I'm Dan Oliver and was on the IIGS team. I don't think Jobs had anything to do with cancelling the IIGS. As you said he wasn't at Apple at the time, but it's more than that. Upper management was maybe a little insecure about filling the role of Jobs. My guess is they would have loved to have cancelled the Mac just to kill Jobs's legacy. What I do know is I was at the meeting when management told the team the IIGS was going to be phased out. The reason was Apple didn't have enough resources for both and the profit margin was much higher on the Mac. And, it wasn't just an either or deal, they didn't really seem to want to extend the Mac line either. They figured to just sell the current Macs. Very short sighted and they later figured out the company did actually need to create new models. I think Jean-Louis Gassée would have been much more influential in the Mac winning than Jobs who's only influence was in creating the Mac team and a such a loved machine. If Jobs had stayed at Apple he would have killed the IIGS the moment he heard about it. I don't think he liked the idea very much that Woz had created the Apple II. Ego. I hated they killed the IIGS of course, but, looking back, I think it was the right choice. Everything about the IIGS was looking backward toward staying compatible and true to the Apple II legacy. Sure, the 65816 could have kept being extended like Intel but that's such an ugly path. It's a low margin path and Apple could never be Apple without high margins. It cost money to produce good products. The Mac was looking forward, many possibilities. The 68000 was like working in an open field instead of inside a closet. I do thank you for showing the power of IIGS. We were very proud of that machine. Side story on just how intense the battle was between the Mac and IIGS teams...When I was creating the Menu Manager I made a the Apple logo in full color, the old 6 horizontal stripes. The Mac team found out and went insane. I'm talking about screaming and crying. THE MAC UI IS BLACK AND WHITE!!! At that time Apple considered the Mac UI to be like the Coca-Cola recipe. Harvey Lehtman and others won that battle and we were allowed to make a color UI. I assume Gassée was probably key in allowing it too, he had a good business mind imo, I think it really pissed off the Mac team that we created the first color UI. Proportional scroll bars were also a battle, Mac team hated them. But today...still proportional...hehehehehe.

@FinalBaton

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for sharing! wow really cool insight from someone who was there! hopefully more people will see this.

@smellincoffee

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks so much for sharing your experience!

@pokepress

5 жыл бұрын

Great information. One thing I’m curious about-to keep the Apple II line going, eventually they would have needed to support resolutions above 240p. Any idea how that might have been accomplished? Also, since there was (briefly) an Apple III, what would the next step have been? Apple IV?

@MrWaterbugdesign

5 жыл бұрын

I'm a software guy. I know as much about hardware as I do about women. I had an Apple III before I joined Apple and it had been discontinued by the time I got to Apple. I liked it a lot, but business only. I don't remember anyone at Apple ever referencing the Apple III so don't know what their original plans were.

@herrfriberger5

5 жыл бұрын

Good points! Except that I can't really see why 65816 being "extended like Intel" would be an "an ugly path". It was already an extended 6502. Intels extension of 8080 to 8086 to 386 was pretty elegant as well (while AMDs extension to x86-64, was damn right beautiful). (I'm not even a 6502 or Apple II fanboy of any kind, but programmed mostly the Z80 at the time. :)

I’ve been waiting almost 4 YEARS FOR EP 2

@jovetj

4 жыл бұрын

I've been waiting 4 minutes, and I'm grossly disappointed.

@OlpusBonzo

4 жыл бұрын

Meanwhile, he became the 8-Bit Guy... I'm not sure he's still entitled to talk about 16, 32 and 64 bit microcomputers!

@henrydando

3 жыл бұрын

@@OlpusBonzo he still has lots of videos on 16 bit computers

@IrlandesLatino

3 жыл бұрын

I have been a fan of the 8 bit guy for a long while. I have just seen the 2015 movie called Steve Jobs. David!!!! Where is the NEXT EPISODE MAN!!!!

@Lucas_andos

3 жыл бұрын

Ok my original comment is over a year old. So we've all been waiting a OVER 5 WHOLE YEARS FOR EPISODE 2!

I’ve been waiting 8 years for episode 2

Been waiting 8 years for part 2

Still waiting on that episode 2...

@CKDEV

7 жыл бұрын

ikr

@austinbland8731

7 жыл бұрын

Andy Merrett Fanboy alert!

@FairyCRat

7 жыл бұрын

+Andy Merrett Well, since this video was released they never stopped making mistakes.

@DacLMK

7 жыл бұрын

3 months later after this comment was posted still waiting...

@paulcristo

7 жыл бұрын

Must have episode 2

I have never regretted going with an IBM clone running DOS for my 1st machine.

@kennethsrensen7706

2 жыл бұрын

Me too , good old DOS and hardware you could upgrade / modificate . It just worked and fun to use too .

@jscottupton

2 жыл бұрын

Amen. My first computer was a Tandy 1000HX IBM clone. Today I am loading Linux on very old computers and they work great. Steve Jobs was all about "style". Wonderful...if you aren't on a budget.

I remember when my dad bought our first computer. It was the Apple IIGS and he paid a bit over $2000 for the whole setup plus ram/hdd upgrade. Then we found out about a year later that they were going to dump the IIGS for the Mac and my dad said he will never buy a computer from them again. We've been on the PC ever since XD

@TorutheRedFox

5 жыл бұрын

the IIGS was ahead of the Mac in a lot of things, like ADB and colour, by 3 years even

@johnchainsman

4 жыл бұрын

Extend and improve a dead platform almost always fails. Well, until Intel extended and improved the x86 and the only reason it survived is because Intel adopted AMD's innovative and backwards-compatible x86-64 architecture.

@SuperSerNiko97

4 жыл бұрын

​@Stephen Anthony What apple did with Intel was supporting all powerpc application and they did it for a very long time. Leopard 10.5 was not an ugly OS and still had upgrades even after Snow Leopard. You can't really blame them.

@Zorkmid123

4 жыл бұрын

Kagusaki Wolf Apple alienated a lot of their fan base by abounding the Apple II line for the Mac. I agree with the 8 bit guy, it was a mistake to do so.

@Zorkmid123

4 жыл бұрын

@@johnchainsman It wasn’t a dead platform, the Apple IIGS sold more than any Mac did the first year it was out, even though Apple barely advertised it. The only reason it died was because Apple refused to continue to make the Apple IIs.

I kept my IIe and IIgs for years. I SO regret selling them. I would loved to see a world where the Apple II series evolved instead of the Mac (writing this on a 2012 Mac Mini - sigh). I have entertained the idea of buying a nice IIe and doing so hobby computing. Right now I am using the Vintage II emulator to play Wizardry I.

"Overpriced and Underpowered" same slogan they use today.

@martinsvk1247

7 жыл бұрын

true...

@gandalfwiz20007

7 жыл бұрын

apple sucks, always had, always will.....to bad there so many idiots that pay $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for products they don't know what they do

@TechnologySpotlight

7 жыл бұрын

I love Apple... I just think their watch is overpriced. Everything else is finely priced.

