Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 26th Aug 2012 10:28 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless In light of the jury verdict in Apple vs. Samsung, the one-liners and jokes flew back and forth. One in particular, by Dan Frakes, has been copied and pasted all over the web, and it goes like this: "When the iPhone debuted, it was widely criticized for having no buttons/keys. Now people think the iPhone's design is 'obvious'." This is a very common trend in this entire debate that saddens me to no end: the iPhone is being compared to simple feature phones, while in fact, it should be compared to its true predecessor: the PDA. PDAs have always done with few buttons.
Thread beginning with comment 532649
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Revisionist History
by galvanash on Mon 27th Aug 2012 19:46 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Revisionist History"
galvanash
Member since:
2006-01-25

I've read my links, I don't see anything about "AGAIN." The word doesn't appear in the first link in any context. In fact, did you read that Hawkins/Palm got their hands on the first prototype in Spring? Did you miss the part where the Newton was demoed in Summer '92?


Frankly, I don't know which source is right... But you didn't read the link that I posted:

...Both Tandy/Casio and Apple/Sharp gave product updates to the press at winter CES last week, showing working prototypes of the new devices but revealing precious little in the way of specifics.


Winter CES was Jan 1993 in Las Vegas. The link YOU posted was about Summer CES in Chicago, which was June 1993. They are both from the same author.

I acknowledged that the Zoomer was released first. But it wasn't demonstrated until well after the Newton had been (the summer of '92 vs. the summer of '93). Read carefully....


Well it would be Summer 92 vs Winter 92 if they in fact did present a prototype at the Winter CES show as stated in the link I posted. But I do know that Apple's Summer 92 demo was just that - a demo. It was not a fully working prototype, it was an instrumented demo.

http://lowendmac.com/orchard/06/john-sculley-newton-origin.html

Apple rented space to show off the MessagePad in Chicago. All of the MessagePads were tethered to Macs - they were too unreliable to run independently.


That was Summer 92. The demo they did for Winter 92 (Las Vegas) was not instrumented. If the Winter 92 Zoomer prototypes (assuming they did in fact exist) were fully fleshed out, then they were demoed independently at the same event. But I have never been able to find out any more about the supposed Zoomer demo done at Winter 92 CES
- so it may well be a moot point.

Hawkins himself and several sources disagree with you.


Again, sources differ. That is why I still say it doesn't much matter - they were essentially developed and released in tandem. But Ill concede that the book reference you gave is likely more correct than a couple of random internet quotes I have run across over the years. I was not aware of the book to be honest.

Just stressing I was NOT trolling - I was posting information I thought to be accurate. Maybe its not, sorry about that.

It's good to know that you are just trolling and can be ignored. Seriously? You admit that this is horrible evidence but you use it anyway because you like to poke people with sticks... Sad.


Im not trolling. I was making a point. It is just as "correct" to say one or the other came first (even ignoring discrepancies in information). The newton was disclosed to the public first, but the Zoomer was technically available first in retail. I prefer to say the Zoomer was "first" because everyone else ignores it ever existed...

Either point of view is correct, and if you feel like I am poking you with a stick Im sorry.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Revisionist History
by jared_wilkes on Mon 27th Aug 2012 20:12 in reply to "RE[9]: Revisionist History"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

Frankly, I don't know which source is right... But you didn't read the link that I posted:


In fact, I did, but you were already chastizing me to read carefully before you had posted it so I wanted to shut down the finger wagging.

Winter CES was Jan 1993 in Las Vegas. The link YOU posted was about Summer CES in Chicago, which was June 1993. They are both from the same author.


Yes, I read it.

Well it would be Summer 92 vs Winter 92 if they in fact did present a prototype at the Winter CES show as stated in the link I posted. But I do know that Apple's Summer 92 demo was just that - a demo. It was not a fully working prototype, it was an instrumented demo.


