Mixing
Why was the original Apple Computer labeled as the Apple I?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
16
down vote
favorite
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later. From what I've been able to find, it seems that since Woz was the sole engineer in those early days, once he finished whatever work was necessary to produce the 1, he went to work on the II.
My question is to any citation or stories around the foresight that led the Steves to silk screen a '1' on the board as it suggests that there would be a '2' or a successor otherwise. I have found that when Woz finished the 1 he already had in mind what he wanted to do for the II, but from a marketing perspective (and even the uncertainty of the 1's success), it doesn't seem to be a good idea to label something as a '1' since it implies something better to come.
I would have thought that the initial run of boards could have omitted the '1' and just been labeled the Apple Computer and when the II was in the works it could have been revised, but the only image I've ever seen has the digit.
Does anyone know more as to why it was labeled this way?
apple-i
asked Aug 23 at 17:19
bjb
4,5601155
add a comment |Â
up vote
16
down vote
favorite
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later. From what I've been able to find, it seems that since Woz was the sole engineer in those early days, once he finished whatever work was necessary to produce the 1, he went to work on the II.
My question is to any citation or stories around the foresight that led the Steves to silk screen a '1' on the board as it suggests that there would be a '2' or a successor otherwise. I have found that when Woz finished the 1 he already had in mind what he wanted to do for the II, but from a marketing perspective (and even the uncertainty of the 1's success), it doesn't seem to be a good idea to label something as a '1' since it implies something better to come.
I would have thought that the initial run of boards could have omitted the '1' and just been labeled the Apple Computer and when the II was in the works it could have been revised, but the only image I've ever seen has the digit.
Does anyone know more as to why it was labeled this way?
apple-i
asked Aug 23 at 17:19
bjb
4,5601155
2
My understanding, admittedly not from having done any in depth research, is that the Apple I was never really intended to be a commercial product as such -- the initial sales were to other members of the Homebrew Computer Club and to local shops, and at the time they began the purpose of selling them was simply to fund the first production run, and possibly the development of the Apple II. When the board layout was designed, there was probably only the vaguest of ideas in their minds that it could be a commercially viable product. Marketing tactics were probably far from their thoughts.
– Jules
Aug 23 at 17:54
1
@Jules WHen doing the design, Woz maybe didn't have big business in mind, but when Jobs did collect money for a production run, it was clearly a comercial venue. Their 25,000 USD upfront investment (more than 100 grand of todays money) isn't anywhere near what (rather average) guys spend on a hobby project. Especially not when it means borrowing it.
– Raffzahn
Aug 23 at 18:00
add a comment |Â
up vote
16
down vote
favorite
up vote
16
down vote
favorite
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later. From what I've been able to find, it seems that since Woz was the sole engineer in those early days, once he finished whatever work was necessary to produce the 1, he went to work on the II.
My question is to any citation or stories around the foresight that led the Steves to silk screen a '1' on the board as it suggests that there would be a '2' or a successor otherwise. I have found that when Woz finished the 1 he already had in mind what he wanted to do for the II, but from a marketing perspective (and even the uncertainty of the 1's success), it doesn't seem to be a good idea to label something as a '1' since it implies something better to come.
I would have thought that the initial run of boards could have omitted the '1' and just been labeled the Apple Computer and when the II was in the works it could have been revised, but the only image I've ever seen has the digit.
Does anyone know more as to why it was labeled this way?
apple-i
asked Aug 23 at 17:19
bjb
4,5601155
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later. From what I've been able to find, it seems that since Woz was the sole engineer in those early days, once he finished whatever work was necessary to produce the 1, he went to work on the II.
My question is to any citation or stories around the foresight that led the Steves to silk screen a '1' on the board as it suggests that there would be a '2' or a successor otherwise. I have found that when Woz finished the 1 he already had in mind what he wanted to do for the II, but from a marketing perspective (and even the uncertainty of the 1's success), it doesn't seem to be a good idea to label something as a '1' since it implies something better to come.