@NLS87

7 жыл бұрын

that's the most ridiculous thing I've read in a while

@gandalfwiz20007

7 жыл бұрын

Technology Spotlight 1000 euros for an iPhone( in Europe, not USA)? don't think so

Interesting video, but the M68K is really a 32-bit architecture. Even though its external data bus is 16 bits wide and its address bus is 24 bits wide, the registers and ALU inside is a full 32 bits wide. Thus it had a future. The 8 bit 6502 (IIe) and 16 bit 65C816 (IIGS) had much less of a future. Apple would have had to move to a 32-bit CPU (and a more advanced OS) sooner or later anyway. But considering it was several years before Intel released the 32-bit 80386, and many more years before Microsoft released even a partially 32-bit OS, it's probably fair to say they moved a little too soon, pushing expensive hardware that wasn't quite needed yet.

The IIgs was an amazing system. When I was a kid, that computer provided me the ability to learn to program, play games, and work on school work. An added benefit was that it would run older IIe/IIc software as well. My parents purchased (and still have) the Woz Limited Edition IIgs. My wife's grandmother gave me her old IIgs (both still work). The game Hacker II provided many sleepness nights for me as I tried to figure it out.

Great video. When I was in HS in the early 90s we played so many games on the IIGs...they just looked and sounded amazing. The Mac classics were used but they were lousy for gaming. A few years later when I had my first tech job as an assistant Mac tech they had my take inventory of a huge room of Macs they had phased out (large college). There were stacks and stacks of IIGs systems as high as the ceiling and took me forever to get through them all. It was a sad thing to see that they were now just junk waiting to be recycled, while some Mac classics were still in use here and there.

Almost two years later, no part 2

@pizzaiolom

7 жыл бұрын

SplashyNoodles Its because all those "overpriced and underpowered" comments sums it up for all the other future parts

@mariannmariann2052

5 жыл бұрын

*4* years later!

@ElliotFlowers

4 жыл бұрын

That was 6 years ago 'future proofed comment'.

@jersonrey

4 жыл бұрын

.

@Sgt_Bill_T_Co

4 жыл бұрын

@@jersonrey - wasn't the author killed in a car crash after making this one?

The Macintosh, as a sleek all in one (for the eighties), wasn't necessarily a bad idea. On the outside, it's an attractive product. The big mistakes were not merging it with the Apple II line, it's limited audio visual capabilities and it's price. It's even possible to forgo the expansion capabilities and still have a desirable device but an upgrade card slot wouldn't go amiss. Having the OS installed internally, and upgradable, would've made the machine much easier to use too.

I love videos like this that discuss the history, and why certain products made it and others didn't. Those years were a confusing blur, but looking at it in hindsight. WOW. It makes us appreciate today's market. Great video!

"Macintosh was a mistake" ~ Hayao Miyazaki

@marioalexanderski9598

3 жыл бұрын

Steve Jobs: A mistake? Lol, the Studio Ghibli director would make a lot of Apple fans mad.

the thing is, i've noticed that when people use Apple products, they are automatically an "Apple Fanboy" by non-Apple users. Which I think is crazy. If someone has an iPhone, they are labeled as "an iSheep". If they have an Android, then thats fine, they have an Android, regardless of what company it is. I have noticed though, people that do use Apple products, tend to be more "Brand loyal". They don't stop with iPhone, they'll get an iPad as well or a Mac computer as well. I love Apple as a company. I love their OS and the fact that they really did change the smartphone market and tablet market. They didn't make the FIRST smartphone or the FIRST tablet, but they changed the way people view them. Before iPhone, people that had smartphones were using Palm, Windows Mobile or Blackberry and typically, they were "Business" people. It wasn't teenagers with smartphones like it is now.

@FlintG

9 жыл бұрын

Yeah I hate it when people start bashing people just cause of that. I use a samsung s4 as my phone and I use a mac mini 2012 model for my mac computer I also use a alienware m11x laptop for my windows needs. I like apple products more cause I know they just work great like they are supposed to. I just can't stand fanboys in general. The one thing I also hate are the pc and console fanboys talking bad about each other. I rather play my games on a console cause I like using a controller rather than a keyboard.

@veoozo

9 жыл бұрын

Oh my god. It's not called "an Android". It's called an Android device. An Android phone. An Android tablet. An Android TV. Get it?

@m333x

9 жыл бұрын

***** You really have some anger issues.

@m333x

9 жыл бұрын

***** Well go fuck yourself you little bitch :) You can't block someone for swear words, and if you don't wanna see them, then don't read the comment sections on any videos.

@SebisRandomTech

9 жыл бұрын

I just get annoyed when people worship Apple and think everything else is stupid. My friend's family literally has nothing but the newest Apple products, and they don't buy anything else. They look at Android as stupid and Windows as stupid. THAT is what pisses me off. Have an iPhone? Fine, good for you. Have a Mac? Awesome. Have it all and boast about it and talk trash about whatever you don't agree with? Get that shit outta here.

I didn't realize the IIGS was as strong as it was. With your examples, it definitely seems like the Mac was a step backwards.

@scottaveles6900

6 жыл бұрын

The IIgs was an incredible machine. I still have a few of them.

@thromboid

6 жыл бұрын

I too never realised how good the IIGS was. Perhaps it was not Jobs's ego as much as calculated marketing: at the time, combined home/business computer systems were seldom taken seriously, and I wonder if Apple wanted to delineate its big-ticket professional system from the home/education offering.

@Landrew0

6 жыл бұрын

Wonderful to see an honest opinion nowadays.

@tarstarkusz

6 жыл бұрын

It's being somewhat overhyped here, but it was superior to the MAC. Don't forget about the $10k LISA! Having the huge software base of the Apple II would have been a huge boost had they focused on the IIGS line. The sound is absolutely outstanding.

@MrVuckFiacom

6 жыл бұрын

The question is: Can it be overclocked?

I could watch your videos all day! I absolutely love your attitude and the way you conduct yourself in videos. Keep up the amazing work love all the topics as well. 👋🖥️💾

Apple deliberately throttling a product for a newer one to compete? OUTRAGEOUS!

@arnaldogonzalez1

3 жыл бұрын

I think that is still their motto

@janbittner1465

3 жыл бұрын

@@arnaldogonzalez1 *tHinK dIFferEnT*

Was that the start of "overpriced and underpowered but cool and simple" as a business strategy?

@kirishima638

8 жыл бұрын

+noidexe Are you living under a rock? Check this out: stevecheney.com/on-apples-incredible-platform-advantage/

@noidexe

8 жыл бұрын

That whole site sounds like paid advertising. It's just a matter of reading the hardware specs. I'm just comparing hardware vs price. I'm not talking about iOS or usability or Apple as a service.

@Jerkwad152

8 жыл бұрын

+Kiyoshi Kirishima "Apple's Insurmountable Platform Advantage" That's like saying "Taco Bell's Insurmountable Antidiarrhea Advantage"

@PlanetCoolMinecraft

8 жыл бұрын

+Kiyoshi Kirishima Are you living under a rock?

