21–30 of 60 posts
He left an indelible impression on all of us that day that is still resonating months later. Made all of us want to go build something!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure that would have been as enlightening as you think. They worked together on the Apple II, not the Mac. And the 6502 boxes were all Woz on the inside. His design, his software. Jobs added the box, the polish and the marketing. But all the look and feel wizardry and attention to detail was still in his future. Apple bootstrapped by selling a machine that was fundamentally the work of a single hacker. Edit: I sh…
You have put into words my thoughts exactly. To be sure, i am a bit of a woz fanboy, having lived through the 80's and poring over his work. Though i don't begrudge Jobs the fame and fortune, i do think a lot of people overlook woz. To me, he is probably the single most influential pioneer in the history of personal computing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe we're talking past each other. It would be ridiculous to claim that Steve would've said "Woz, you should consider this design pattern or abstraction to solve that problem you're having". I imagine it would have been more general points about the user experience he hoped for.
But that's the thing: the Apple II simply had no "user experience" in the sense we understand today. You turned it on and got an Integer BASIC prompt (or the monitor). That software was a stripped down version of BASICs that existed elsewhere, not something meaningfully "improved" by Apple (except in the sense of running amazingly well in 8kb of RAM) it was hand written (hand assembled I believe) by Woz. Eventually,…
I thought the first computer that Woz made had a mouse and GUI though ("borrowed" from Xerox PARC), am I remembering wrong? The Lisa was started in 1978 way before Woz left.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe we're talking past each other. It would be ridiculous to claim that Steve would've said "Woz, you should consider this design pattern or abstraction to solve that problem you're having". I imagine it would have been more general points about the user experience he hoped for.
But that's the thing: the Apple II simply had no "user experience" in the sense we understand today. You turned it on and got an Integer BASIC prompt (or the monitor). That software was a stripped down version of BASICs that existed elsewhere, not something meaningfully "improved" by Apple (except in the sense of running amazingly well in 8kb of RAM) it was hand written (hand assembled I believe) by Woz. Eventually,…
Of course there is an user experience element on an Apple II. You just have to put the II in the context of the microcomputers if its time. It came in a plastic box, you could hook up your TV and you could display color and make music and sound effects in the speaker. You turned it on and you got a BASIC language interpreter instantly. You could connect a cassette recorder (an 8-track would do) and save your programs.
Compare that with the average computer of 1977:
http://www.old-computers.com/museum/year.asp?st=1&y=1977
and you'll see the "user experience" of an Apple II was miles ahead what most of the competition could offer (monochrome text on a screen, fan noise, metal cases, serial terminals, no BASIC...) at much higher prices.
People often compare the II to other 8-bit micros like the Atari 400/800 and the VIC family, but forget they were launched 2 and 3 years after the II respectively.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would Steve have said about the software? Have you actually used Integer BASIC? Looked through the red book at the code samples they shipped with the machine? Seriously, it's 100% Woz. The case, and the idea of selling it as a preassembled machine clearly came from Jobs. And the hustle required to actually sell and market them was all his. But I'm not kidding: Jobs' technical work lay in the future. His skills w…
> What would Steve have said about the software? Why are OS X and iOS APIs riddled with NS prefix? Who founded NEXTStep? Was Woz there? Was Woz at Pixar? Not to diminish the input of the man, but: Steve without Woz would still be known for something. Woz without Steve? Would probably hack happily at HP.
Reminds me what an incredible guy Woz is as well. Makes me wish I could have been there as the two of them debated the future of the personal computer in their garage.
Not sure that would have been as enlightening as you think. They worked together on the Apple II, not the Mac. And the 6502 boxes were all Woz on the inside. His design, his software. Jobs added the box, the polish and the marketing. But all the look and feel wizardry and attention to detail was still in his future. Apple bootstrapped by selling a machine that was fundamentally the work of a single hacker. Edit: I sh…
It's pointless to try to determine who was more important to Apple's initial success anyway. It's like trying to figure out whether the calves or the thighs contribute more to a vertical jump. Try keeping your legs perfectly straight at the knees and jumping with just the feet: You'll only get a couple inches off the floor. Now try keeping the ankle locked and jump off the heels with your thighs: You'll get a little higher. But if you take a full natural jump with your upper and lower leg, you'll jump far higher than the addition of both before. The point is, sometimes synergies just can't be broken down into obvious component forces.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's the thing: the Apple II simply had no "user experience" in the sense we understand today. You turned it on and got an Integer BASIC prompt (or the monitor). That software was a stripped down version of BASICs that existed elsewhere, not something meaningfully "improved" by Apple (except in the sense of running amazingly well in 8kb of RAM) it was hand written (hand assembled I believe) by Woz. Eventually,…
> the Apple II simply had no "user experience" in the sense we understand today Of course there is an user experience element on an Apple II. You just have to put the II in the context of the microcomputers if its time. It came in a plastic box, you could hook up your TV and you could display color and make music and sound effects in the speaker. You turned it on and you got a BASIC language interpreter instantly. Yo…
My point earlier was that attributing this to Jobs purely because of an intuition that "Jobs does UX" is incorrect, and speaks more broadly to my point that Woz has been terribly shafted by history.
I mean, when a site called "Hacker News" no less can't speak unanimously to this man's genius, something is terribly wrong.