Well, no, it would be comparing the Summer of '92 and January of '93. (Claiming Winter '92 in reference to CES when it is in fact in 1993 is a little too slippery for me; why don't we just agree to use the actual dates rather than obscurely timeshifting?)

That was Summer 92. The demo they did for Winter 92 (Las Vegas) was not instrumented. If the Winter 92 Zoomer prototypes (assuming they did in fact exist) were fully fleshed out, then they were demoed independently at the same event. But I have never been able to find out any more about the supposed Zoomer demo done at Winter 92 CES
- so it may well be a moot point.


Well, the Palm book I cite says they didn't receive prototypes at Palm until Spring of '93. I'd rather trust a Palm exec writing the entire history of Palm referencing numerous sources with the aid of a reporter than some commenter on the internet who disagrees with the point, admits the Newton may likely have been first but at worst was contemporaneous, but continues to argue the point even though he keeps admitting he has little to no evidence to support his arguments.

Can we presume that since Hawkins concedes the Newton beat the Zoomer that if a demonstration occurred in January of 1993 that it was actually cruder, less complete than at least one or more of the Newton's demonstration in the summer of '92 or the CES Jan, '93 demo?

Im not trolling. I was making a point. It is just as "correct" to say one or the other came first (even ignoring discrepancies in information). The newton was disclosed to the public first, but the Zoomer was technically available first in retail. I prefer to say the Zoomer was "first" because everyone else ignores it ever existed...


You had earned me to your side at the beginning there: okay, he just likes to argue points for the sake of detail... But then you end with silliness that I cannot accept. Propeling something into Firsthood just because of its obscurity and others's ignorance is just silliness.

Either point of view is correct, and if you feel like I am poking you with a stick Im sorry.


Which point of view? That one or the other was first? It can depend on what you think of as first, but I don't see how either one can be correct.

Of course, it seems you agree with me that the Zoomer does little in terms of establishing originality, invention, innovation ahead of the Newton so on that we can agree.

Edited 2012-08-27 20:15 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[11]: Revisionist History
by galvanash on Mon 27th Aug 2012 23:47 in reply to "RE[10]: Revisionist History"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Claiming Winter '92 in reference to CES when it is in fact in 1993 is a little too slippery for me; why don't we just agree to use the actual dates rather than obscurely timeshifting?


That was the common terminology... CES had seasonal events - and the winter event was "around" new years - sometimes before, sometimes after. It was commonly referred to as "Winter CES", and the year used being the year of the winter season. There is nothing slippery about it.

Well, the Palm book I cite says they didn't receive prototypes at Palm until Spring of '93. I'd rather trust a Palm exec writing the entire history of Palm referencing numerous sources with the aid of a reporter than some commenter on the internet who disagrees with the point, admits the Newton may likely have been first but at worst was contemporaneous, but continues to argue the point even though he keeps admitting he has little to no evidence to support his arguments.


??? I agreed that the book was likely a better source... Like I said I did not know about the book.

Can we presume that since Hawkins concedes the Newton beat the Zoomer that if a demonstration occurred in January of 1993 that it was actually cruder, less complete than at least one or more of the Newton's demonstration in the summer of '92 or the CES Jan, '93 demo?


Probably. I was just conjecturing.

You had earned me to your side at the beginning there: okay, he just likes to argue points for the sake of detail... But then you end with silliness that I cannot accept. Propeling something into Firsthood just because of its obscurity and others's ignorance is just silliness.


Ugh... Im a fan of the Zoomer - so I name drop it when it can. It is equally worthy of the title of being the first touchscreen PDA. I have never said or implied that the Newton was a derivative of it - in fact I posted the opposite numerous times.

What I find to be siliness is that you are so bent out of shape over which one deserves "Firsthood". I think they both do - equally - as I said before.

Of course, it seems you agree with me that the Zoomer does little in terms of establishing originality, invention, innovation ahead of the Newton so on that we can agree.


Yes.... and vise versa.

Reply Parent Score: 2