@spyone4828

8 жыл бұрын

+noidexe In 1989 I knew a guy whose job was to evaluate computers and software for a major corporation. If they were considering buying something, they would have him test it and write a report. As a result,he had both a Mac and a PC. He said the difference was this: To build a PC that can do everything the Mac can do would cost more than buying a Mac. But almost nobody wants a machine that can do everything the Mac can do. If you want to do just one thing, like desktop publishing or video production, you can build a PC that will do that better than a Mac for less money than a Mac.

The Macintosh vs the 2GS sort of seems to feel like Jobs VS Wozniak. I was never that fond of any Macintosh I've ever used, but the 2GS impresses me in hindsight. (I was way too young to think too critically about such a thing if I had even known it existed when it was new). All these companies with weird decisions huh. Amiga could've been much bigger than they were, but Commodore just messed everything up. The 2GS was impressive, but apple had other ideas. Ideas which really forced them into a niche market for a really long time. You can consider it to their credit that they survived at all, given the number of those 80's computer companies that are just plain gone now... But still...

The Macintosh was a great marketing ploy with portability. Don't forget, when Steve Jobs introduced it he took it out of a travel bag. It was really the introduction to the laptop. It was successful in the sense that it proved that all the other CEO's and John Sculley were lost in business bs instead of inventing something new.

@trentonhuggins465

3 ай бұрын

That's a good point

I can't wait for episode 2

@jeswynnn

Жыл бұрын

Me too!

When is Ep 2 coming? :)

@turbolaserguyg

3 жыл бұрын

Steve Jobs’ ghost is stopping it from coming

@annyone3293

3 жыл бұрын

Not yet.

@rubayyathsaddeksanbir2184

3 жыл бұрын

lolooolol

@tardwrangler1019

3 жыл бұрын

Because he's a fanboy

@darqv9358

3 жыл бұрын

@@tardwrangler1019 He's certainly not a fanboy.

The iBookGuy , while I accept the merits of your view on the situation, I think that it was the best 'dumb luck' point in business history. Steve Jobs got thrown out of Apple, started Next, and then when Apple acquired Next they got a better OS environment and were able to re-invent themselves. (Under 'new' leadership.) This offered opportunities that an otherwise stagnant Apple would die from. Had Steve Jobs stuck around, I think the company would be out of business by now, rather than being one of the fastest growing companies in the desktop market. Innovation wasn't their strong point, style was. The iPod was just a polished Creative Labs MP3 player with more storage, and Microsoft had tablet convertibles way before the iPad came about. I think the form factors really took shape with the re-invention of the company, from ideas that started in the 1980's. Steve Jobs also adding people like Jony Ive & Phil Schiller to the team with his return. Steve Jobs wasn't the brightest businessman in his younger days, but he had ambition and drive. What he lacked in technical prowess, he made up for in having child-like imagination about the idealized future of technology. The Macintosh was supposed to be the idiot's (regular person's) computer. It was designed to be more of an appliance, than a serious business machine, so the backwards compatibility and expansion options were unnecessary. (I do agree that the pricing was backwards, but higher prices usually imply 'quality' and 'integrity' to customers.) Consider that prestige brands do the same job as economy brands, but at a much higher multiple of 'value', because people believe it's better. Like Mercedes vs. Chevy. It's like the original iMac vs the G3 Blue & White (I have the original beige G3, personally.). One was made to be a workstation that offered expandability and power, while the other was for new users that wanted to surf the internet and write e-mails or play that dinosaur and bug game they pre-installed on them. (Facebook wasn't even a thing yet, by that point, and neither was KZread.) The iMac served its purpose and the business class machines served theirs. If you look at what we have now, with the Mac Mini (or iMac 5K) vs. the Mac Pro, one is good for KZread level video production and content consumption, while the other can churn out Pro-quality 4K content, without choking on it. They're going to be pointed at two entirely different market segments, much like a commuter car vs. a semi-truck. It isn't that one is 'better' than the other, so much as they're like a sledgehammer vs. a scalpel. They just have different jobs, expectations, and strengths.

Very insightful and bold episode, thank you.

"I'll create a mini series. "3 years later

@tomypower4898

4 жыл бұрын

Another Alt Acc of Haywire 2: Electric Boogaloo but yes only color

@horusreloaded6387

4 жыл бұрын

@@suprememasteroftheuniverse who hurt you

@davidtinoco2484

4 жыл бұрын

Another Alt Acc of Haywire 2: Electric Boogaloo He prob read the comments

@alpzepta

3 жыл бұрын

Another Alt Acc of Haywire 2: Electric Boogaloo I’ll probably taken over his series with my own show called Computer Chronicles X

My last Apple computer was the Apple IIE . I didn't care for the Mac and I jumped ship for the PC clones, my first being the Tandy TX1000. I put in a VGA card and attached a Bernelle cartridge drive. Good times. Never went back to Apple.

@mrkcur

8 жыл бұрын

me too. as an Apple IIe user, i felt abandoned when the Mac came out. I thought, ok if I have to switch over to a new platform and toss all my old software, I might as well go to a PC running DOS.

Interesting, but I think we disagree on the CPU though. The 68K processor had 16 registers (8 data, 8 address) for general use, each 32 bit. The 65816 had 2 8 bit accumulators and a few 16 bit registers. You can talk about it being more cycle efficient per instruction, but when you're missing basic things like multiplication and division, you realize that cycle/instruction benefit doesn't help you all that much. In addition, the 68K was made for compilation to it so working with a high level language is reasonable. Not so much for the 65816, although at least it has a 16 bit stack pointer, although the whole thing is hampered by the data bank register making it painful to work with anything more than 64K (yay! bank switching!). And while there were eventually C compilers for it, compiling to it was awkward since the compiler wouldn't know, for example, that you needed to convert a binary value to BCD for printing, which is why so much code for those machines were written in assembly. The 65816 was clearly a compromise of a CPU: a decent compromise given that it had to be able to switch into 6502 compatibility mode, but still a compromise.

@zelekuther7938

6 жыл бұрын

I agree, the Motorola 68000 CPU was the better CPU and the way of the future. It had a simple, flat memory map, none of this complicated segmented memory that Intel CPUs had at the time.

@oldtwinsna8347

4 жыл бұрын

agreed. the 65816 was a bitch to program. western design, the 6502 licensee that created the 65816, was a tiny little company and had very little resources for R&D of successor chips of the line. most definitely no where the strength of intel or motorola of its time. i think this is the point many are ignoring - the 65816 was a dead-end chip and most certainly could not compete against the powerhouses that would come in the 68k lineup.

Very interesting. Waiting for the second episode!!

Great video ! A good short story. I had a //GS back then and what you're telling reflects perfectly my feelings at that time. And in France, where I live, I fear the support for the // GS was even worst.

I swear this channel changes names every time I watch a video.

About the part you mentioned on 3:09, the original Macintosh of course had no expansion slots, but the mac plus you were discussing about has the ability to be expanded.

@The8BitGuy

8 жыл бұрын

+Avedis Ghazarian Not really.. It had no expansion sockets other than RAM modules. I think you're thinking of the Macintosh SE, which came out next and I think it had one socket.