I would have thought that the initial run of boards could have omitted the '1' and just been labeled the Apple Computer and when the II was in the works it could have been revised, but the only image I've ever seen has the digit.
Does anyone know more as to why it was labeled this way?
apple-i
asked Aug 23 at 17:19
bjb
4,5601155
asked Aug 23 at 17:19
bjb
4,5601155
asked Aug 23 at 17:19
bjb
4,5601155
asked Aug 23 at 17:19
bjb
4,5601155
4,5601155
2
My understanding, admittedly not from having done any in depth research, is that the Apple I was never really intended to be a commercial product as such -- the initial sales were to other members of the Homebrew Computer Club and to local shops, and at the time they began the purpose of selling them was simply to fund the first production run, and possibly the development of the Apple II. When the board layout was designed, there was probably only the vaguest of ideas in their minds that it could be a commercially viable product. Marketing tactics were probably far from their thoughts.
– Jules
Aug 23 at 17:54
1
@Jules WHen doing the design, Woz maybe didn't have big business in mind, but when Jobs did collect money for a production run, it was clearly a comercial venue. Their 25,000 USD upfront investment (more than 100 grand of todays money) isn't anywhere near what (rather average) guys spend on a hobby project. Especially not when it means borrowing it.
– Raffzahn
Aug 23 at 18:00
add a comment |Â
2
My understanding, admittedly not from having done any in depth research, is that the Apple I was never really intended to be a commercial product as such -- the initial sales were to other members of the Homebrew Computer Club and to local shops, and at the time they began the purpose of selling them was simply to fund the first production run, and possibly the development of the Apple II. When the board layout was designed, there was probably only the vaguest of ideas in their minds that it could be a commercially viable product. Marketing tactics were probably far from their thoughts.
– Jules
Aug 23 at 17:54
1
@Jules WHen doing the design, Woz maybe didn't have big business in mind, but when Jobs did collect money for a production run, it was clearly a comercial venue. Their 25,000 USD upfront investment (more than 100 grand of todays money) isn't anywhere near what (rather average) guys spend on a hobby project. Especially not when it means borrowing it.
– Raffzahn
Aug 23 at 18:00
2
2
My understanding, admittedly not from having done any in depth research, is that the Apple I was never really intended to be a commercial product as such -- the initial sales were to other members of the Homebrew Computer Club and to local shops, and at the time they began the purpose of selling them was simply to fund the first production run, and possibly the development of the Apple II. When the board layout was designed, there was probably only the vaguest of ideas in their minds that it could be a commercially viable product. Marketing tactics were probably far from their thoughts.
– Jules
Aug 23 at 17:54
My understanding, admittedly not from having done any in depth research, is that the Apple I was never really intended to be a commercial product as such -- the initial sales were to other members of the Homebrew Computer Club and to local shops, and at the time they began the purpose of selling them was simply to fund the first production run, and possibly the development of the Apple II. When the board layout was designed, there was probably only the vaguest of ideas in their minds that it could be a commercially viable product. Marketing tactics were probably far from their thoughts.
– Jules
Aug 23 at 17:54
1
1
@Jules WHen doing the design, Woz maybe didn't have big business in mind, but when Jobs did collect money for a production run, it was clearly a comercial venue. Their 25,000 USD upfront investment (more than 100 grand of todays money) isn't anywhere near what (rather average) guys spend on a hobby project. Especially not when it means borrowing it.
– Raffzahn
Aug 23 at 18:00
@Jules WHen doing the design, Woz maybe didn't have big business in mind, but when Jobs did collect money for a production run, it was clearly a comercial venue. Their 25,000 USD upfront investment (more than 100 grand of todays money) isn't anywhere near what (rather average) guys spend on a hobby project. Especially not when it means borrowing it.
– Raffzahn
Aug 23 at 18:00
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Development happened very rapidly in the first two years of Apple. Wozniak did the Apple 1 in 1975 and the Apple ][ in 1976. When the Apple 1 was first presented to the world at the Homebrew Computer Club, it didn't have any name at all, since there was no company called "Apple" at the time. The original thought Woz had was simply to show off the computer he had designed to the club and share the schematics for the design - it was very much a "hacker" community project without thought of a commercial product.
