home.social

#applehistory — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #applehistory, aggregated by home.social.

  1. I stood in front of this little machine and was completely mesmerized.

    Apple Macintosh Classic II (1991) - the very last black-and-white compact Macintosh Apple ever made.

    9-inch monochrome screen, 16 MHz 68030 processor, perfect all-in-one design. Even after 35 years it still looks incredibly clean, elegant and timeless.

    Sometimes the old machines have a "soul" that modern computers just can't replicate anymore.
    Or it's just me getting old now 🥲

    #Macintosh #VintageApple #RetroComputing #AppleHistory #History #Computer #Apple #Mac #Museum #Blog #Thoughts

  2. I stood in front of this little machine and was completely mesmerized.

    Apple Macintosh Classic II (1991) - the very last black-and-white compact Macintosh Apple ever made.

    9-inch monochrome screen, 16 MHz 68030 processor, perfect all-in-one design. Even after 35 years it still looks incredibly clean, elegant and timeless.

    Sometimes the old machines have a "soul" that modern computers just can't replicate anymore.
    Or it's just me getting old now 🥲

    #Macintosh #VintageApple #RetroComputing #AppleHistory #History #Computer #Apple #Mac #Museum #Blog #Thoughts

  3. I stood in front of this little machine and was completely mesmerized.

    Apple Macintosh Classic II (1991) - the very last black-and-white compact Macintosh Apple ever made.

    9-inch monochrome screen, 16 MHz 68030 processor, perfect all-in-one design. Even after 35 years it still looks incredibly clean, elegant and timeless.

    Sometimes the old machines have a "soul" that modern computers just can't replicate anymore.
    Or it's just me getting old now 🥲

    #Macintosh #VintageApple #RetroComputing #AppleHistory #History #Computer #Apple #Mac #Museum #Blog #Thoughts

  4. 🔍 Behold the digital graveyard for Apple's dearly departed products, curated by someone with too much time on their hands. 😂 Apparently, listing Apple's product fatalities is a full-time hobby now—because why innovate when you can just alphabetize corporate tombstones? ⚰️💀
    killedbyapple.theden.sh/ #digitalgraveyard #Applehistory #productfailures #techhumor #innovation #HackerNews #ngated

  5. 🔍 Behold the digital graveyard for Apple's dearly departed products, curated by someone with too much time on their hands. 😂 Apparently, listing Apple's product fatalities is a full-time hobby now—because why innovate when you can just alphabetize corporate tombstones? ⚰️💀
    killedbyapple.theden.sh/ #digitalgraveyard #Applehistory #productfailures #techhumor #innovation #HackerNews #ngated

  6. 🔍 Behold the digital graveyard for Apple's dearly departed products, curated by someone with too much time on their hands. 😂 Apparently, listing Apple's product fatalities is a full-time hobby now—because why innovate when you can just alphabetize corporate tombstones? ⚰️💀
    killedbyapple.theden.sh/ #digitalgraveyard #Applehistory #productfailures #techhumor #innovation #HackerNews #ngated

  7. 🔍 Behold the digital graveyard for Apple's dearly departed products, curated by someone with too much time on their hands. 😂 Apparently, listing Apple's product fatalities is a full-time hobby now—because why innovate when you can just alphabetize corporate tombstones? ⚰️💀
    killedbyapple.theden.sh/ #digitalgraveyard #Applehistory #productfailures #techhumor #innovation #HackerNews #ngated

  8. 🔍 Behold the digital graveyard for Apple's dearly departed products, curated by someone with too much time on their hands. 😂 Apparently, listing Apple's product fatalities is a full-time hobby now—because why innovate when you can just alphabetize corporate tombstones? ⚰️💀
    killedbyapple.theden.sh/ #digitalgraveyard #Applehistory #productfailures #techhumor #innovation #HackerNews #ngated

  9. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  10. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  11. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  12. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  13. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  14. 42 years ago today (1984), Apple released the Apple IIc.

    It was their first “portable” computer — sort of. No built-in display or battery, but compact, lightweight, and ready to go with a handle. Basically the MacBook Air of its floppy-disk era.

    #AppleIIc #RetroComputing #AppleHistory #VintageTech #apple

  15. 42 years ago today (1984), Apple released the Apple IIc.

    It was their first “portable” computer — sort of. No built-in display or battery, but compact, lightweight, and ready to go with a handle. Basically the MacBook Air of its floppy-disk era.

    #AppleIIc #RetroComputing #AppleHistory #VintageTech #apple

  16. 42 years ago today (1984), Apple released the Apple IIc.

    It was their first “portable” computer — sort of. No built-in display or battery, but compact, lightweight, and ready to go with a handle. Basically the MacBook Air of its floppy-disk era.

    #AppleIIc #RetroComputing #AppleHistory #VintageTech #apple

  17. 42 years ago today (1984), Apple released the Apple IIc.

    It was their first “portable” computer — sort of. No built-in display or battery, but compact, lightweight, and ready to go with a handle. Basically the MacBook Air of its floppy-disk era.

    #AppleIIc #RetroComputing #AppleHistory #VintageTech #apple

  18. 42 years ago today (1984), Apple released the Apple IIc.

    It was their first “portable” computer — sort of. No built-in display or battery, but compact, lightweight, and ready to go with a handle. Basically the MacBook Air of its floppy-disk era.

    #AppleIIc #RetroComputing #AppleHistory #VintageTech #apple

  19. Wow! I’ve never heard of "General Magic" before. A fascinating short documentary about a company whose people, products and ideas were simply too far ahead of their time.

    #Apple #AppleHistory

    youtube.com/watch?v=zYQfTwQANbw

  20. Wow! I’ve never heard of "General Magic" before. A fascinating short documentary about a company whose people, products and ideas were simply too far ahead of their time.

    #Apple #AppleHistory

    youtube.com/watch?v=zYQfTwQANbw

  21. Wow! I’ve never heard of "General Magic" before. A fascinating short documentary about a company whose people, products and ideas were simply too far ahead of their time.

    #Apple #AppleHistory

    youtube.com/watch?v=zYQfTwQANbw

  22. Wow! I’ve never heard of "General Magic" before. A fascinating short documentary about a company whose people, products and ideas were simply too far ahead of their time.

    #Apple #AppleHistory

    youtube.com/watch?v=zYQfTwQANbw

  23. Wow! I’ve never heard of "General Magic" before. A fascinating short documentary about a company whose people, products and ideas were simply too far ahead of their time.

    #Apple #AppleHistory

    youtube.com/watch?v=zYQfTwQANbw

  24. David Pogue ha pubblicato il libro Apple: The First 50 Years, che esplora la storia dell'azienda. La pubblicazione coincide con il 50° anniversario di Apple, fondata il 1° aprile 1976.

    #davidpogue #applehistory #techbook

  25. David Pogue ha pubblicato il libro Apple: The First 50 Years, che esplora la storia dell'azienda. La pubblicazione coincide con il 50° anniversario di Apple, fondata il 1° aprile 1976.

    #davidpogue #applehistory #techbook

  26. David Pogue ha pubblicato il libro Apple: The First 50 Years, che esplora la storia dell'azienda. La pubblicazione coincide con il 50° anniversario di Apple, fondata il 1° aprile 1976.

    #davidpogue #applehistory #techbook