@Cortana_ice_fox

8 жыл бұрын

Oh, thank you. I mean it was the first time with the Plus that you could add more ram, but if you were talking about adding things like advance new hardware, then I am wrong.

It's funny to go back and watch these vids and see how empty your studio used to be.

i think this was good. Not because I think it is fun to point out flaws, but because companies like Apple have so much going into their decisions, and it is always interesting to try to deconstruct those decisions. I am very interested in what additional issues you have on your mind. Thanks for the great content.

"Overpriced and underpowered" might as well be Apple's slogan

@WedgeBob

7 жыл бұрын

Not to mention non-user upgradeable. At least the Apple IIgs was upgradeable, and certainly I've seen mods that could almost bring that 30-year-old computer to be rather competitive with even today's computers (well, maybe not, but certainly anything better than Macs at the time would let you do).

@bx19tgd

7 жыл бұрын

wardrich yes!!

@nekad2000

6 жыл бұрын

"We sue our customers" could be a runner up.

@zUltraXO

5 жыл бұрын

it still is

@ch.illmatic

5 жыл бұрын

😂😂True

Thanks for everything Xerox.

@sebastianmrozek8761

4 жыл бұрын

Th8aXs fer every1hing Xerex. :-)

@niveditasrinivasan7070

2 жыл бұрын

@@sebastianmrozek8761 ??

I’m over here 5 years waiting for part 2.

Can't wait for episode 2

So they've been selling overpriced, underpowered machines since the start?

@suprememasteroftheuniverse

4 жыл бұрын

Yes. Damn mushroom munchers greed socialist capitalism abusers. Their business is not technology but reproducing fan boys and making them more and more stupid zombies.

@Gnomechild

4 жыл бұрын

Master of the Universe hmmm you sure dont know nothing about apple...

@Gnomechild

4 жыл бұрын

Master of the Universe you make me laugh kid never see idiotic comment.”greed socialist capitalism abusers” haha

@dontbe8thnotes

4 жыл бұрын

@@suprememasteroftheuniverse Chill bro damn. Nothing wrong with mushrooms either.

@danem2215

4 жыл бұрын

Wait, you mean to tell us the company founded by a guy who stole most of his ideas from Xerox and then defrauded his business partner, and sold $6,000 monochrome underclocked computers is not, in fact, a greedy capitalist company?

I remember my first year in High School, when the Mac came out there was this huge promotion at our school where every teacher was given a Mac for their classroom. It was suppose to revolutionize teaching, I think the Apple company was even involved, it got a ton of media attention, stories in the local paper, even made the nightly news. In the next two years, I only saw one teacher even turn the machine on and she just used it to play games while the class was taking a test or working on assignment. By my senior year, ever Mac was sitting on a shelf or filing cabinet gathering dust.

@scooter5ify

2 жыл бұрын

0

@scanspeak00

2 жыл бұрын

The first one I saw was at my job in a mobile phone company. I took one look at the tiny monochrome screen and wondered why on earth the company wasted thousands of dollars on it.

@thomasfink2385

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah.

Hope you get a chance to make more of these! I am an apple fanboy but also appreciate learning the low points

You have absolutely no clue about how important CPU choice is. The world was shifting away from programming everything in assembly language. Assembly language was the only practical way to program the 6502/6510 - the 65816 extended the address space to 16MB, but hold on. When Intel was designing the 8088/86 in the late 70s they already had the experience of the 8080 but actually thought ahead by adding registers to specifically support high level languages (e.g., C soon became the dominant high level language to program commercial software on personal computers). One was a stack frame register the other was a dedicated segment register that would allow a stack to be located into any segment (and thus load multiple programs into memory each with its own stack). Later there would be instructions added that made if more efficient to push and pop a stack frame context. So the Motorola with the 6809 was thinking along the same lines, they added features to that CPU that specifically assisted the use of high level programming languages. The Motorola 68000, for the mid 80s, then ended up being the ultimate high level language friendly CPU. Compared to the Intel 8088/86 and the 6502 CPUs it was pure Nirvana. Had all the registers necessary for doing a high level call stack properly and above all its registers were bit-wise large enough to where an address anywhere in its addressable memory space could be formed as a single binary value. The Intel 8088/86, of course, required much more complicated segmented addressing for code and data when going beyond 64K. Well, the 65816 of the Apple IIGS that you're praising much more resembled the 8088/86 CPUs than the MC68000 - but it was actually much worse than an Intel 8088/86 because it lacked two crucial registers that that CPU family had added in its design back in the late 70s - a register for the stack frame (not a stack pointer - stack frame - a context set up by high level languages when making a subroutine JSR) and a register to refer to the memory bank where a stack resides (meaning is possible to load multiple programs into memory and give each its own call stack). This made the 65816 just absolutely utterly pitiful for trying to support with a high level language. Sure, the Mac toolbox in ROM was coded in assembly language but the vast majority of software written for that computer was being written in high level languages which its CPU choice was the absolute best choice at that point in time in history for supporting high level languages. Computer software (and hence the economic factors of creating software) at the end of the day are what end up making or breaking a computer. To program for the Apple IIGS meant sticking with less economical assembly language programming or using crappy compilers that had to produce code that did atrocious hacks in their code generation in order to try and support what a high level language needs to do. The Commodore Amiga went with the MC68000 - not the 65816. Unless one needed to have specific legacy support for 6502 8-bit software, the MC68000 was the hands down obvious choice to base a new computer on in the mid 1980s - no contest whatsoever. It's clear the designer(s) of the 65816 didn't care whatsoever about supporting high level languages - didn't regard that as important at all. Otherwise they would have mimicked the Intel 8088/86 and added a dedicated stack frame register and a dedicated bank register for where the stack resides (on the 65816, the one and only stack is stuck in the zero bank of memory - the only thing they allow to do on the 65816 is to reposition the stack to any where within the zero bank, but this means when loading another program - think MS-DOS TSR programs -, there is no provision for giving the other loaded program its own call stack). The CPU designers at both Intel and Motorola fully conceived of their respective CPUs having explicit support for high level languages and in the mid 80s, Motorola 68000 with its flat addressing ability was the very best conception of all (Intel would not match that until they introduced the 80386 - on the 80386 the OS designs specific to that CPU would set all the segment registers to the same segment and then just ignore them from then on, effectively treating the 80386 as a 32-bit flat addressing CPU). The 65816 was nothing but a CPU designed to support late-70s/early-80s 6502-based 8-bit computers with backward compatibility mode. That is THE only forte it had on its resume. The designer(s) brought absolutely nothing else to the table and the 65816 was already outclassed by its rivals as it appeared in new systems in the mid-80s. The market place tells the rest.

@Zeonoid

4 жыл бұрын

Does it mean that 68000 has kind of 32 bit architecture ?

@peberdah

3 жыл бұрын

C was introduced as a super assembler with a compiler to hidden code. At that time Basic was the language of choice, so including a software that translate Basic syntax into C and include a library of Basic functions equivalents, would be the graal.

