Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Almighty Buck Apple

Apple 1 Computer Sells For $210,700 164

Posted by samzenpus
from the blast-from-the-past dept.
digitaldc writes "An Apple computer purchased more than 30 years ago has sold for 425 times its original selling price. From the article: 'An Apple-1, one of only about 200 such machines built in Apple co-founder Steve Jobs' parents' garage, sold at Christie's auction house in London today for 133,250 pounds (about $210,700). The Apple-1, which didn't include a casing, power supply, keyboard, or monitor, originally retailed for $666.66 in 1976. Apple discontinued the model in 1977.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple 1 Computer Sells For $210,700

Comments Filter:
  • and they were incredulous that an 'old' computer would sell for so much. I was thinking yeah, that Mona Lisa is nothing but old paying and old canvas, why would someone pay millions for it?

    Of course this was from the same channel that said "We will be getting snow and cold weather".

    • by Lev13than (581686) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:35PM (#34333028) Homepage

      Going from $666 to $210,100 in 36 years is an 18% return - not bad, but not as crazy huge as it might look on first glance.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by timeOday (582209)

        an 18% return - not bad, but not as crazy huge as it might look on first glance.

        Well, an 18% return sustained for 36 years is crazy huge, precisely because it turns $666 into $210k. An 18% return on a single stock for year is very good. An 18% return on a portfolio for a whole year is really good. But a sustained 18% return for 36 years in a row? I doubt Bill G.'s own stock in Microsoft achieved that.

        • by kill-1 (36256)

          Bill G.'s stock went from $0.08 [yahoo.com] in 1986 (split adjusted) to $25. That's a return of about 27% a year for the last 24 years.

      • Please excuse me if my formula is incorrect but 666.66 x (1.18 ^ 36) = 258,021.96 which is significantly higher than $210,700.

        To solve, use:

        210,700 / 666.66 ^ (1/36) = 1.1733775686728221274377171681115 - 1 = 17.34%.
    • by rolfwind (528248) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:36PM (#34333034)

      But it also was the right time to sell because the Apple brand is riding high at the moment so interest overall is higher.

      Collectibles/Antiques are like any other market, and interest fluctuates. I have seen things that used to fetch $100k go for as little as $3k now (for instance, the European Glass market really sunk once communism collapsed and the east opened up). This is not unusual.

      Some people think the older something gets, the more it's worth but that's not always the case. Often there's a peak and then decline.

    • An apple computer Compared to the Mona Lisa. Now I've heard everything. Lets not forget that there were many other computer manufactures around at the time producing hardware superior to anything apple was doing and most of them went on to be far far more successful than apple. I know apple markets itself has this giant global computer manufacturer but the fact of the matter is they make toys for people with too much money to show of to their friends. Every product they make has a competing products that ar
      • by delinear (991444)

        This constant misnomer that somehow apple has the lead on anything in relation to technology drives me crazy. It's all marketing.

        Surely, if nothing else, that demonstrates that they lead on marketing in relation to technology :)

        • Well played my friend. Well played.
        • What can you do with an Apple I ?
          How about CHANGE THE WORLD.



          And you can't play "Breakout" on the Mona Lisa.
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            I'd sooner play Breakout on an Atari 800 (1979) or Commodore 64 (1982).

            Plus these computers still get support (well the C64 does) such that you could use it on the modern internet or do word processing, spreadhseets, etc. Apples can't. Also I remember using 8-bit Apples in school and not really liking them. The lack of good sound & graphics felt dull compared to what Atari and Commodore were doing at the time.

      • by warrigal (780670)
        Lets not forget that there were many other computer manufactures around at the time producing hardware superior to anything apple was doing and most of them went on to be far far more successful than apple. Care to name one that's still in business? Every product they make has a competing products that are superior, cheaper and more popular. Some sort of facts? Apart from rabid fanboy trolling? It's all marketing. There were smartphones better than the iphone long before the iphone was released. They'
    • I was thinking yeah, that Mona Lisa is nothing but old paying and old canvas, why would someone pay millions for it?

      I wouldn't, since it's sure to be fake.
      The Mona Lisa is painted on wood.

  • figures... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by uncanny (954868) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:25PM (#34332846)
    Just yesterday my father and i were talking about some old computers that the university i work at have on display, and he was telling me about how, about 30 years ago, he had an apple 1, and it was numbered 151. He remembers that they were offering to trade this computer for a new updated version, boy did he get a deal! then again, if they kept all their old baseball cards they'd be rich off of those too
    • by hcpxvi (773888)
      he had an apple 1, and it was numbered 151. Heh. A magic Apple number. ISTR that on the Apple ][ you could type "CALL -151" at the Basic prompt to drop yourself into the monitor/disassembler mode.
  • So what? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:26PM (#34332872)

    Every Apple computer sells for more than it's worth.

