Live data from Hacker News

Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

righto.com

91–100 of 163 posts

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#91
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fake it till you make it.

Well, he’s dead and I’m still here. I don’t think he made it.

I remember reading something by Art Spiegelman, whose father was a Holocaust survivor, about how his life felt unimportant because nothing could compare to what his father went through.

But then, he rhetorically asked, if surviving the concentration camp was success, did that mean the vast majority who didn't were losers?

And I think his father said something to the effect, that it was random, there was no "survival of the fittest", so no, matter of factly, the dead were not ones who failed.

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which like the GUI was ripped off from someone else: The GUI was stolen from Xerox, and the switching power supplies were ripped of from an oscilloscope company, Hewlett-Packard. Didn't Woz work for them. Hmmmm...

The GUI wasn’t stolen. It was licensed. That it was stolen is completely false. And on switching power — did any other computer company think to use it? Apple did. And borrowing that tech did revolutionize computer power supplies.

> The GUI wasn’t stolen. It was licensed. That it was stolen is completely false.

Not only was it not stolen, several Xerox PARC people moved over to Apple since they wanted to see their ideas actually commercialized and not squandered like Xerox was doing, so a lot of it was even the same people!

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is debunking this claim by Steve Jobs: "That switching power supply was as revolutionary as the Apple II logic board was," Jobs later said. "Rod doesn't get a lot of credit for this in the history books but he should. Every computer now uses switching power supplies, and they all rip off Rod Holt's design."’

Which like the GUI was ripped off from someone else: The GUI was stolen from Xerox, and the switching power supplies were ripped of from an oscilloscope company, Hewlett-Packard. Didn't Woz work for them. Hmmmm...

> The GUI was stolen from Xerox

Stolen...right. Xerox invited Apple's engineers to tour PARC and then Apple gave them millions of dollars of shares which Xerox later sold for a hefty profit. IIRC they made more off the Apple stock sale then sales of the Alto and Star.

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#94
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wish your blog articles had the published date at the top.

It's my subtle protest against the HN belief that people need to be warned against articles from previous years. That said, it's a bit alarming to realize I wrote the article 9 years ago.

Lack of dates in articles annoyed me way before i started reading HN. So i don't see the problem (didn't know that was a thing on HN), but i respect your decision.

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still baffles my mind that Xerox is not a multi-trillion dollar company today.

Sadly, no business opportunity can be so idiot-proof that management can't prove themselves to be better idiots.

What would you have done differently than Xerox management?

Probably you, and most people on HN haven't been paying attention to them in a long time, but what happened in the last 15 years or so, is that they decided to diversify out from copiers into services.

It sounds vaguely plausible, people obviously deal with documents mostly on computers and not paper these days, so why can't they help with that?

Eventually they acquired a fairly big, but not a household name, outsourcing company called ACS. I used to wonder why Google couldn't do the same stuff, but they did in fact outsource, probably because it was the data processing equivalent of cleaning toilets.

But then a notorious corporate raider, aka Carl Icahn, came in and forced management to break up the company in the name of shareholder value, isolating the copiers in one business, and the document services in another, basically ACS under a new name.

Who's right? Diversify or get back to basics? It seems sometimes it's just random. You can come up with platitudes justifying either.

This may kind of seem like normal corporate America, but it just seems a bit uncharitable to call the CEO an idiot when you look at how the people running GameStop or whatever have had things a bit easier with billions being thrown at them.

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is neither making or debunking that claim. It is debunking the claim that apple revolutionized computer power supplies by borrowing the switching power supply design used in oscilloscopes. It’s the second sentence of the post.

So why didn’t any other computer maker do it?

They did. Read the article.

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which like the GUI was ripped off from someone else: The GUI was stolen from Xerox, and the switching power supplies were ripped of from an oscilloscope company, Hewlett-Packard. Didn't Woz work for them. Hmmmm...

The GUI wasn’t stolen. It was licensed. That it was stolen is completely false. And on switching power — did any other computer company think to use it? Apple did. And borrowing that tech did revolutionize computer power supplies.

Read the article. Many computer companies used them before apple. Apple's use didnt revolutionize anything according to the article, because it was already in common use before them. Did we read the same thing?

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#98
post #82
post #44

And now power supplies are getting another step smaller and more efficient by switching from silicon transistors to GaN. ( https://www.cui.com/blog/how-gallium-nitride-gan-enables-sma... )

I've been using a GaN-based power supply for my MacBook Pro and it's just as good as advertised. Slightly bigger than a deck of cards, yet it runs cooler than the stock unit. Hopefully this tech finds its way into more devices as it gets cheaper. It would be neat to have GaN based inverters for electric cars.

Tesla use silicon carbide which has favorable temp and reliability over Gan for higher voltage operation.

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#99
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still baffles my mind that Xerox is not a multi-trillion dollar company today.

If you are doing something so well and making tons of money, why spend money on what will absolutely ruin your core business? Personal computers weren't just going to supplement the copier business, they would seriously ruin it. But there was also a chance computers would flop so why spend the money on trying to ruin your core business and not succeed? People found uses for computers that the pioneers could never ima…

Your summary doesn't address and can't possibly apply to the period from ~1980 to 2005, during which personal computers were well established.

Also, it's the exact same generic story people tell about, say, Kodak.

Re: Apple didn't revolutionize power supplies; new transistors did (2012)

#100
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wish your blog articles had the published date at the top.

It's my subtle protest against the HN belief that people need to be warned against articles from previous years. That said, it's a bit alarming to realize I wrote the article 9 years ago.

Nice article, Ken. I noticed that all the Google patent links are broken. For example, https://www.google.com/patents?id=RfA9AAAAEBAJ should be https://patents.google.com/patent/US4677366 .
Post reply on HN