@TheSulross

3 жыл бұрын

@@Zeonoid It had a 24-bit address bus to memory, giving it a max 16MB addressable memory. But the registers internally were 32 bit, so as new models of the CPU came out, the addressability to memory was increased, but was possible for software to have been written on 68000 and then just run as is on later generations of the 68000

@TheSulross

3 жыл бұрын

@@peberdah Commercial games of the late 70s, early 80s were written in assembly language - not interpreted BASIC. Non-game professional software developers were quick to move on to compiled languages that generated native code. We predominately chose C as that language in that mid-80s time frame. And because the MS-DOS PC was the business standard, and to some extent the Apple Mac (stuff like desktop publishing), this was a great choice because the CPU architecture supported high level languages. I wrote software for both Intel PCs and Apple Macs in the 80s (and 90s). In the 80s we all were using C for biz software. In the 90s, well in my circles it was C++. By 2000, it became practical to run managed programming languages for creating enterprise business software as computers were fast enough and had much more memory.

Great video again. I've got some additional info for those interested: Steve Jobs was actually against turning the Mac into a color computer because most people had b/w printers, and then the display will not be WYSIWYG compared to the paper. He was also against internal expansion slots. The first Mac with color and expansion slots was the super expensive Macintosh II in 1987, the development had started two years earlier in "secret" because Steve was still in Apple. Once he left they could start the development all-in, so it took them a while. After the release of the Mac in 1984, the Apple II line was selling about 5 times more than the Mac the next couple of years. Mac is actually a cost reduced/cut down Lisa computer. Lisa was released a year before the Mac, but was just to expensive for personal use. So they took away color monitor and memory, and they stripped the OS to fit in the smaller amount of RAM, removing multitasking and color support, let it have 1 internal disk drive instead of 2 etc..

@Odee

4 жыл бұрын

first real multitasking was on apple from 1996. First multitasking by years: Unix-1969, Sinclair QL-1984, Commodore's Amiga-1985, Windows NT-1990 and at the end Mac OS X 1996

@houseofno

4 жыл бұрын

@@Odee Mac OS X didn't exist until 2001. I think you're confusing Mac OS X with the earlier Mac OS which was strictly a 68000 product. Apple briefly made a version of OS X that worked with 68000 until they fully made the transition over to x86 architecture shortly after.

@Odee

4 жыл бұрын

@@houseofno yes, sorry for mac os x, just change os x to computers :) I just trying to say that apple was last in multitasking

@jovetj

4 жыл бұрын

I can't stand it when people drop articles with things like lines of products such as computers. It's _THE_ Macintosh or _A_ Mac, not just "Mac did this" or "Mac was that". It's not a goddamned person.

Where's episode 2? I was looking forward to the second episode, as a previous employee of Apple with my opinions too.

@stevenqbosell

8 жыл бұрын

+Brandon MacEachern seriously, this was really objective, looking forward to number 2

Former IIGS owner here (had one as a kid). Have many fond memories of the platform.

Yes! Hearing that Lemmings music brings me back to the good old days.

The macitosh line is what happens when you have someone caught up in the emotions and marketing of a product as opposed to the engineering of something that could be awesome! I don't own ANY apple products and neither do my kids...never will...one distinct reason...I think your comparison is spot on here. Thank you for the vid!! Cheers.

@igniteexport1463

3 жыл бұрын

Thats so sad you keep your kids off the best phones and tablets in the industry. Well really there is not much of a tablet industry there is iPad and oh I guess windows Surface but thats about it. There are really not much android ones. Oh you use windows? Thats Apple you know

@nunyabusiness4651

3 жыл бұрын

@@igniteexport1463 Think outside the box... your kids are playing with the most overpriced POS that's on the market today. P.S. Windows came from the Xerox Alto, just like Apple OS...

@igniteexport1463

3 жыл бұрын

@@nunyabusiness4651 Windows came from the Mac. Gates was not interested as much in the GUI he liked what they were doing and it wasn't till the Mac came along that they started looking seriously into a GUI. Overpriced? The surface is more expensive then the iPad is and is not nearly as good. There are really no android tabs to speak of.

As I remember the time, the II GS was the successor of the Apple II, which was an enormously popular machine by hobbyists. At least here in Europe. But it always had the nimbus of beeing a hobby machine. Which was great for people developing their own add-on cards, but seriously this wasn't something, lets say a doctor or a lawyer wanted to have on his desktop. The other popular computres of that time, the Atari ST and the Amiga had that same image of beeing a toy machine, used for playing games but not for that much more. Well, the Atari had some reputation of beeing usefull for working with sounds (MIDI), the Amiga was known for the first steps in doing video editing, but that was pretty much it. The Mac on the other hand was a machine, which looked good, which simply worked and definitely was something to do serious work with. It became popular in the first generation of typesetting software for eg. doing a newspaper or just where you need a lot of writing to be done in a professional way. Clearly the lack of color didn't matter that much for these type of things. Much more important was, that even an untrained secretary or a medical or a law student could use that system out of the box without a lot of training or fiddeling around with cables or switches. The Mac was always targeted at the professional market, while the II GS was targeted at the hobby market to all who loved the plugboard design and could make use of it. The competitor for the II GS was Atari ST and Amiga, while the competitor for the Mac was the IBM PC.

@bigalexg

Жыл бұрын

Good points. I just missed this era, not getting a proper computer until the early 90's. I suppose the IBM PC started out with a business image - the name IBM alone accomplishes that - but interesting that IBM (the clones actually) came to own both home/gaming and business markets (with the niche exceptions that the Mac dominated) but I guess the IIGS could never have pulled that off even if it did have more or less the same architecture and limited upgrade path as the IBMs - it was just perceived as a joyboy family and gaming machine.

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

In the USA the IIGS was marjeted at the education market, which Apple dominated. However, they quickly replaced it in their education marketing materials with the Macintosh.

Great points. Thanks for the review

Still a good video, I learned a few new things. Thinking of getting a IIgs and this video came up. Thanks! I was in my late teens/early 20's when the Mac came out and they made me want one SO bad, and seeing one in person made me want one too. Oddly I didn't even know about the IIgs until years later, as the stores where I lived (SF Bay Area) simply didn't carry it. They were pushing the Mac hard. I had a //c and then a IIe with lots of expansion cards I bought used during this period (85-86) but had I known about the IIgs I certainly would have favored it, for obvious reasons. Seems so odd that I was completely in the dark about it.

Where's episode 2?

@davidg4781

8 жыл бұрын

+Josh Rice Was there ever one made? I just found this video, don't know how I missed it a while back.

@AmyraCarter

7 жыл бұрын

Probably won't be one.

@UncleAaron2007

5 жыл бұрын

Josh Rice - He's still trying to upload it with a 200 baud modem!

I was a massive Apple fan at that time. I mean really massive. I knew the memory map, the hooks, I programmed multitasking and networking professionally, built my own interface cards and had a schematic of the Apple II on my wall. And I was eyeing on to the 68000 as well! When I saw the Mac, monochrome, bolted down, with only 128 K of RAM, which was way too scarce for that architecture, that honeymoon was over. You had to PAY more to get a working system. It was like a birdie to all the independent developers. Game over for me. Period. It looked like fascism to me, the kind of thinking that was attacked by that first iconic Macintosh movie clip. Which was withdrawn after one show. They must have realized what it meant. The IBM PC copied the Apple II recipe, with listings and schematics and all openness and look what they achieved! F*** Apple.