    • Re:So what? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by rolfwind (528248) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:37PM (#34333062)

      And Linux is Free only if your time is worth nothing.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by FauxPasIII (75900)

        This troll made a lot more sense 7 or 8 years ago when it wasn't much quicker and easier to install and maintain Linux than any other general use system.

        Even if you factor out install time (since most people get their Windows and Mac systems preloaded), the time you spend maintaining your system very quickly tilts the balance back in favor of Linux.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by abigor (540274)

          I take it you don't run Gentoo.

        • I got a phone call yesterday. From my Dad. Computer Virus. Fourth one this year.

          Now, I use windows at work and I tend to use it at home. I don't have to do any regular maintenance on it at all. I save maybe 3 seconds in boot time compared to my Ubuntu box.

          I'd say its more or less the time I spend maintaining OTHER PEOPLES systems makes me want THEM to use Linux more than anything else.

          Seems a bit strange now that I reflect on it.

          • by nschubach (922175)

            I replaced my Mom's computer with Ubuntu some time back and since then she stopped calling me to clean up all her toolbars and spyware. Now I just get those awkward calls asking how things are. It was the best thing I've done. Every now and then she complains that she can't install a new screensaver (background image) and I'm still trying to get it through her head that you don't need to "install" these... but overall, it's been a good experience.

        • by blair1q (305137)

          Really? Yesterday I tried to get a piece of software for my desktop linux machine. Instead of a click-download-click-install, I got directed to a page that gave me step-by-step directions to manually download and unpackage the files, but I couldn't do it with that version because I had a different distro, so I had to go to another version that first gave me a long (100+) list of package dependencies that I would have had to validate, again manually, and I would have had to install any of them that were lac

          • by nschubach (922175)

            Why are you blaming the OS for the application developer's lack of packaging?

            Your scenario would also have played out the same if Blizzard asked you to download a zip file and copy the files to the right place instead of packaging up their app in an installer.

            • by blair1q (305137)

              So it's easy to maintain, and if it isn't it's because the people making you maintain it don't know how to do that. And they're the bulk of the people to distribute stuff. As opposed to Windoze, where 99.9% of installs are click-download-click-install-click-options, or easier.

              • by FauxPasIII (75900)

                So it's easy to maintain, and if it isn't it's because the people making you maintain it don't know how to do that. And they're the bulk of the people to distribute stuff. As opposed to Windoze, where 99.9% of installs are click-download-click-install-click-options, or easier.

                I guess it comes down to what you run. In Linux, 100.0% of my installs are "apt-get install ", whereas in Windows I never make it through a week without an install consisting of "Open archive in 7zip, copy it to a new folder somewhere, add that folder to the PATH environment variable". And heaven help you if you need to make sure you're running the most up-to-date version of things in Windows.

                Even if you're willing to call that a wash, there's still the questions of drivers (everything's already on your s

                • by blair1q (305137)

                  "everything's already on your system in Linux, and kept up to date through automatic updates"

                  You're thinking of a particular distro and version, not "Linux" in general.

                  • by FauxPasIII (75900)

                    While that's true, I don't understand how it relates to what we're discussing?

                    Then again, this whole thread is attached to a conversation about a collector buying an Apple 1, so off-topic is relative. =)

        • by Kjella (173770)

          Assuming a few things, like:

          - Your hardware actually works with Linux, or you've bought specifically only Linux-friendly hardware. It's great if everything works out of the box, if you don't have to put in driver CDs that's great. But there's still a lot of hardware that isn't or is poorly supported under Linux. Or it has some quirks like wireless not doing encrypted connections, suspend/resume not working fully or something like that.
          - You're not looking to run any Windows software. Don't get me wrong, WIN

        • by Dr. Cody (554864)

          This troll made a lot more sense 7 or 8 years ago when it wasn't much quicker and easier to install and maintain Linux than any other general use system.

          Even if you factor out install time (since most people get their Windows and Mac systems preloaded), the time you spend maintaining your system very quickly tilts the balance back in favor of Linux.

          Don't be that guy...

        • by jo_ham (604554)

          I dropped a LiveCD of Kubuntu on my Powerbook, ran an update that was suggested right after doing so, which promptly broke the wireless networking. Still haven't fixed that.