Based on the interest in the Apple 1 design amongst the hacker/hobbyist community, Steve Jobs suggested ordering PCB's and selling them at a profit. While pursuing buyers for the PCB, Jobs made the famous deal with the Byte Shop in Palo Alto, but that deal required fully assembled PCB's to be delivered. This led to Jobs seeking capital from banks, arranging for vendor credit, and other similar business activities needed to launch a real product. So the company was officially founded and named "Apple", and shortly after Mike Markkula got involved and formed Apple, the Corporation.
While this was happening, Woz was already well on his way to developing the successor Apple ][. So the "Apple 1" was named with full knowledge that a company was being formed and would, hopefully in short order, be able to offer the far-superior Apple ][ to its customers.
This quote from a lengthy interview with Wozniak sums up the thinking of the Apple founders at the time:
I went to a store in Southern California, cause I was on vacation, showed them the Apple I, what it was, isn't that, demonstrated it. Got some orders out of that. But it was pretty much, you know, one person at a time, you know, getting small accounts. So we didn't sell very many in the period of a year. And by then, we had the Apple II. We even saw the Apple II coming and part of the Apple II introduction was, we said, you can turn in your Apple I for a real good refund or a discount on the Apple II.
Also, despite the fact that a successor to the Apple 1 was already planned, the company did exercise some discretion in not giving too much away when marketing the Apple 1. It was their only source of income for some months, so the little bit of marketing material that was created simply referred to the Apple 1 as "The Apple Computer".
answered Aug 23 at 19:00
Brian H
13.9k49121
I think you've confused Markkula with Ronald Wayne, Markkula came along much later
– mcottle
Aug 24 at 6:00
@mcottle Wayne left well before before Apple Computer Company was converted to Apple Computer, Inc.
– 8bittree
Aug 24 at 13:21
@8bittree I'm pretty sure Wayne was there for the Apple 1, which is what the question is about.
– mcottle
Aug 26 at 12:28
@mcottle Wayne was there for less than 2 weeks before bailing, and the Apple 1 didn't go on sale until a few months after his departure. Markkula was there for the entire second half of the Apple 1 sales period. So while Brian H doesn't have any inaccuracies about Markkula's involvement, you are right that Wayne would have a bit more influence with the Apple 1, including writing the manual. It's not clear, at least in my research, whether Wayne had any influence in the numbering of the Apple 1, though.
– 8bittree
Aug 27 at 3:42
@8bittree According to Markkula's wikipedia page "Jobs visited him and convinced Markkula of the market for the Apple II and personal computers in general." - Markkula joined in 1977, the Apple II was already on the market and the Apple 1 was history. My original comment stands. I believe Brian H confused Wayne and Markkula. Markkula had nothing to do with the Apple 1.
– mcottle
Aug 27 at 6:42
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later.
Let's start with the fact, that it was labeled Apple 1 not I. Not only on the silk screen, but also throughout all manuals and advertisements. Similarly, the Apple II was originally named Apple 2. The II only came later, after Woz did come up with the 'graphical' play with square brackets (][) as start message. Quoting the Apple 1 as Apple I was made by magazines in hindsight.
Why was the original Apple Computer labeled as the Apple I
It's a common practice to add a number to make things sound better. The case could not only be made for the Apple 1, but as well for KIM 1, Osborne 1, PET 2001, Atari 800, OSI Model 500, Altair 8800 and so on. These are arbitrary numbers to make it sound better. Just think Anhilator 2000.
edited Aug 23 at 20:23
manassehkatz
1,091110
answered Aug 23 at 17:55
Raffzahn
32.4k470129
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Development happened very rapidly in the first two years of Apple. Wozniak did the Apple 1 in 1975 and the Apple ][ in 1976. When the Apple 1 was first presented to the world at the Homebrew Computer Club, it didn't have any name at all, since there was no company called "Apple" at the time. The original thought Woz had was simply to show off the computer he had designed to the club and share the schematics for the design - it was very much a "hacker" community project without thought of a commercial product.
