512 Pixels

‘Pick From This List of Things To Do’

Kevin Lipe:

I spent the whole day playing with a stack of Apple ][+, //e, and Enhanced //e machines, testing a stack of 80-column cards and memory expansions and fifteen Disk ][ drives and an Applied Engineering Music Synthesizer card, and the whole time I was using and/or abusing that old Apple hardware (several times I had to pull out the old “Programmer’s Reference” and call stuff from the Monitor ROM because I wasn’t sure what I was doing) I had one thought: “Apple would never allow me to do any of this anymore, if they had their way.”

The Apple //e has seven slots, a special “auxiliary” slot for 80-column and RAM expansion, and chips that were socketed for easy replacement/upgrading. The top snaps off. The manuals say to call Apple if you have trouble sticking new ROM chips in the motherboard.

If you open your iMac, you no longer have a warranty.

Granted, there’s a lot less of a reason to open an iMac than there was an Apple ][+—which is an incredibly limited computer without any expansion cards, though it wasn’t at the time it was released—but still. Apple used to encourage you do do whatever you wanted with your Apple computer. The Monitor ROM was there, and it had a disassembler built in so you could peek into other people’s programs, see what was happening.

Here’s the way Apple’s platforms have evolved: You have to tell the Apple II what to do, or it doesn’t do anything. With the Mac, you can do whatever you want, but the basics are already there if that’s all you need. With the iPad, Apple essentially says “Pick from this list of things to do.” I think that’s what makes me sort of uncomfortable about it. You can’t get to the Monitor ROM.

The downside of the Appliance Mentality is the death of hardware tinkering.

‘Curated Computing’

Forrester analyst Sarah Rotman Epps:

The iPad creates a use case for a device that doesn’t do everything your laptop does, targeted at a consumer that uses devices more for consumption than production. The iPad ushers in a new era of personal computing that we call “Curated Computing”—a mode of computing where choice is constrained to deliver less complex, more relevant experiences. Let me repeat that, because it’s the essence of the Curated Computing experience: less choice; more relevance.

The Appliance Mentality, hard at work.

Finally, Gawker Publishes Something Worth Reading

VentureBeat has the details:

Valleywag editor Ryan Tate, irked by an iPad ad, drunkmailed Apple CEO Steve Jobs just after 9:30 last night. To Tate’s shock and delight, Jobs argued back and forth with him until 2:20 AM in four rounds of messages, reproduced below.

Hit the link to read the emails. They’re pretty great. Once again, a Gawker employee looks like a total ass.

Next-gen iPhone Documents Unsealed

CNET:

Brian Hogan, a 21-year-old Redwood City, Calif., resident, found the phone in a bar. But the affidavit prepared by detective Matthew Broad in the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office reveals that an important tip came when Hogan’s roommate, Katherine Martinson, called Apple on April 21 to let them know that he had examined it and sent photographs to back up her claim.

Hogan told her that Gizmodo had offered him $10,000 for the phone, and showed her a camera box containing $5,000 in $100 bills, according to the affidavit. It says: “Martinson said Hogan also told her that he will receive a cash bonus from Gizmodo.com in July, if and when Apple makes an official product announcement regarding the new iPhone.”

The site has also posted copies of the unsealed documents surrounding the case. (PDF warning.)

On the Apple Lisa & Macintosh XL

Mac Observer points out that this Saturday is the 25th anniversary of the Macintosh XL/Lisa project being scrapped:

Apple officially discontinued the Macintosh XL, née Lisa, on April 29, 1985, and the last Lisa rolled off the assembly line at the Carrollton, Texas, factory on May 15. Despite its lack of market acceptance during its initial availability, the Lisa now enjoys strong demand among vintage computer collectors on eBay who recognize its importance as the forerunner to the Macintosh.

Released in 1983, the Lisa was a game-changing machine. The GUI-driven experience — driven by a mouse — was unlike anything the public had seen before. However, the machine was plagued with problems. The custom-built floppy drives failed easily, there was very little software available for the platform and the cost was very high — at $9,995 price tag, the machines sold quite poorly.

The biggest problem for the Lisa was Apple itself. In January 1984, the Macintosh was released at a much lower $2,500 pricetag. The Mac had many more features than the Lisa and a larger software library. The Macintosh outsold the Lisa very quickly, and was soon the system of choice for Apple customers.

Four short months later — April 1984 — Apple released MacWorks, which allowed the Lisa to emulate the Macintosh ROM. This solution was based entirely on the floppy drives — it could not use a hard disk drive for storage. To call it rough is an understatement.