@craigconway4093

2 жыл бұрын

A+

@MichaelKingsfordGray

Жыл бұрын

IBM PC copied Hewlett-Packard, not Apple.

As a authorized Apple service tech at the time Apple brought out the Macintosh we were blown away with some of the marketing strategies Apple came out with. Now with all back room details available to us I now think it was a miracle that Apple came out of this time period alive. Thanks for your insight on this subject.

Dave, you never followed up with more. Excellent info. Ignore any Apple apologists. Give us more of reality. Always great work you do.

Hmmm, they slowed down the 2GS on purpose? Sounds like they haven’t changed one bit.

@vincentjanse

4 жыл бұрын

Steve Jobs was a arrogant dickhead that always put his own needs first. However he got better at collaborating when he came back. His bio is a very good read.

@Vanden1500

3 жыл бұрын

i'm pretty sure it was something to do with battery life

@ThomTomful

3 жыл бұрын

That's something people like to repeat, but there's no real evidence for it; if anything quite the opposite. Check out the rate that the 65816 accesses RAM versus the speeds of RAM available c. 1985 when the machine was being designed versus the costs. It's like saying that Apple deliberately crippled the Macintosh Plus because the 68020 had been available since 1984 but wasn't used. It just conveniently discards all the other engineering.

@igniteexport1463

3 жыл бұрын

Apple slowed down OLD iPhones to allow them to continue to be used. If they had not and the battery life sucked then people would complain about that.

@tetsujin_144

3 жыл бұрын

Personally I am skeptical of that claim. The faster CPU still needs to interact with the slow IIe core and peripherals. So about the best you could hope for is a "fast RAM/chip RAM" situation like on the Amiga, but with the "chip RAM" clocked at a lowly 1 MHz. So if they put more effort into giving it faster RAM and CPU the machine could have still wound up bottlenecked by the need to interact with its IIe parts. Though it could be they really did feel a need to be careful about how they positioned the machine relative to the Mac. Ultimately the Mac really was the platform that carried Apple through the 1990s and early 2000s. It floundered a lot in the 1990s - but it remained a viable platform long enough for the iMac and iPod to propel it into the next decade. I really don't believe a IIgs-derived platform could have done the same.

Quite funny to see that you're a fan of Futurame. Nice Slurm T-shirt.

Loved this video, but still waiting on Ep 2. ;)

This was very interesting, thank you.

Gotta say I'm impressed with those black and white games :O they DO look pretty

@lucasrem

5 жыл бұрын

OneMinuteFixed Still impressed, what do you see, what do u use yourself? Games????

"Overpriced Under powered" The only summary of apple you need.

@igniteexport1463

3 жыл бұрын

Apple is far better then other stuff. And frankly most android phones are in price if not higher then the iPhone. Yes the Mac is higher but its allot better then windows machines

Great video. I loved the Apple IIGs I was a Commodore kid so I got the Amiga 1000. Later on as Mac got color I switched over.

The high-res IIGS graphics mode was 640 x 200, which had rectangular pixels. One of the things the Mac introduced was square pixels, and it made the machine look more professional. After trying GEOS and AppleWorks, returning to the Mac was a visual relief.

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

GEOS and AppleWorks were both 8-bit Apple II programs that worked on an Apple //e. Not a fair comparison. Try comparing HyperCard to HyperCard IIGS.

Here's another possibility - the Mac might have had much better margin - e.g. more profit per unit.

@dvl973

8 жыл бұрын

+passion4paws91 so what? they were going bankrupt and they needed money. I think that's a great motivation. This strategy lasted them to this day and made them the most profitable company ever.

@ShamanKish

5 жыл бұрын

@@dvl973 So what? They use slave labor and produce/support idiots all around the planet.

"Overpriced and under powered." I'm pretty sure that's Apple's motto.

@asdfasdf4345artsdfg

7 жыл бұрын

Well, if you knew something about them, you'd probably take that back. However, I do agree with some of the points that David made.

@WinterCedar

7 жыл бұрын

Goorpijp Wessel 12 of one, a dozen of the other.

@iustin898

7 жыл бұрын

maccollectorZ (Commenting Account) Yeah, i know the company fucking sucks and you defending it makes me cringe hard.

@asdfasdf4345artsdfg

7 жыл бұрын

They are kinda going downhill because of Tim Cook; but if you don't know what made them great, you know nothing about them. People who hate Macs don't know much about computers in general.

@ikonix360

7 жыл бұрын

MasterCheifn343 far as I'm concerned their only good more modern product is the iPod. when it was first introduced I don't think there was anything quite like it.

I own a IIGS (now, not then) and it's a really cool computer! I think it was very competitive for its time. One thing I note is that the Mac adopted many of the innovations from the IIGS eventually including the ADB bus, color displays and color graphics in the GUI, and eventually high quality digital audio.

Great video. We had an Apple //c back in the latter half of the 1980's, but I was always quite jealous of my cousin's IIgs (we also used the IIgs in junior HS). By the time we got a new computer, (A Dell with a Pentium 75), the Apple II was pretty much gone and Macintosh was in the doldrums. Since then, I have stuck with the PC. However, I still have fond memories of my Apple II days and have always wished they would have kept it going. If they did, there is a good chance I'd still be an Apple user today.

I wouldn't necessarily blame Steve Jobs, although during his early years at Apple he did do his share of damage. The problem has to do partly with why he was ousted in 1985. When Macintosh sales were slipping, John Sculley wanted to re-focus Apple II development, whereas Jobs wanted to continue Mac development. When Jobs was out of the picture, I think Apple was in a situation where the Mac had gained enough of a following to where the product line could continue to exist, although they could not afford to kill the Apple II. I feel that's how the situation ended up the way it did. I think had Steve Jobs not been fired, the Macintosh probably would have advanced faster, making superior to the Apple II in every way (except for the expandable ports) and the price difference between the Apple II and Macintosh would have been justified.

Here's the problem with your analysis. The IIGS operating system software GSOS would not have existed except for engineers from the Mac team. They brought code and experience from the System 1 project over to the IIGS. Now, I agree that it was completely unfair and short sighted to hobble the IIGS performance.

@vadimrumyantsev8498

4 жыл бұрын

GS/OS technically is a Mac-like GUI running over ProDOS. It based on Apple II technologies.

@TheFaustianMan

2 жыл бұрын

@@vadimrumyantsev8498 agreed. that asshole @stephen collins has no idea what the fuck he is talking about.

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

Apple's Human Interface is a standard. It is a not hardware specific. It could be applied to anything. GSOS is an operating system that manages devices. You are confusing the two.

Great video. Very interesting.

Amazing. Thank you!