Based on the interest in the Apple 1 design amongst the hacker/hobbyist community, Steve Jobs suggested ordering PCB's and selling them at a profit. While pursuing buyers for the PCB, Jobs made the famous deal with the Byte Shop in Palo Alto, but that deal required fully assembled PCB's to be delivered. This led to Jobs seeking capital from banks, arranging for vendor credit, and other similar business activities needed to launch a real product. So the company was officially founded and named "Apple", and shortly after Mike Markkula got involved and formed Apple, the Corporation.
While this was happening, Woz was already well on his way to developing the successor Apple ][. So the "Apple 1" was named with full knowledge that a company was being formed and would, hopefully in short order, be able to offer the far-superior Apple ][ to its customers.
This quote from a lengthy interview with Wozniak sums up the thinking of the Apple founders at the time:
I went to a store in Southern California, cause I was on vacation, showed them the Apple I, what it was, isn't that, demonstrated it. Got some orders out of that. But it was pretty much, you know, one person at a time, you know, getting small accounts. So we didn't sell very many in the period of a year. And by then, we had the Apple II. We even saw the Apple II coming and part of the Apple II introduction was, we said, you can turn in your Apple I for a real good refund or a discount on the Apple II.
Also, despite the fact that a successor to the Apple 1 was already planned, the company did exercise some discretion in not giving too much away when marketing the Apple 1. It was their only source of income for some months, so the little bit of marketing material that was created simply referred to the Apple 1 as "The Apple Computer".
answered Aug 23 at 19:00
Brian H
13.9k49121
I think you've confused Markkula with Ronald Wayne, Markkula came along much later
– mcottle
Aug 24 at 6:00
@mcottle Wayne left well before before Apple Computer Company was converted to Apple Computer, Inc.
– 8bittree
Aug 24 at 13:21
@8bittree I'm pretty sure Wayne was there for the Apple 1, which is what the question is about.
– mcottle
Aug 26 at 12:28
@mcottle Wayne was there for less than 2 weeks before bailing, and the Apple 1 didn't go on sale until a few months after his departure. Markkula was there for the entire second half of the Apple 1 sales period. So while Brian H doesn't have any inaccuracies about Markkula's involvement, you are right that Wayne would have a bit more influence with the Apple 1, including writing the manual. It's not clear, at least in my research, whether Wayne had any influence in the numbering of the Apple 1, though.
– 8bittree
Aug 27 at 3:42
@8bittree According to Markkula's wikipedia page "Jobs visited him and convinced Markkula of the market for the Apple II and personal computers in general." - Markkula joined in 1977, the Apple II was already on the market and the Apple 1 was history. My original comment stands. I believe Brian H confused Wayne and Markkula. Markkula had nothing to do with the Apple 1.
– mcottle
Aug 27 at 6:42
add a comment |Â
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Development happened very rapidly in the first two years of Apple. Wozniak did the Apple 1 in 1975 and the Apple ][ in 1976. When the Apple 1 was first presented to the world at the Homebrew Computer Club, it didn't have any name at all, since there was no company called "Apple" at the time. The original thought Woz had was simply to show off the computer he had designed to the club and share the schematics for the design - it was very much a "hacker" community project without thought of a commercial product.
Based on the interest in the Apple 1 design amongst the hacker/hobbyist community, Steve Jobs suggested ordering PCB's and selling them at a profit. While pursuing buyers for the PCB, Jobs made the famous deal with the Byte Shop in Palo Alto, but that deal required fully assembled PCB's to be delivered. This led to Jobs seeking capital from banks, arranging for vendor credit, and other similar business activities needed to launch a real product. So the company was officially founded and named "Apple", and shortly after Mike Markkula got involved and formed Apple, the Corporation.
While this was happening, Woz was already well on his way to developing the successor Apple ][. So the "Apple 1" was named with full knowledge that a company was being formed and would, hopefully in short order, be able to offer the far-superior Apple ][ to its customers.