One year later, Apple released the Macintosh XL. In reality, the XL was just re-badged a Lisa that ran Macintosh System 5 in emulation (via MacWorks XL) in a much smoother fashion than the Lisa machines, including hard drive support.

Somewhat surprisingly, the Macintosh XL did fairly well, at least in comparison to the Lisa, which sold only 10,000 units in two years.

The XL was discontinued in September 1985 due to a lack of parts to repair existing machines — their factories had all been retooled to build new Macintosh systems. The Lisa was officially discontinued in August 1986, but the model hadn’t actually been for sale for some time by that point.

In 1986, Apple offered customers the chance to trade in their Lisa or XL systems for $2600 off a new Mac Plus and Hard Disk 20 system. All remaining inventory was destroyed thee years later. Tim Hall of American Heritage:

One September day in 1989 about 2,700 Apple Lisa computers were unceremoniously buried in a landfill in Logan, Utah. In an industry where rapid obsolescence is not only the norm but a goal, the mass burial elicited few tears from anyone except insiders. Yet this prosaic event put an end to perhaps the greatest and most revolutionary failure in the history of computing.

The most interesting thing to me about the Lisa and Macintosh XL era is the fact that Apple had three competing product lines — in 1984, Apple was selling the Apple II line, the Macintosh and the Lisa. In short, Apple’s public offerings were scattered and the company was stretched too thin internally.

Steve Jobs handpicked the best engineers from the II and Lisa teams, crippling their development for the sake of the Macintosh project. He had been kicked off the Lisa project in 1982, and was determined to release a computer that could outsell both the Apple II and the Lisa.

In doing so, he simultaneously changed the PC industry forever and almost tore Apple apart. The chain of events that started in 1982 led to his ousting from the company in May 1985.

It’s pretty easy to see that the XL was a quick and dirty fix to the problem, but considering it was for sale for only 9 months, it’s hard to believe Apple thought it was a viable solution. Simply killing the Lisa would have solved Apple’s problems, but rebadging it as the Macintosh XL muddied the product lines and put sub-par hardware and software on desks of thousand of customers.

That type of decision making is what led Apple into the Dark Ages of the 1990s with several competing and overlapping product lines; the Performa, Quadra, Centris, LC and the Power Macintosh all stem from the Lisa and Macintosh XL philosophy. This table shows just how complicated things became.

Some say that the Apple of today is repeating those mistakes. Leopard was delayed because of the iPhone, the AppleTV continues to languish and there is no news in site about OS X 10.7. Even though there is some overlap in the current product line, it is no where near is confusing as it once was. Time will tell if the lessons of the Macintosh XL have been forgotten. I hope they haven’t, for everyone’s sake.

New iPad Ad Seems Familiar

Arnold Kim:

Apple started airing a new iPad ad tonight called “What is iPad?”. The Ad seems to be a departure from their recent ads with a bit of a gruff narrator walking through what the iPad is. However, it struck me as strangely familiar and I realized that Apple had reincarnated one of the original Apple Newton ads called “What is Newton?” from almost 20 years ago.

It’s eerie.

MobileMe Webmail Beta Announced

Apple’s MobileMe blog:

Today we’re introducing the beta of an all new MobileMe Mail web application, and we’re asking you to try it and let us know what you think. You can sign up at me.com by just logging in to MobileMe Mail and clicking “Request an invitation.” You will receive an email notification when you have been added to the beta and can start using it.

Betas are an unusual thing for Apple. The changes outlined in that blog post look fantastic, though. MobileMe’s webapps are already pretty good, but lack some of the features of other services — mainly Gmail.

Be sure to check out the FAQ.

C4 Conference Canceled

Wolf Rentzsch:

C4 was billed as a Mac indie conference, but at its core C4 was a computer science conference.

I believed the best way to move software forward was to inform Apple programmers about better ways to build software — to infect the best top-downer minds with fertile discontent.

My hope was that developers would care primarily about user experience yet also be passionate about utilizing lingual and tooling advances.

C4 was my attempt to push on the Apple community from the bottom-up.

With that background in place, I hope you can understand how Section 3.3.1 has broken my spirit.

[…]

With resistance to Section 3.3.1 so scattershot and meek, it’s become clear that I haven’t made the impact I wanted with C4. It’s also clear my interests and the Apple programming community’s interests are farther apart than I had hoped.

This is a huge loss to the Apple developer community.

I don’t think canceling C4 is the right move. Giving up doesn’t do anything to help the problem that Section 3.3.1 embodies. It feels like there are some things going on behind the scenes here.