3:53 You're still leaving out the floppy disk drive for the IIGS. I guess that would bring the IIGS up to about US$2000, just a little less than the Mac and a helluvalot more than the 16 bit wonders Atari ST and Commodore Amiga.

@tetsujin_144

3 жыл бұрын

Or more realistically - at least two floppy drives: a 5.25" drive to run all the Apple II software, and a 3.5" drive for the handful of GS software...

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

The Mac Plus also would have typically had an external SCSI drive and the same external 3.5" floppy drive purchased. If someone bought a IIGS new and did not have an Apple ][+ or //e then they would have had to buy a new 5.25" drive, but if they were upgrading they could use the Disk ][ drives with the IIGS instead of buying new drives. If you were just going to run 8 bit software then you didn't need to buy the IIGS RGB monitor, a composite monitor from a //e or even a TV set would work. Basically if you already had a ][+ and wanted a IIGS you could get by with just purchasing the IIGS itself - which came with CPU, keyboard, and mouse. You only needed to purchase better peripherals if you wanted to run IIGS specific software.

You are awsome! I am 10 years old And i have a commodore 64 c pc!

Very nice, insightful video (as usual)! Sums it all up quite well. So sad all of Woz's work on the IIGS was so underappreciated, because it's still a magnificent little machine to this day! Jobs may have been an excellent businessman for selling the Macintosh at such high prices but in terms of really appreciating the engineering involved, truth be told: sometimes he kinda sucked. Too bad the business side and the technical side of computing seldomly go hand in hand as history has teached us many times.. Keep up the good work and uh, easy with the dynamite, David ;-)

After getting out of the navy in '84, I was hired by GE up in Syracuse NY. Their engineering offices had three microcomputers: An Apple Macintosh, An IBM PC (two 5.25" floppy drives and no hard drives), and a DEC Rainbow (CP/M, and proprietary pre-formatted 5.25" floppy disks because the machine couldn't re-format them). The DEC didn't get much use. The PC and the Mac were used by various engineers depending on which one they were comfortable with. Personally, I learned Microsoft DOS on the office's PC.

"Slight memory upgrade" from 128k to 1024k?

@EricssonXL

8 жыл бұрын

well it's not much today

@JimFortune

8 жыл бұрын

EricssonXL Factor of 8? Not slight.

@EricssonXL

8 жыл бұрын

Jim Fortune still not much today

@JimFortune

8 жыл бұрын

EricssonXL Upgrading your memory by a factor of 8 is still a huge thing. By calling it "slight" you minimize the stupidity of the original design. And the machine was intentionally designed to have no upgrade path other than buying a new machine.

@EricssonXL

8 жыл бұрын

Unless I was talking to an Apple fanboy, then yes that was my full intention from a normal user's perspective. I know factor of 8 is a huge thing, the thing is the normal person would not talk about 128kb to 1024kb being a factorial jump large but technology advancement large so we'd compare 128kb to 1024kb to something we'd use now like 4gb to 16 gb

Very interesting. I didn't know much about the Apple IIGS. Thanks for this comparison. But I feel that its backward compatibility might have been a drag and prevented the machine from being truly innovative. Although the Mac seemed like an overpriced, underpowered product for some years. I remember distinctly when I first saw the original MacIntosh on display in a computer store, and the ridiculous price tag on it for a little box, with a tiny but very sharp black and white monitor, which couldn't do anything else than a word processor and primitive paint program. I had a full Commodore 64 system at the time, with tons of software and games, 4 floppy drives, colour monitor, printer, for a fraction of the cost of that Mac. It's ironic that today, a Mac is basically a PC with a better OS. Nevertheless I love my near silent Mac and will probably never go back to Windows. Too many wasted years, struggling with half baked operating systems and incompatible hardware, drivers, libraries, and damn noisy fans.

The 68000 cpu used in the Mac required twice as many clock cycles to perform the same operations as the 65816 cpu used in the Apple IIgs. Consequently, to compare clock speeds, you should divide the Mac's clock by two, for an effective Mac clock speed of 3.9Mhz vs the IIgs' 2.8 Mhz. But the major limitation of the IIgs was not speed, it was its peculiar memory segmentation. The 65816 was a 16-bit upgrade of the 8-bit 6502, which could only access 64KB of RAM. While the 65816 could use up to 8MB of RAM, it could only access one 64KB bank of RAM at a time, making it awkward to program. The Mac's 68000 was a native 16-bit cpu that could simultaneously access its entire 8MB memory space without arbitrary memory restrictions. By 1986, it was clear that the Apple II's 8-bit legacy hardware and software limitations were handicaps that could no longer compete with the increasingly dominant IBM PC.

We’ve been waiting almost 5 YEARS FOR EP 2....

Sorry, claiming that both the 68000 and the 65816 processors are "16 bit" is quite questionable. Additionally, just considering clock efficiency in regard to accessing memory is also quite questionable. The 65816 was an 8/16 processor with some extensions over the 6502 and quite frankly, had a very clumsy instruction set. The 68000 was a 16/32 processor and had a clear and planned upgrade path. And frankly, the difference between 24 bit linear addressing (the 68000) vs 24 bit bank addressing (the 65816) is as different as night and day. On the 68000, you could actually use all of your memory for your programs in a seamless fashion. But using banks? That is just pure undiluted insanity. So the 65816 was the tail end of a dead end processor architecture, while the 68000 was the beginning of a new architecture with a clear future upgrade path.

@herrfriberger5

5 жыл бұрын

Not necessarily a dead end. The 65816 could pretty easily have been extended to 32-bit linear adressning, just like Intel did when they designed the 386 from the 8086 and 286. (AMD did the same when extending the instruction set to 64 bits.)

@lawrencedoliveiro9104

5 жыл бұрын

@@herrfriberger5 Your examples seem to refute your point. The 80386 linear addressing offered *no* backward compatibility with segmented addressing as done on the 80286 and earlier processors. This is why the transition from 16-bit to 32-bit Windows APIs was so long and drawn out. Whereas the 68000 was, as the OP pointed out, basically a cut-down 32-bit processor. So when the first 32-bit Mac, the Mac II, was released in 1987, most existing Mac software worked fine on it, and the transition to the “32-bit-clean” era was pretty much complete by about 1990, 5 years before Windows 95.

@herrfriberger5

5 жыл бұрын

​@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 Linear adressing is by definition not segmented, so yes, of course. However, the 386 itself was 100% compatible with 286-style segmented adressing, being a pure extension of the 286. The linear adressing possible with the 386 was just a special case of segmentation, using a single 4 GB segment. It was perfectly possible to run older code on the 386, just as you can run 386 code on x86-64 today. The fact that the designers of 32-bit Windows did not chose to make much use of the segmentation is another matter. I would not blame the "slow" Windows developments on Intel. It has more to do with the original "Windows" being a simple DOS-program, basically a CP/M-style program, and "Windows NT" being (essentially) a port of WMS from the VAX to the the 386. Merging these two worlds took some time, yes, but the transistion from 16- to 32-bit addressing (or word size) was hardly the main problem there. Of course, it's also true that the 68000 had a linear 32-bit adressing architecture from the start and that it made it easy to extend old software. (Its atomic 32-bit integers were of less importance though. The addition of larger native integers when porting code is usually smooth.) The 65816 could run 6502 code using 24-bit adressing, and that simple mapping could have been easily expanded into 32-bits. Adding MMU functionality (like the 286/386 or 68010/20) would be a bit more complex, of course, but that was not strictly required in those days and in these kinds of computers. (There were even UNIX systems without any MMU hardware.)