          There are just as many maintenance tasks and oddities to mess with on Linux as there are on other systems, but it's much better than it was.

      • If a few cumulative hours over the years is the price for not having system updates maliciously disable functions of my media player then I'd say It's a bargain.

      • by Tablizer (95088)

        You should get mod points just for surviving angry mod-mobs.

      • Re:So what? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mcgrew (92797) * on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @02:38PM (#34334976) Homepage Journal

        And how is that? It takes half an hour at most to install it, and all or most of the apps you need are installed with it. I've found that Windows takes up a hell of a lot more of my valuable time than Linux. And I don't just save time and money on the OS, I save money by not needing AV and paying for updates, time not cleaning out malware, time not relearning a new OS every time MS comes up with a new version, etc.

        Fifteen years ago your statement was accurate, but the pendulem has swung the other way. Most distros just plain work, right out of the box, no muss, fuss, or tweaking (unless you just want to).

        • I save money by not needing AV and paying for updates,

          microsoft provides a free AV / malware suite called security essentials. updates to it come along with other OS updates. it's widely acknowledged to be the lightest weight least intrusive AV solution.

          Fifteen years ago your statement was accurate, but the pendulem has swung the other way. Most distros just plain work, right out of the box, no muss, fuss, or tweaking (unless you just want to).

          yes, unless you want to play a DVD. or you want your multimedia keys to work. or use the lightscribe features of your DVD ROM. or plug in my android phone. or use my SD card reader slot. or power off my laptop's LCD display when idle. oh, and the fact that i literally got 1/2 the battery life on linux compared

        • by Shadow99_1 (86250)

          Having setup and maintained many Ubuntu installs just a year ago, I can say that windows (at least version 7) 'just runs' more than Ubuntu does. Ubuntu would not setup the 3D drivers for the Nvidia or Ati cards, so manual install. Ubuntu couldn't seem to find a HP 5i network printer they were connected to without uninstalling and reinstalling the whole printer interface from the web... Ubuntu randomly hated certain CD/DVD-rom drives from the same batch of computers failing to even install, so replacing hard

    • Alright, someone call the MythBusters and have them cancel the "Apple Tax" episode.
    • I hear Acrobat 1.0 is also going for 5+ figures.

  • Big News! (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The big news is that they sold off documents from Turing and some of the machinery used to break the enigma codes and win world war II. These are things that belong in museums and should be shared as part of our shared heritage. The news that is reported in the US is that some interesting commercial product was sold because of its historical value. That is fucked up.
    • Re:Big News! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by countSudoku() (1047544) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:57PM (#34333446) Homepage

      Stop your whining this INSTANT, young man! Google stepped up and offered $100,000, which is like $12 pounds 50 shillings I think, to help secure the artifacts for the Bletchley Park Museum. And that is NOT fucked up, unless you're talking about the sale in the first place, which is indeed a bit fucked in the head, but then perhaps the collector needs the bucks and the Turning notes are of value.

      More to the point; I have the build an Apple I book and will gladly build anyone an Apple I for $50,000! Order now and save BIG!!1!

    • by flosofl (626809)

      These are things that belong in museums

      Thanks for that Indiana Jones...

  • Anyone else seriously doubt that the thing would work? I'm guessing that the capacitors have given out, or if they haven't will do so as soon as there's power run through it. It'd be neat to see if they can get the thing running properly. Still not as cool as the Apple I they had in Make II though (made entirely out of a breadboard and wires - sooo cool).
    • by toofast (20646)

      My Timex Sinclair I got in early 1982 still works like a charm... Granted, it's 6 years younger than this, but it's still almost 30 years old!

  • If memory serves me correctly he lost his in a fire way back.

    And I should get a time machine and go tell my primary school self not to listen to my parents and keep my original King's Quest I box... Darn.

  • by Bill Dimm (463823) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:44PM (#34333170) Homepage

    $666.66 -- could Steve Jobs make it any clearer that he is the devil? ;-)

    • by rotide (1015173)
      Insightful? This was a joke. Fanboi-ism at it's finest!
    • by Ecuador (740021)

      Well, it seems he could and he proved it again and again over the years since...

    • in the first century AD the number of the devil is 666.