This quote from a lengthy interview with Wozniak sums up the thinking of the Apple founders at the time:
I went to a store in Southern California, cause I was on vacation, showed them the Apple I, what it was, isn't that, demonstrated it. Got some orders out of that. But it was pretty much, you know, one person at a time, you know, getting small accounts. So we didn't sell very many in the period of a year. And by then, we had the Apple II. We even saw the Apple II coming and part of the Apple II introduction was, we said, you can turn in your Apple I for a real good refund or a discount on the Apple II.
Also, despite the fact that a successor to the Apple 1 was already planned, the company did exercise some discretion in not giving too much away when marketing the Apple 1. It was their only source of income for some months, so the little bit of marketing material that was created simply referred to the Apple 1 as "The Apple Computer".
answered Aug 23 at 19:00
Brian H
13.9k49121
I think you've confused Markkula with Ronald Wayne, Markkula came along much later
– mcottle
Aug 24 at 6:00
@mcottle Wayne left well before before Apple Computer Company was converted to Apple Computer, Inc.
– 8bittree
Aug 24 at 13:21
@8bittree I'm pretty sure Wayne was there for the Apple 1, which is what the question is about.
– mcottle
Aug 26 at 12:28
@mcottle Wayne was there for less than 2 weeks before bailing, and the Apple 1 didn't go on sale until a few months after his departure. Markkula was there for the entire second half of the Apple 1 sales period. So while Brian H doesn't have any inaccuracies about Markkula's involvement, you are right that Wayne would have a bit more influence with the Apple 1, including writing the manual. It's not clear, at least in my research, whether Wayne had any influence in the numbering of the Apple 1, though.
– 8bittree
Aug 27 at 3:42
@8bittree According to Markkula's wikipedia page "Jobs visited him and convinced Markkula of the market for the Apple II and personal computers in general." - Markkula joined in 1977, the Apple II was already on the market and the Apple 1 was history. My original comment stands. I believe Brian H confused Wayne and Markkula. Markkula had nothing to do with the Apple 1.
– mcottle
Aug 27 at 6:42
add a comment |Â
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Development happened very rapidly in the first two years of Apple. Wozniak did the Apple 1 in 1975 and the Apple ][ in 1976. When the Apple 1 was first presented to the world at the Homebrew Computer Club, it didn't have any name at all, since there was no company called "Apple" at the time. The original thought Woz had was simply to show off the computer he had designed to the club and share the schematics for the design - it was very much a "hacker" community project without thought of a commercial product.
Based on the interest in the Apple 1 design amongst the hacker/hobbyist community, Steve Jobs suggested ordering PCB's and selling them at a profit. While pursuing buyers for the PCB, Jobs made the famous deal with the Byte Shop in Palo Alto, but that deal required fully assembled PCB's to be delivered. This led to Jobs seeking capital from banks, arranging for vendor credit, and other similar business activities needed to launch a real product. So the company was officially founded and named "Apple", and shortly after Mike Markkula got involved and formed Apple, the Corporation.
While this was happening, Woz was already well on his way to developing the successor Apple ][. So the "Apple 1" was named with full knowledge that a company was being formed and would, hopefully in short order, be able to offer the far-superior Apple ][ to its customers.
This quote from a lengthy interview with Wozniak sums up the thinking of the Apple founders at the time:
I went to a store in Southern California, cause I was on vacation, showed them the Apple I, what it was, isn't that, demonstrated it. Got some orders out of that. But it was pretty much, you know, one person at a time, you know, getting small accounts. So we didn't sell very many in the period of a year. And by then, we had the Apple II. We even saw the Apple II coming and part of the Apple II introduction was, we said, you can turn in your Apple I for a real good refund or a discount on the Apple II.