@herrfriberger5

5 жыл бұрын

@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 PS The 68000 was not really a "cut down" 32-bit processor. It was essentially more of a 16-bit processor that emulated a 32-bit architecture via microcode. It's ALU and data paths were all just sixteen bits wide. The same could be said about processors like the Intel iAPX 432, the National 16032 CPU, many mini computers of the time, etc. A 16-bit implementation of a "32-bit architecture" was common. DS

@lawrencedoliveiro9104

5 жыл бұрын

@@herrfriberger5 There was simply no way to take advantage of the flat 32-bit addressing in the 80386 in any backward-compatible fashion. Contrast this with the 680x0 family, where you could still use 32-bit addresses on the 16-bit machines, albeit restricted to only 16MiB of available address space on a 68000 (note: only 8MiB of this could be used for RAM on the 16-bit Macs), and then run exactly the same code on a 32-bit machine and immediately have access to more memory than that.

You are the only one I don't need to watch on 1.5x

Very clear explanation. That was Steve Jobs Stubborness.

Really love your channel

The Macintosh was released early 1984, but the IIGS was released late 1986. Sure they were on sale at the same time, but alot can happen in 2 years.

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

Here is what happened in those two years -- Apple bled money on the Macintosh, Macintosh 128K, and Macintosh 512K. They were only making money on Apple II sales. By 1986 they had the IIGS which proved that the Apple GUI did not require a Macintosh.

Man i am a PC guy and i find this stuff fascinating. Its always interesting to see the history of a company and their successes and failures.

I still prefer the 512X342 pixel display on the Plus to the 320/640 X 200 display. If you're doing word processing you can see what it's going to look like when printed. Same PPI as the dot matrix printer. Apple's Mac prices were sooo high, though. I love ADB. Woz is the man.

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

You can see what you get as long as you aren't trying to print in color to an ImageWriter II printer.

Great video BTW. Thanks!

I remember our family having an Apple IIgs when I was young, and getting to use early Macs & Mac Pluses, and later our family getting a Mac IIci. I recall the Apple IIgs's GUI usage via mouse sucking- it was laggy, low framerate and extremely hard to position the mouse where you wanted and click on what you wanted. The Mac felt good and Just Worked. Why did Apple dump and neglect the Apple II platform? Probably because architecturally, it was hacks built on hacks to get something that remotely looked and felt like a Lisa/Mac's GUI. Sometimes in software development, you can push a lesser architecture to do cool, modern things, but the further you push without a major architectural rewrite the more bugs and hacks and wasteful computations you end up with and eventually you hit a wall. The Apple II platform was pushed as far as it could go with the IIgs; it gave all it could give. The Apple II was like trying to drive a Ford Model T on a modern highway- it can try to keep speed, but it's really just rattling and shaking, barely holding it together in the slow lane. I don't think they should've focused on the Apple II platform instead of the Mac; I think they should've combined the platforms from early on. The Mac Plus should've had the Apple IIgs's screen and colors. Focus on one better product (as Jobs doubled-down on when he returned in the 90s), not this product line or that product line.

@squirlmy

2 жыл бұрын

It's like you didn't even watch the video! I don't know what point in time you're pointing to that the Apple II was like a Model T, but the whole analogy is faulty. Really the determining factor was the World Wide Web and Internet. It's really a whole separate use for computers at the time. It's a fun challenge to try and get Apple II's on the internet now, and insight into why they faded. Apple also could have spun off a separate Apple-II company, or sold it's licensing. And the Macs did have "Apple II cards" as explained in the video. You're idea about "combining" the product lines is just pulled out of nowhere.

There's a greater difference between the original Mac and the Mac Plus than memory! Newer ROM, HFS file system, double sided floppy, mini DIN-8 ports, SIM sockets.

@RCH_Aero

5 жыл бұрын

No. The Plus still had DB-9 serial ports. It also added a SCSI port, that the 128/512 lacked. The Mac didn't get DIN-8 serial ports (and ADB) until the SE in '87.

@brenthendricks8182

4 жыл бұрын

@@RCH_Aero Wrong, Google Mac plus rear, it still had the db9 mouse but 2 din port for modem and mouse.

Enjoying your videos. :)

I need to see the rest of the series.

It's 2017 and I'm still waiting for the episode 2 tho...

@gourakrushnasahoo-3971

5 жыл бұрын

Now its 2019... No ep2

@Enmos

2 жыл бұрын

@@gourakrushnasahoo-3971 2021 now :/

A very interesting video, thank you for this. I am not an Apple user, I've always had PC's. Mostly because I always felt a PC was far more affordable, expandable and customizable. This may or may not be true, but it's the impression I've always maintained through the years, and being in graphic design and animation, I took a lot of heat for that perspective. I have a great deal of respect, however, for Apple and what they have achieved, and always wondered what product really helped them turn the corner into becoming a profitable and successful business again? Was it the debut of the iMac of the late 90's, or was it as most people believe the iPhone years later?

@thesisko3715

2 жыл бұрын

I always felt it was the iPod that was their beginning of their true renaissance, which paved the way for the iPhone and iPad.

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

The iMac saved Apple.

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

And a loan from Microsoft.

I never could understand why the Mac was so hideously expensive. Which is one reason why I never had one growing up. I absolutely LOVE my IIGS! But to think that it is essentially the better Mac is interesting! Now imagine a IIGS with Macintosh ROMS... Hmmm :)

I worked at Bell Telephone Laboratories in the 80's and we used the MAC for the Graphic arts department. it was a very capable machine and was one of the first if not the first machine to use the GUI. Windows 3.1 GUI was as far as I know and can remember was a direct result of the MAC GUI.

I feel so sad for folk who somehow got the idea that anything from Apple can do video games.

The design of the Macintosh is one of the reasons why I turned my back on Apple (after having owned an Apple II) forever. I hated the way you couldn't expand it, couldn't modify it. It was a manifestation of Steve Jobs' attitude about computers vs. that of Steve Wozniak, an attitude that continues to this day.

The Macintosh 128k was introduces in 1984. Anyhow the comparaison stays fair given it's 1986 the Macintosh Plus and the Apple IIGS… Except: 1) The Macintosh had a GUI and made the computer accessible to any company (as long as they would have understood that it's much more than an expensive typewriter). 2) Both Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak left the company in 1985…

@BrendanBellina

3 ай бұрын

The IIGS had a GUI (initially a black & white one that was then replaced in 1986 with ProDOS 16 and then again in 1988 with System 6 & GSOS.) The Apple IIGS was marketed (while it was marketed) as a consumer home and education machine, not a business machine, and it was backwards compatible with thousands of education titles that the Mac was not.

I'm watching this from the future!