sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> In California, "Shake Alert" for earthquakes is now available for both
> iOS and Android, but Google is going further with a worldwide rollout of
> earthquake detection using Android devices
> <https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/11/21362370/android-earthquake-detection-seismometer-epicenter-shakealert-google>.
> Hopefully Apple will follow, and this is something that Google would
> also probably be willing to help Apple with.

While your point was that Apple is not an innovator, but a well-funded
well-marketed "fast follower", there are some (really crappy) things that
the brilliant Apple _did_ innovate where Google was the fast follower.

Apple pioneered, for example, the "Fuck you customer - it's good for you."

For example, take the loss of functionality so that the user is forced to
buy it back. Apple is the pioneer in doing that (e.g., loss of chargers).

Apple pioneered the "fuck you" to the customer "and then tell them it's good
for them"), as in "I took away the charger for the environment."

Apple made it _easy_ for Samsung to follow, although (thank god) almost all
Android phones still have the basic amenities Apple one by one took from
their customers by way of "fuck you - it's good for you."

Offhand... in no particular order...
Never including SD cards
Not enabling FM radios
Removing aux jacks
Removing chargers
Disallowing sideloading
etc.

Apple pioneered the "fuck you - it's good for you", which Google and Samsung
are only happy to follow (if it works with the Android customers, which,
most of the time, it doesn't).
--
Note that I'm not talking onesies here but huge numbers of phones, where I
know that nospam will claim Android made Apple do all these fuck you's.

On 10/14/2021 8:02 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
>> In California, "Shake Alert" for earthquakes is now available for both
>> iOS and Android, but Google is going further with a worldwide rollout of
>> earthquake detection using Android devices
>> <https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/11/21362370/android-earthquake-detection-seismometer-epicenter-shakealert-google>.
>> Hopefully Apple will follow, and this is something that Google would
>> also probably be willing to help Apple with.
>
> While your point was that Apple is not an innovator, but a well-funded
> well-marketed "fast follower",

Being a "fast follower" is often more profitable than being an innovator.

With Android, no manufacturer wants to fall behind a competitor so they
sometimes introduce features before they are ready for prime time. Apple
knows that iPhone users are not going to run out and buy an Android
device just because the iPhone is a year or two late with some cool new
feature, and Apple can let the technology mature and improve until they
add the feature.

The iPhone was late with 3G, 4G, 5G, NFC, IP68, OLED screens, multi-lens
cameras, phablets, wireless charging, 120Hz displays, reverse wireless
charging (except for the MagSafe battery pack), and still lacks hole
punch cameras, USB-C, folding displays, active styluses, and
under-screen fingerprint readers (these are all likely coming on future
iPhones)

In article <skb2j1$fri$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> The iPhone was late with 3G,

nope. the iphone had 3g before the first android phone was released.

> 4G, 5G,

the first versions ran hot and drained the battery within an hour or
two, making those nothing more than a useless checklist item to be
'first'.

rest of your list snipped.

as usual, you ignore the numerous things where apple was first,
including the iphone itself, retina displays, wide gamut displays, xdr
displays, variable refresh rate, 64 bit processors, uwb, bluetooth le,
face id, continuity & handoff, lidar, airdrop, heif/hevc, 3d touch,
universal control, pro res video, cinematic mode, private relay,
sign-in, object capture, apple silicon, 5nm process and much more.

android still lacks most of those and took a while for the few they do
have.

On 2021-10-14 8:02 p.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
>> In California, "Shake Alert" for earthquakes is now available for both
>> iOS and Android, but Google is going further with a worldwide rollout of
>> earthquake detection using Android devices
>> <https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/11/21362370/android-earthquake-detection-seismometer-epicenter-shakealert-google>.
>> Hopefully Apple will follow, and this is something that Google would
>> also probably be willing to help Apple with.
>
> While your point was that Apple is not an innovator, but a well-funded
> well-marketed "fast follower", there are some (really crappy) things that
> the brilliant Apple _did_ innovate where Google was the fast follower.
>
> Apple pioneered, for example, the "Fuck you customer - it's good for you."
>
> For example, take the loss of functionality so that the user is forced to
> buy it back. Apple is the pioneer in doing that (e.g., loss of chargers).
>
> Apple pioneered the "fuck you" to the customer "and then tell them it's good
> for them"), as in "I took away the charger for the environment."
>
> Apple made it _easy_ for Samsung to follow, although (thank god) almost all
> Android phones still have the basic amenities Apple one by one took from
> their customers by way of "fuck you - it's good for you."
>
> Offhand... in no particular order...
> Never including SD cards
> Not enabling FM radios
> Removing aux jacks
> Removing chargers
> Disallowing sideloading

Those are all CHOICES, and you've already demonstrated that you're lying
by the use of the term "took away".