Also, despite the fact that a successor to the Apple 1 was already planned, the company did exercise some discretion in not giving too much away when marketing the Apple 1. It was their only source of income for some months, so the little bit of marketing material that was created simply referred to the Apple 1 as "The Apple Computer".
answered Aug 23 at 19:00
Brian H
13.9k49121
Development happened very rapidly in the first two years of Apple. Wozniak did the Apple 1 in 1975 and the Apple ][ in 1976. When the Apple 1 was first presented to the world at the Homebrew Computer Club, it didn't have any name at all, since there was no company called "Apple" at the time. The original thought Woz had was simply to show off the computer he had designed to the club and share the schematics for the design - it was very much a "hacker" community project without thought of a commercial product.
Based on the interest in the Apple 1 design amongst the hacker/hobbyist community, Steve Jobs suggested ordering PCB's and selling them at a profit. While pursuing buyers for the PCB, Jobs made the famous deal with the Byte Shop in Palo Alto, but that deal required fully assembled PCB's to be delivered. This led to Jobs seeking capital from banks, arranging for vendor credit, and other similar business activities needed to launch a real product. So the company was officially founded and named "Apple", and shortly after Mike Markkula got involved and formed Apple, the Corporation.
While this was happening, Woz was already well on his way to developing the successor Apple ][. So the "Apple 1" was named with full knowledge that a company was being formed and would, hopefully in short order, be able to offer the far-superior Apple ][ to its customers.
This quote from a lengthy interview with Wozniak sums up the thinking of the Apple founders at the time:
I went to a store in Southern California, cause I was on vacation, showed them the Apple I, what it was, isn't that, demonstrated it. Got some orders out of that. But it was pretty much, you know, one person at a time, you know, getting small accounts. So we didn't sell very many in the period of a year. And by then, we had the Apple II. We even saw the Apple II coming and part of the Apple II introduction was, we said, you can turn in your Apple I for a real good refund or a discount on the Apple II.
Also, despite the fact that a successor to the Apple 1 was already planned, the company did exercise some discretion in not giving too much away when marketing the Apple 1. It was their only source of income for some months, so the little bit of marketing material that was created simply referred to the Apple 1 as "The Apple Computer".
answered Aug 23 at 19:00
Brian H
13.9k49121
edited Aug 24 at 0:03
answered Aug 23 at 19:00
Brian H
13.9k49121
answered Aug 23 at 19:00
Brian H
13.9k49121
answered Aug 23 at 19:00
Brian H
13.9k49121
13.9k49121
I think you've confused Markkula with Ronald Wayne, Markkula came along much later
– mcottle
Aug 24 at 6:00
@mcottle Wayne left well before before Apple Computer Company was converted to Apple Computer, Inc.
– 8bittree
Aug 24 at 13:21
@8bittree I'm pretty sure Wayne was there for the Apple 1, which is what the question is about.
– mcottle
Aug 26 at 12:28
@mcottle Wayne was there for less than 2 weeks before bailing, and the Apple 1 didn't go on sale until a few months after his departure. Markkula was there for the entire second half of the Apple 1 sales period. So while Brian H doesn't have any inaccuracies about Markkula's involvement, you are right that Wayne would have a bit more influence with the Apple 1, including writing the manual. It's not clear, at least in my research, whether Wayne had any influence in the numbering of the Apple 1, though.
– 8bittree
Aug 27 at 3:42
@8bittree According to Markkula's wikipedia page "Jobs visited him and convinced Markkula of the market for the Apple II and personal computers in general." - Markkula joined in 1977, the Apple II was already on the market and the Apple 1 was history. My original comment stands. I believe Brian H confused Wayne and Markkula. Markkula had nothing to do with the Apple 1.
– mcottle
Aug 27 at 6:42
add a comment |Â
I think you've confused Markkula with Ronald Wayne, Markkula came along much later
– mcottle
Aug 24 at 6:00
@mcottle Wayne left well before before Apple Computer Company was converted to Apple Computer, Inc.
– 8bittree
Aug 24 at 13:21
@8bittree I'm pretty sure Wayne was there for the Apple 1, which is what the question is about.