      In the 21st century, the number of the devil is $666.66 apparently. I guess inflation is a force greater than good or evil.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by phantomfive (622387)
      A few years ago I ran across an evangelical christian web page claiming that Apple was from the devil. That Apple was a dirty hippie company trying to push their evil values on the rest of us. Among the evidence, that it's core was built on Darwin. Serious stuff. Something like this [archive.org]. Choice quote:

      But there are even darker undertones to this company than most are aware of. Consider the name of the company and its logo: an apple with a bite taken out of it. This is clearly a reference to the Fall, when Adam and Eve were tempted with an apple by the serpent. It is now Apple Computers offering us temptation, thereby aligning themselves with the forces of darkness.

      • by tompaulco (629533)
        Wow, you would expect a religious wacko to be more knowledgeable about his religion. It was not an apple that they were tempted with but the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil.
    • by Thud457 (234763)
      well, their logo is the legendary fruit of the tree of knowledge.
      And it has a bite from it.

      (I'm assuming showing two bites didn't work from a design perspective?)
  • by snsh (968808) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:44PM (#34333174)
    If a VC had invested $666 in Apple in 1976, how many Apple I's would that be worth today?
    • I just posted that AAPL has appreciated 87 times since 1980. Since this four years before Apple went public, and early investment on successful companies is worth 10 times on IPO day, 666$ in 1976 = 6660$ on 1980. That would be worth 579,000$ today. Yes, the investment would have appreciated even more. And it has. The founders are billionaires.
    • Well, I'm not sure about a VC in 1976, but if you'd invested $666.66 in 12/12/1980 the date of the IPO [corporate-ir.net], you would have received your shares at $2.75 per share (after adjusting for stock splits that have occurred since then). Given that the same shares are trading around $315, you'd be sitting on right around $76,350.
    • by Lev13than (581686) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @01:04PM (#34333568) Homepage

      If a VC had invested $666 in Apple in 1976, how many Apple I's would that be worth today?
       
      About $76,000, for an IRR of 17.1%. APPL shares were worth $2.75 (split adjusted) at their 1980 IPO, and are going for $315 or so today.

      In contrast, the Apple I has gone from $666 to $210,000 over 36 years, which is an IRR of 18.4%.

      • by blair1q (305137)

        For comparison, INTC's split-adjusted IPO-day closing price in July 1986 is $0.37, and it trades at $21.33, an IRR of 33%.

        MSFT's in March 1986 is (25.45/0.08)^(1/14.7) - 1 = 48%.

        That would have been a good year to bet the farm and the mortgage on it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by hipp5 (1635263)
      That reminds me of this [kyleconroy.com]. Some guy calculated how much value you'd have if you had bought Apple stock instead of their various gadgets.
  • The split adjusted price for a share of AAPL on Dec 12 1980 is $3.60. Current closing price is around $314. or 87 times. Given this info the 425x price for the original apple computer does not seem to be totally unreasonable/surprising. The antique comes with a letter signed by Steve "le God" Jobs himself.
  • by DeathToBill (601486) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @12:56PM (#34333426) Journal
    Something like: "Apple Computer sells for £133,250." Am I the only one who saw this and thought, "That can't be right! Their market capitalization is, like, £70bn or something. And why would shareholders be getting out now?"
  • by mrnick (108356) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @01:42PM (#34334190) Homepage

    Wow, that's a descent sum of money! I wonder how much I could get for my WANG??

    • Not as much as Ron Jeremy.

    • No thanks. (Score:5, Funny)

      by jamrock (863246) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @02:11PM (#34334604)

      I wonder how much I could get for my WANG??

      Well let's see. If you're a typical Slashdot denizen it's never been used and 3.5 inch floppy is standard.

      You should clear just enough to buy some razor blades to slit your wrists.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by cmholm (69081)

        If you're a typical Slashdot denizen it's never been used

        Au contraire, you're thinking external interface. Typically, the built-in-test mode has been exercised thousands of times.

        • Au contraire, you're thinking external interface. Typically, the built-in-test mode has been exercised thousands of times.

          Ah. Thank you for the corollary. I should have made it explicit that I was referring to normal usage scenarios, not manual override.

  • ... and I thought the headline was, "1 Apple Computer Sells For $210700"; Which, honestly, did not sound like news to me.

  • More info (Score:5, Funny)

    by sootman (158191) on Wednesday November 24, 2010 @03:34PM (#34335666) Homepage Journal

    "The Apple-1, which didn't include a casing, power supply, keyboard, or monitor..."

    Also, it didn't run Flash.

  • ...Less space than a nomad. Lame.
    And expensive !

  • The Apple-1, which didn't include a casing, power supply, keyboard, or monitor

    Is that *was* user friendly back in those days.

"Never give in. Never give in. Never. Never. Never." -- Winston Churchill

Working...