You cannot take away that which you never once provided.

> etc.
>
> Apple pioneered the "fuck you - it's good for you", which Google and Samsung
> are only happy to follow (if it works with the Android customers, which,
> most of the time, it doesn't).
>

On 2021-10-15 04:24, nospam wrote:

> as usual, you ignore the numerous things where apple was first,
> including the iphone itself

Nokia 9000 in late 1990s, first smartphone. Not known in USA because of
lack of GSM (but was available on Omnipoimt/Voicestream and Fido in
Canada). This was a PSION Series 3a under the hood with a Nokia phone
packaged into a clamshell phone. Data at the time was circuit switched
since GPRS didn't exist yet. (GSM offered circuit switched data from
very early on - the GSM network acted as a glorified RS232 cable that
let the mobile device connect to a modem at the mobile carrier premises
which then dialed into the telephone nerwork to connect).

Compaq iPaq evolved into the 6300 in June 2004 (by then under HP) with
cellular capability, touch screen etc.

The expected tidal wave from Microsoft CE (which morphed into different
names) was so great that PSION, the first to do PDAs to just throw in
the towel and donate its new operating system to a consortium headed by
Nokia ( OS got renamed to Symbian).

Windows CE never took over as expected, and it was instead IOS and Android.

Apple wasn't first smartphone. But it did a much better job than prevous
smartphones.

> retina displays,

Not an Apple product. That is a LCD manufacturer product. Where Apple
has been good is securing supply first for new tech.

> 64 bit processors

Digital was first with the Alpha in 1992. Apple was first to
commercialise a 64 bit ARM processor in the 2010s. Heck, even the 8086
went 64 bits before ARM.

> face id,

Plenty of facial recognotion before. iPhone. In fact, even the Compaq
Ipaq had fingerprint recog on some models. Apple may have done much
better job of implementing both fingerprint and facial recog, but it
wasn't first.

On 10/15/2021 10:29 AM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-15 04:24, nospam wrote:
>
>> as usual, you ignore the numerous things where apple was first,
>> including the iphone itself
>
> Nokia 9000 in late 1990s, first smartphone.

The IBM Simon, distributed by BellSouth Cellular Corporation beginning
in 1994, predated the Nokia 9000 as the first smart phone, see
<https://history-computer.com/products/simon-personal-communicator-complete-history-of-the-computer-by-ibs/>.

Steve Jobs' genius was the ability to look at product categories that
failed and then creating compelling products that addressed the flaws of
the failed products. The Xerox Star begat the Mac. The MPMan
F10/EigerMan F10 & F20 begat the iPod. The IBM Simon and Nokia 9000
begat the iPhone. Windows XP Tablet Edition tablets begat the iPad.

In article <ITiaJ.210966$Kv2.52464@fx47.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Apple wasn't first smartphone. But it did a much better job than prevous
> smartphones.

i didn't say they made the first smartphone.

what i said was that the iphone was first, which android and windows
phone copied.

> > retina displays,
>
> Not an Apple product.

yes it was in an apple product, first in the iphone 4, then later
released in macbooks and the imac.

the latest ipad pro has a mini-led xdr display that is without
question, the best display on any mobile device.

> > 64 bit processors
>
> Digital was first with the Alpha in 1992.

digital didn't make phones and their computers weren't that good either.

the first smartphone to have a 64 bit processor was the iphone 5s,
using apple's own design, the a7.

android device makers and qualcomm tried to claim 64 bit wasn't needed
while they scrambled to catch up.

> Apple was first to
> commercialise a 64 bit ARM processor in the 2010s.

specifically, 2013.

> Heck, even the 8086
> went 64 bits before ARM.

8086 was never used in a phone, nor has it been used since the 1980s.

> > face id,
>
> Plenty of facial recognotion before.

ones which were trivially spoofed with a photo.

one of them (i think samsung) was spoofed *at* the product introduction
in the demo room, moments after it was announced, by using a selfie on
another phone.

face id is the first facial recognition system that is actually secure
and incredibly difficult to spoof (nothing is 100%).

it took google a couple of years to copy face id for the pixel 4, which
they subsequently discontinued in the pixel 5, leaving not a single
android device with anything equivalent.

In article <skceks$nb6$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> The Xerox Star begat the Mac.

not really. both had a graphical display with icons, but the similarity
mostly ends there. the user interface differences are dramatic, all of
which was apple's own efforts.

what's also amusing is that in 1984, a $2500 128k mac running from a
floppy drive was faster than a $15,000 xerox star, with a shitload more
apps too. i used both.