– mcottle
Aug 26 at 12:28
@mcottle Wayne was there for less than 2 weeks before bailing, and the Apple 1 didn't go on sale until a few months after his departure. Markkula was there for the entire second half of the Apple 1 sales period. So while Brian H doesn't have any inaccuracies about Markkula's involvement, you are right that Wayne would have a bit more influence with the Apple 1, including writing the manual. It's not clear, at least in my research, whether Wayne had any influence in the numbering of the Apple 1, though.
– 8bittree
Aug 27 at 3:42
@8bittree According to Markkula's wikipedia page "Jobs visited him and convinced Markkula of the market for the Apple II and personal computers in general." - Markkula joined in 1977, the Apple II was already on the market and the Apple 1 was history. My original comment stands. I believe Brian H confused Wayne and Markkula. Markkula had nothing to do with the Apple 1.
– mcottle
Aug 27 at 6:42
I think you've confused Markkula with Ronald Wayne, Markkula came along much later
– mcottle
Aug 24 at 6:00
I think you've confused Markkula with Ronald Wayne, Markkula came along much later
– mcottle
Aug 24 at 6:00
@mcottle Wayne left well before before Apple Computer Company was converted to Apple Computer, Inc.
– 8bittree
Aug 24 at 13:21
@mcottle Wayne left well before before Apple Computer Company was converted to Apple Computer, Inc.
– 8bittree
Aug 24 at 13:21
@8bittree I'm pretty sure Wayne was there for the Apple 1, which is what the question is about.
– mcottle
Aug 26 at 12:28
@8bittree I'm pretty sure Wayne was there for the Apple 1, which is what the question is about.
– mcottle
Aug 26 at 12:28
@mcottle Wayne was there for less than 2 weeks before bailing, and the Apple 1 didn't go on sale until a few months after his departure. Markkula was there for the entire second half of the Apple 1 sales period. So while Brian H doesn't have any inaccuracies about Markkula's involvement, you are right that Wayne would have a bit more influence with the Apple 1, including writing the manual. It's not clear, at least in my research, whether Wayne had any influence in the numbering of the Apple 1, though.
– 8bittree
Aug 27 at 3:42
@mcottle Wayne was there for less than 2 weeks before bailing, and the Apple 1 didn't go on sale until a few months after his departure. Markkula was there for the entire second half of the Apple 1 sales period. So while Brian H doesn't have any inaccuracies about Markkula's involvement, you are right that Wayne would have a bit more influence with the Apple 1, including writing the manual. It's not clear, at least in my research, whether Wayne had any influence in the numbering of the Apple 1, though.
– 8bittree
Aug 27 at 3:42
@8bittree According to Markkula's wikipedia page "Jobs visited him and convinced Markkula of the market for the Apple II and personal computers in general." - Markkula joined in 1977, the Apple II was already on the market and the Apple 1 was history. My original comment stands. I believe Brian H confused Wayne and Markkula. Markkula had nothing to do with the Apple 1.
– mcottle
Aug 27 at 6:42
@8bittree According to Markkula's wikipedia page "Jobs visited him and convinced Markkula of the market for the Apple II and personal computers in general." - Markkula joined in 1977, the Apple II was already on the market and the Apple 1 was history. My original comment stands. I believe Brian H confused Wayne and Markkula. Markkula had nothing to do with the Apple 1.
– mcottle
Aug 27 at 6:42
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later.
Let's start with the fact, that it was labeled Apple 1 not I. Not only on the silk screen, but also throughout all manuals and advertisements. Similarly, the Apple II was originally named Apple 2. The II only came later, after Woz did come up with the 'graphical' play with square brackets (][) as start message. Quoting the Apple 1 as Apple I was made by magazines in hindsight.
Why was the original Apple Computer labeled as the Apple I
It's a common practice to add a number to make things sound better. The case could not only be made for the Apple 1, but as well for KIM 1, Osborne 1, PET 2001, Atari 800, OSI Model 500, Altair 8800 and so on. These are arbitrary numbers to make it sound better. Just think Anhilator 2000.
edited Aug 23 at 20:23
manassehkatz
1,091110
answered Aug 23 at 17:55
Raffzahn
32.4k470129
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later.
