Apple began the eighties with two major flops under its belt: the Apple III and the LISA. Both machines were attempts at breaking into the business market. They were technologically advanced, but major flaws prevented their success. Read the story at Low End Mac.
First, he knows Wozniak (someone that actually knows hardware and software), then he is able to hijack the Mac project after his Lisa failed, and then Apple to the rescue again after the NeXT failure.
And all the while, being a complet a-hole to all the people around him doing the real work.
Newton – almost their but Apple pullled the plug too early
eMate – precursor to the toilet seat iBook
eWorld – An Apple branded ISP
Apple also tried their hand at a web browser called “Rocket Dog” or something along those lines.
Apple’s browser was CyberDog. A lot of people liked it, but it was apparently quite quirky.
Dan Knight, lowendmac.com
made, as i recall, with the nifty opendoc techmology, shame opendoc never took off
Wiki on OpenDoc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDoc
No , the first failure of Apple whas its closed platform , software and Hardware , and they opened there solution to all others the situation would be very different today.
I remember we had one of those monstrosities at my primary school. I don’t think anyone remembered how to work it, though. We all used Archimedes instead (yes, my school does seem to have a fine track record of buying doomed machines).
It amazing that Jobs would plunge a cool million to get hold of Xerox PARCs technology, when most people would have considered retiring after making millions on the Apple II. It is quite clear that Jobs was willing to take risks so early in his career.
I wonder how much Bill Gates payed for the PARC’s technology.
The Macintosh introduced several GUI concepts that are taken for granted now since all OSes, especially Windows, also use them. I suspect Bill just copied the Mac since he had access to early versions to create Word.
All in all a very interesting read on L.E.M.
In the early-mid ’90s, Apple actually did open up their Mac hardware to clone-makers, but the results were catastrophic for Apple.
People bought the cheaper clones, only to have a hefty number of them fail, and people called Apple to complain. The clones only took sales from Apple’s pie, not Wintel’s, and then Apple ended up with higher support staff costs.
So Apple bought back the clone licenses with a LOT of money, and I suspect Apple learned their lesson on the “advantages” of open hardware.
pippin
IBM also learned the value of having its hardware and software controlled by other companies! They completely lost their machine!
Steve Jobs was a meanie then! Steve Jobs is still a meanie!
This article is very simplistic and tells nothing that hasn’t already been said. Also, I just glanced through it and already spotted a couple of grave mistakes:
“Bill Atkinson was among this group; he would later design all of the graphics for the Lisa and Macintosh.” What about Susan Kare?
“The team hoped that the machine would require no software manuals.” That is not true if you carefully read what Jef Raskin written in 1979: “Large manuals, or many of them (large manuals are a sure sign of bad design) is taboo.”
It is true, from the accounts of several sources, that Steve had… interpersonal differences issues with some of his co-workers, and personally I think it does not speak highly of a business leader who needs to bully the people working for them to feel good.
I would definitely count that as a minus against Steve and at the same time I have to say that I’m not sure I wouldn’t do the same [but I’ll never find that out and I would be tainted by the knowledge of how things went for Steve anyway].
OTOH if there is a huge credit for Steve [and this will be a topic of scorn by the Wintel afficionados] it’s that if it hadn’t been for him, Apple would be the size of Amstrad right now, or gone the way of the Amiga. If you see what the Apple experience is today as compared to earlier, there is a huge difference. Steve has done a wonderful job in turning Apple around from heading for the wall to a very lively, trendsetting company.
It makes the Linux crowd truly believe there could be a future for UNIX distributions, it makes Microsoft push the envelope a bit harder and it gives the Apple faithful something to point at and say “you see, we knew it was going to work out ok”.
Apple should be dead by now. The fact that it isn’t is due to the hard work of many talented people under the guidance of Steve who, together with being an assclown in general and a royal pain in the neck in particular, still had the vision of making something that wasn’t just another ordinary hardware company. You can’t take that away from him.