> The IBM Simon and Nokia 9000
> begat the iPhone.

other than both being phones, no.

> Windows XP Tablet Edition tablets begat the iPad.

also wrong. there is nothing in common between windows xp tablets and
the ipad beyond the shape.

apple designed a touch-centric operating system explicitly for tablets
and phones.

microsoft chose not to do that, and why the old windows tablets were a
horrible failure.

On 10/15/2021 2:07 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <skceks$nb6$1@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> The Xerox Star begat the Mac.
>
> not really. both had a graphical display with icons, but the similarity
> mostly ends there. the user interface differences are dramatic, all of
> which was apple's own efforts.
>
> what's also amusing is that in 1984, a $2500 128k mac running from a
> floppy drive was faster than a $15,000 xerox star, with a shitload more
> apps too. i used both.
>
>> The IBM Simon and Nokia 9000
>> begat the iPhone.
>
> other than both being phones, no.
>
>> Windows XP Tablet Edition tablets begat the iPad.
>
> also wrong. there is nothing in common between windows xp tablets and
> the ipad beyond the shape.
>
> apple designed a touch-centric operating system explicitly for tablets
> and phones.
>
> microsoft chose not to do that, and why the old windows tablets were a
> horrible failure.
>

HP Jornada and iPaq...

On 15/10/2021 07.11, sms wrote:
> On 10/14/2021 8:02 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
>> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
>>> In California, "Shake Alert" for earthquakes is now available for both
>>> iOS and Android, but Google is going further with a worldwide rollout of
>>> earthquake detection using Android devices
>>> <https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/11/21362370/android-earthquake-detection-seismometer-epicenter-shakealert-google>.
>>>
>>> Hopefully Apple will follow, and this is something that Google would
>>> also probably be willing to help Apple with.
>>
>> While your point was that Apple is not an innovator, but a well-funded
>> well-marketed "fast follower",
>
> Being a "fast follower" is often more profitable than being an innovator.
>
> With Android, no manufacturer wants to fall behind a competitor so they
> sometimes introduce features before they are ready for prime time. Apple
> knows that iPhone users are not going to run out and buy an Android
> device just because the iPhone is a year or two late with some cool new
> feature, and Apple can let the technology mature and improve until they
> add the feature.
>
> The iPhone was late with 3G, 4G, 5G, NFC, IP68, OLED screens, multi-lens
> cameras, phablets, wireless charging, 120Hz displays, reverse wireless
> charging (except for the MagSafe battery pack), and still lacks hole
> punch cameras, USB-C, folding displays, active styluses, and
> under-screen fingerprint readers (these are all likely coming on future
> iPhones)

:-D

<https://www.applesfera.com/curiosidades/tipo-ha-conseguido-poner-usb-c-funcional-iphone-13-no-quien-crees-que>

*One guy has managed to put a working USB-C in an iPhone X (and it's not
who you think it is). *

Someone has managed to put a USB-C on an iPhone X. And he's done it with
a port that is functional, both in charging and data transfer. The
project demonstrates that it is possible to create an iPhone with USB-C
and shows us what it would be like to have it on a terminal of these
characteristics.

The unseen: an iPhone X with USB-C port

An iPhone X with USB-C is not something that will go unnoticed. Although
Apple probably has several iPhone models in operation with this
connector in its laboratories, the truth is that it is most striking.
And the man responsible is Ken Pillonel, a technician who studied
electronics and holds a master's degree in robotics from the Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology.

....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAekbJf4Gsw&t=39s

World's First USB-C iPhone #shorts

https://kenp.io/iphone_usbc_mod_part_1/

The USB-C iPhone Mod - Part 1

<https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/10/11/iphone-gets-usb-c-thanks-to-creative-robotics-engineer>

iPhone gets USB-C thanks to creative robotics engineer

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2021-10-15 10:43 a.m., sms wrote:
> On 10/15/2021 10:29 AM, JF Mezei wrote:
>> On 2021-10-15 04:24, nospam wrote:
>>
>>> as usual, you ignore the numerous things where apple was first,
>>> including the iphone itself
>>
>> Nokia 9000 in late 1990s, first smartphone.
>
> The IBM Simon, distributed by BellSouth Cellular Corporation beginning
> in 1994, predated the Nokia 9000 as the first smart phone, see
> <https://history-computer.com/products/simon-personal-communicator-complete-history-of-the-computer-by-ibs/>.
>
>
> Steve Jobs' genius was the ability to look at product categories that
> failed and then creating compelling products that addressed the flaws of
> the failed products. The Xerox Star begat the Mac. The MPMan
> F10/EigerMan F10 & F20 begat the iPod. The IBM Simon and Nokia 9000
> begat the iPhone. Windows XP Tablet Edition tablets begat the iPad.

