well, it is my believe that Apple wasn't as historically important as they themselves like to stress

Ofcourse, marketing talk is always very clever. But they are always loosely based on facts. And one such fact is that the Apple I was the first machine that could be classed as a Personal Computer, and is really the grandfather of the computers we know today. It was the first small, affordable computer, with a keyboard for input, and a screen for output.

Another fact is that the GUI introduced in the Mac/Lisa was one of the first commercially available GUIs, and the first GUI on a personal computer, and basically the defining GUI, because all later GUIs resemble the early Lisa/Mac GUIs quite closely. I think most people today can work with an original Lisa/Mac almost instantly, because it will simply look and feel very familiar. Try doing that with the original IBM PC and DOS 1.0 :)

Ofcourse it is also a fact that the Mac was the first to adopt many new technologies as standard, such as CD/DVD burning, USB, Firewire, and ofcourse it was the first personal computer to offer 64 bit processing (no, Alpha doesn't count, it's workstation class, not affordable. Opteron doesn't count either, while the CPU itself was cheap enough, it was not available in personal computers at the time Apple released the G5, only servers and big workstations).

This has nothing to do with what you believe in, these are just facts.
Posted on 2004-01-26 07:44:10 by Henk-Jan
Let's see... 40gig additional harddrive space, faster RAM, DVD burner, 15" flat panel display, speakers... at a lower price. Including more software. And the ability to run a lot more software. Gee, what would I choose?
Posted on 2004-01-26 08:36:01 by f0dder
Let's see, 32 bit only, 2 gb memory limit, no fast vector processing, bad syncing, tons of legacy crap that I never use anyway, no option for dual CPUs, no Firewire, no gigabit ethernet, slower memory subsystem, gee what would I choose?

It's not as black-and-white as the specs. But you won't know what you're missing unless you've tried it.
Posted on 2004-01-26 09:29:39 by Henk-Jan
32bit only + 2gb memory limit is hardly a problem for... like, what, 99% of people who'd buy a machine in this price category? FireWire would be a cheap extra, and Gigabit ethernet (if you really need this...) isn't all that expensive anymore either. Clearly you should be able to get both for less than the price of a 15" flat panel.

The Mac is probably a fine machine and everything, but it's more expensive, and doesn't have nearly as much software. For me, there isn't really any 'choice' involved - getting the PC system would be a given.
Posted on 2004-01-26 09:37:59 by f0dder
For you yes, for someone else probably not.
So don't confuse your opinion/needs with that of others.
And certainly don't judge computers on their specs alone...
As an example... When my dad bought his first PC in 1989, we have had a C64 for a few years already... The PC had about 10x the specs of the C64:
C64 is ~1 MHz, 64k memory.
XT is ~10 MHz, 640k memory.

Which one did you think was the computer I used most? Which one did you think had the WYSIWYG word processor? Which one did you think was the faster/better game machine? Etc etc.
Posted on 2004-01-26 09:54:42 by Henk-Jan
The ideas are not enough as the technology and culture must be willing to imbrace the ideas. It was obvious from the inventor's perspective that windowed GUI's were advantagious, but it took several years to refine and comercialize the idea. Apple was very key in the adoption of the technology by the culture.

After taking a very long vacation with his money from Apple, Steve Jobs worked very hard to get funding for Next computers - I remember reading about it for years before there was an actual product. Ultimately, they were just another step in the evolution of GUI's -- a test bed for new ideas. The best ideas of Next were propagated to other windowing systems.
Posted on 2004-01-26 10:28:56 by bitRAKE