Would I like to work for him? I honestly don’t know. I know a guy who does and who thinks very highly of him, but I’d have to see it to believe it. Do I think he has it in him to make something out of a company? I’ve got two words for you: Apple & Pixar.
“It is true, from the accounts of several sources, that Steve had… interpersonal differences issues with some of his co-workers, and personally I think it does not speak highly of a business leader who needs to bully the people working for them to feel good. “
to put it lightly, what he did to the woz was unforgivable, and losing raskin was one of the worst things to ever happen to apple.
“OTOH if there is a huge credit for Steve [and this will be a topic of scorn by the Wintel afficionados] it’s that if it hadn’t been for him, Apple would be the size of Amstrad right now, or gone the way of the Amiga. If you see what the Apple experience is today as compared to earlier, there is a huge difference. Steve has done a wonderful job in turning Apple around from heading for the wall to a very lively, trendsetting company. “
Literally from day 1 there were people who said that the company wasnt going to make it, but so far they have managed to pull through even after spectacular failures. I would say that the return of steve wasnt half as important as the departure of gil amelio. what steve did was bring them back to the origional ideas (steve is a big fan of putting expensive machines into pretty boxes). To be honest, I would say the only move he has done since he’s been back that was both new and insanely smart was getting into the music business.
“Apple should be dead by now. The fact that it isn’t is due to the hard work of many talented people under the guidance of Steve who, together with being an assclown in general and a royal pain in the neck in particular, still had the vision of making something that wasn’t just another ordinary hardware company. You can’t take that away from him. “
first off, that ranks amoung the greatest descriptions of jobs ive ever seen. 😀
The woz was a computer design genius by any meter. Jef Raskin spent his entire life trying to design technology around the human. Jobs? He wants to sell a pretty user experience. When the board gave him full reign the first round, we got a computer that retailed at 10k. after almost sinking apple, he went on to NeXT, making those cubes that retaild at 15k. after that, he went to pixar, and almost killed it by forcing everyone to use next cubes. Steve has great vision, but he seems to be totally out of touch with what people are willing to pay. Sometimes he manages to hit a sweet spot and create the high end market (like with ipods) most of the time though, we just get another lisa iteration.
Steves greatest talent is, and alwas has been, surrounding himself with genius. His expectations are sky high, and his teams (generally) manage to meet them. That makes him a fantastic manager. Maybe not a good human being, maybe not a fun guy to work for, but definately a great manager.
“In the early-mid ’90s, Apple actually did open up their Mac hardware to clone-makers, but the results were catastrophic for Apple. ”
Apple whas created in the 70’s ,in the start of the 80’s , at the start of the clone from IBM they where less then reliable too , but they improved with time.
” People bought the cheaper clones, only to have a hefty number of them fail, and people called Apple to complain. The clones only took sales from Apple’s pie, not Wintel’s, and then Apple ended up with higher support staff costs. ”
I know the history , but if they had started with clone at the start the history would be different as IBM only came with a PC of there own much more later , also the problem whas not just hardware Apple add a closed OS that no one else could write software for at that time.
Its not the opening of the hardware wich whas the problem , it whas the one who did took adavantage of it at that moment in time where not professional. Apple never add Open Hardware , they licensed there architecture.
A recent example whas Nvidia vs ATI , until recently ATI whas the one making there video cards only as Nvidia make only the architecture and the chipset but dont make cards of there own, they have thousands of company of cards brand making different cards for them. It whas a battle of many against 1 , since ATI started to open up there achitecture to others and alllow access to there chip and allow others to make cards , there income as increased , there numbers made have increased , the solution offered have increased , and the driver as improved too. And yes some card where bad at the start , but they improved.
Apple arent making the right choice if they made availaible an x86 platform they could regain another chunk of the market , and increase there income , they could offer it the same way they offer it for PPC by choosing on the hardware they deem is proper for there OS , that they have tested to the max.
I think he was referring to LisaGraf and QuickDraw, not the icons.
I would also like to read about the history of the IBM-pc.