Let's start with the fact, that it was labeled Apple 1 not I. Not only on the silk screen, but also throughout all manuals and advertisements. Similarly, the Apple II was originally named Apple 2. The II only came later, after Woz did come up with the 'graphical' play with square brackets (][) as start message. Quoting the Apple 1 as Apple I was made by magazines in hindsight.
Why was the original Apple Computer labeled as the Apple I
It's a common practice to add a number to make things sound better. The case could not only be made for the Apple 1, but as well for KIM 1, Osborne 1, PET 2001, Atari 800, OSI Model 500, Altair 8800 and so on. These are arbitrary numbers to make it sound better. Just think Anhilator 2000.
edited Aug 23 at 20:23
manassehkatz
1,091110
answered Aug 23 at 17:55
Raffzahn
32.4k470129
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later.
Let's start with the fact, that it was labeled Apple 1 not I. Not only on the silk screen, but also throughout all manuals and advertisements. Similarly, the Apple II was originally named Apple 2. The II only came later, after Woz did come up with the 'graphical' play with square brackets (][) as start message. Quoting the Apple 1 as Apple I was made by magazines in hindsight.
Why was the original Apple Computer labeled as the Apple I
It's a common practice to add a number to make things sound better. The case could not only be made for the Apple 1, but as well for KIM 1, Osborne 1, PET 2001, Atari 800, OSI Model 500, Altair 8800 and so on. These are arbitrary numbers to make it sound better. Just think Anhilator 2000.
edited Aug 23 at 20:23
manassehkatz
1,091110
answered Aug 23 at 17:55
Raffzahn
32.4k470129
As we all know, the Apple I computer didn't last very long as it was supplanted by the hugely successful Apple II about a year later.
Let's start with the fact, that it was labeled Apple 1 not I. Not only on the silk screen, but also throughout all manuals and advertisements. Similarly, the Apple II was originally named Apple 2. The II only came later, after Woz did come up with the 'graphical' play with square brackets (][) as start message. Quoting the Apple 1 as Apple I was made by magazines in hindsight.
Why was the original Apple Computer labeled as the Apple I
It's a common practice to add a number to make things sound better. The case could not only be made for the Apple 1, but as well for KIM 1, Osborne 1, PET 2001, Atari 800, OSI Model 500, Altair 8800 and so on. These are arbitrary numbers to make it sound better. Just think Anhilator 2000.
edited Aug 23 at 20:23
manassehkatz
1,091110
answered Aug 23 at 17:55
Raffzahn
32.4k470129
edited Aug 23 at 20:23
manassehkatz
1,091110
edited Aug 23 at 20:23
manassehkatz
1,091110
edited Aug 23 at 20:23
manassehkatz
1,091110
1,091110
answered Aug 23 at 17:55
Raffzahn
32.4k470129
answered Aug 23 at 17:55
Raffzahn
32.4k470129
answered Aug 23 at 17:55
Raffzahn
32.4k470129
32.4k470129
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f7358%2fwhy-was-the-original-apple-computer-labeled-as-the-apple-i%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
2
My understanding, admittedly not from having done any in depth research, is that the Apple I was never really intended to be a commercial product as such -- the initial sales were to other members of the Homebrew Computer Club and to local shops, and at the time they began the purpose of selling them was simply to fund the first production run, and possibly the development of the Apple II. When the board layout was designed, there was probably only the vaguest of ideas in their minds that it could be a commercially viable product. Marketing tactics were probably far from their thoughts.
– Jules
Aug 23 at 17:54
1
@Jules WHen doing the design, Woz maybe didn't have big business in mind, but when Jobs did collect money for a production run, it was clearly a comercial venue. Their 25,000 USD upfront investment (more than 100 grand of todays money) isn't anywhere near what (rather average) guys spend on a hobby project. Especially not when it means borrowing it.
– Raffzahn
Aug 23 at 18:00