early on, Apple was planning on calling it the "Bicycle for the Mind." I don't know if it makes as much an impact if you don't know the story behind it.
I got this anecdote from one of the Apple behind-the-scenes books (I forget which), like Apple Confidential [amazon.com].
Apple history (Score:5, Informative)
A little more history... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:MS co-founder? (Score:3, Informative)
I can get to it, it took a little bit to load but I got it now. At least the article that talks about the game.
The game they are talking about is Donkey.
(Somehow I doubt that's related to Donkey Kong.)
It says the authors were Bill Gates and Neil Konzen, it was written in BASIC, poorly animated, and called Donkey because at certain points in the game a "donkey" appeared in the middle of the road and you would then have to quickly hit the space bar, or the game would end. (I'm guessing the space bar was for stopping?)
That article also mentions that MSDOS was a clone of an earlier version of CP/M.
Re:Cheapest Mac (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Bicycle (Score:4, Informative)
The Susan Kare-style logo at the top of the WotM letterhead was the same featured in the Folklore site. Pretty cool, if you ask me. Still cool, even if you don't.
Inside the Apple Studio with... Andy Hertzfeld (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I'll play devil's advocate (Score:5, Informative)
It was copied, that is for sure, but it was far from "open." A plagiarized design doesn't make it "open" in the same fashion that a blown up safe lock box is also an "open" box.
And most of the games you mention have more in common with the machines you dissed than the actual original PC. I.e. most of the Doom engine was actually developed in NextStep, a lot of the 3DS software that game designers adopted in the 90s come from an Atari ST design program, most of the multi channel audio we know assume as standard was inspired by the Amiga (.mod's were the
For those interested in Apple history... (Score:5, Informative)
Here are several other great Apple history resources.
Sites:
Books:
Other:
It still is in Australia... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Cheapest Mac (Score:5, Informative)
There is a difference between the cheapest Mac that runs OS X, and that runs Darwin. Darwin (the core) will run on a lot older hardware than OS X itself. For instance, you can run Darwin on the PowerMac 8NNN series, but dont try to take a retail OS X and install.
Have a lookt at Low End Mac [lowendmac.com] and Accelerate your Mac [xlr8yourmac.com]. Perhaps they can give you some kind of hint. Now finally, i'd just like to point out that if you indeed want to run OS X, keep in mind that the "minimum requirements", like 128MB ram, is NOT sufficient imho. My G5 even choked on 512MB
Re:iPods predicted in 1984? (Score:3, Informative)
So you can compare, here's a link to the original commercial [isd.net], which you can see didn't have an iPod in it. ;o)
(As has been mentioned, Apple digitally added the iPod in the 2004 version of the commercial.)
Close but no cigar for you! (Score:3, Informative)
The original author of Q[uick and dirty]DOS was Tim Patterson who much later went to work for Microsoft in the compiler group. Bill gates did not work on the code.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Uh, check the history books (Score:5, Informative)
As was mentioned by another poster, MS is a marketing marvel, but this myth about it's founders being technnical geniuses has just got to go. It scares the kids...
Re:MS co-founder? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Close but no cigar for you! (Score:3, Informative)
Cheap shots aside, (Sir) [slashdot.org] Bill by all accounts did an excellent job of sqeezing it into a very small space.
Credit [sysun.com]where it is due.
Cheers, Andy!
Re:Why is Apple's UI so much better than the rest? (Score:4, Informative)
On my desktop, I use xinerama, either two or three monitors (I have gone as high as five in the past). I use menus-in-apps (aka Windows style). I load many many apps and have them spread out all over the place. I also tend to open new URLs in new windows.
On my laptop, I use a single 1024x768 monitor. I use menu-at-top (aka MacOS style). I load only a few apps, and have them all maximized (in general). I tend to use tabbed browsing significantly more.
In both I use Konsole (the KDE terminal app) in a uniform manner... lots of tabs, a primary shell, a root shell, and then several task shells. I use the second desktop in both as a place to kick windows that either are running "in the background" (conceptually, a la xmms) or interesting tangents that I ran across while working on a task (web pages found while googling for something else, half finished documents I was working on, etc).
I also used to be an emacs kinda guy, and now I use vi. I use Kate often as well (the file sidebar is very handy for making small changes to many files).
It's interesting, because the menubar difference is very natural, and I move back and forth with no difficulty. I can't recall the last time I hunted for the menu with a false start. For the single screen, MacOS style is the best, especially with a eraserhead mouse. For many screens, Windows style is better because I don't have to move across several monitors to hit a menu.
--
Evan
Re:Cheapest Mac (Score:3, Informative)
I disagree. I run Jaguar on an old Bondi-blue G3 imac at 233Mhz with 96MB Ram !
And it runs just fine. There's only a limitation in startup time (don't power it of : sleep it if you need to. Boot time is around 10 minutes) , most of the iApps (which are to big to fit on the 2GB harddisk anyway) and MS Office (to big also, but easily replaced by textEdit or shareware alternatives).
I run my mySQL/PHP/apache test setup on it, my iCal, and my accounting. Perfect.
Another Advantage to the Global Menu (Score:3, Informative)
In contrast, you have to hit the correct horizontal range, but also the correct vertical range, both for Windowed menus, and for taskbar buttons. If you move a long-term Mac user to Windows, they will constantly battle with this, as they're accustomed to just mousing up to the top of the screen, clicking, and then just scanning back and forth to find the right menu.
In Windows, this just is dramatically more challenging, so most users never develop that habit.
Tim
Re:Bicycle (Score:5, Informative)
On the other hand if you've done any riding of both it's surprising at first, but reflection bears it out.
If you try to sit on a horse like you do on a chair you'll get pounded to death. Your butt will turn to hamburger, your spine will get crunched (forensic examination of Custer's troops showed spinal degredation even among teenagers as I recall). You have to lift yourself up and down in stirrups in rythmn with the horse. Saves your butt and spine, but until you've done a fair amount of riding you'l come home with your legs aching. Riding a horse is a lot of work. This is why the genteel class prefered the surrey. Even if, for some reason, you choose to sit like a sack and take the pounding you'll burn a fair number of extra calories in the process. Riding a horse works all the muscles of the body, each burning calories, no matter how slightly.
On a bicycle you can simply sit; only the legs are really using extra calories; and fairly gentle pressure on the pedals will give you 8 mph or so on the level. Grandma can do this and keep it up all day. 12 mph is the speed a man with virtually depleted sugar stores can ride all day (although he won't enjoy it very much). An expert can ride at 15 mph until he falls asleep if he eats normally(the record average speed for crossing the US coast to coast is 15.3 mph, that average includes all downtime such as for sleeping. The clock started in California and stopped in Atlantic City NJ).
I have to note that all of this is highly speed dependant. For instance, it takes a world class athlete (horse or man) to hit 40 mph, but the jockey of a horse galloping at 40 mph is probably working at about the rate of a bicyclist going 20 mph; about
The bicycle is at the disadvantage going uphill or into the wind. On the other hand riding a bicycle downhill requires very little energy while riding a horse downhill requires more human energy.
None of it is very straight forward and thus the claim that a man on a horse uses more energy than a man on a bicycle is provisional based on the conditions.
As I recall the figure I have is for a horse at a trot of about 8 mph (which is why I chose that figure above) and a man bicycling at the same speed on the level in still air.
The man on the bicycle will be expending about
Yeah, in the mid 70s I was a bicycle researcher, which is why I have that chart, and why it is "somewhere," although I concentrated more on dynamics.
KFG
This data isn't all positive (Score:3, Informative)
And he's the CEO of Apple now, and sure enough, we get lots of all-in-one models.