Again: the Xerox Star did NOT beget the Mac.

Apple was working on GUI concepts before anyone had seen it.

On 2021-10-15 14:07, nospam wrote:
>
> what's also amusing is that in 1984, a $2500 128k mac running from a
> floppy drive was faster than a $15,000 xerox star, with a shitload more
> apps too. i used both.

Apple's first GUI was the Lisa a few years before the first Mac. The
LISA was much closer to the Xerox computer. And not fair to compare a
1984 Mac with a 181 or 1982 Xerox product since chips back then saw
performance double every year.

> apple designed a touch-centric operating system explicitly for tablets
> and phones.

Windows CE and PSION's EPOC 32 both were touch screen centric and in
late 1990s, much before Apple got into that generation. The Newton
predated both, but never evolved into a phone. Windows CE (under
various names() did support phones before Apple did. (HP iPaq 1600)

There was also tha Palm Pilot which became popular in USA and did
eventually morph into a phone but after HP bought it, just perished as
do must of what HP acquires.

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote
> nospam wrote

>> as usual, you ignore the numerous things where
>> apple was first, including the iphone itself

> Nokia 9000 in late 1990s, first smartphone.

Not true and the first iphone was radically different anyway.

> Apple wasn't first smartphone.

He didn’t say it was.

> But it did a much better job than prevous smartphones.

>> retina displays,

> Not an Apple product. That is a LCD manufacturer product.

Mindless hair splitting.

> Where Apple has been good is securing supply first for new tech.

>> 64 bit processors

> Digital was first with the Alpha in 1992.

But not used in a phone, stupid.

In article <65naJ.92464$ol1.45470@fx42.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> >
> > what's also amusing is that in 1984, a $2500 128k mac running from a
> > floppy drive was faster than a $15,000 xerox star, with a shitload more
> > apps too. i used both.
>
> Apple's first GUI was the Lisa a few years before the first Mac. The
> LISA was much closer to the Xerox computer.

no it very definitely wasn't.

> And not fair to compare a
> 1984 Mac with a 181 or 1982 Xerox product since chips back then saw
> performance double every year.

no they didn't.

the point is that a small desktop computer could outperform something
six times its price.

> > apple designed a touch-centric operating system explicitly for tablets
> > and phones.
>
> Windows CE and PSION's EPOC 32 both were touch screen centric and in
> late 1990s, much before Apple got into that generation.

wince was basically windows with a proxy for a mouse. it was not
touch-centric and the 'touch' was resistive with a stylus.

that's very, very different than the iphone.

> The Newton
> predated both, but never evolved into a phone. Windows CE (under
> various names() did support phones before Apple did. (HP iPaq 1600)

newton was another apple first and a bit ahead of its time.

> There was also tha Palm Pilot which became popular in USA

only because it was less expensive than a newton and small enough to
fit in a pocket. otherwise, it was nothing special.

> and did
> eventually morph into a phone but after HP bought it, just perished as
> do must of what HP acquires.

that part is true.

On 2021-10-15 3:16 p.m., JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-15 14:07, nospam wrote:
>>
>> what's also amusing is that in 1984, a $2500 128k mac running from a
>> floppy drive was faster than a $15,000 xerox star, with a shitload more
>> apps too. i used both.
>
> Apple's first GUI was the Lisa a few years before the first Mac. The
> LISA was much closer to the Xerox computer. And not fair to compare a
> 1984 Mac with a 181 or 1982 Xerox product since chips back then saw
> performance double every year.

1. The Lisa got its GUI from the work they were doing on the Mac, not
the other way around.

2. It still wasn't anything like the Xerox GUI other than that there
were certain basic concepts in common (windows, a pointer, icons, etc.).
How you worked with those elements in each was very different (look up:
direct manipulation).

>
>
>> apple designed a touch-centric operating system explicitly for tablets
>> and phones.
>
> Windows CE and PSION's EPOC 32 both were touch screen centric and in
> late 1990s, much before Apple got into that generation. The Newton
> predated both, but never evolved into a phone. Windows CE (under
> various names() did support phones before Apple did. (HP iPaq 1600)
>
> There was also tha Palm Pilot which became popular in USA and did
> eventually morph into a phone but after HP bought it, just perished as
> do must of what HP acquires.
>
>

On 2021-10-15 18:31, Alan wrote:

> 1. The Lisa got its GUI from the work they were doing on the Mac, not
> the other way around

Suggest you read real history books. Even the Isaccson biography of
Steve Jobs speaks of the Xerox-> Lisa -> Mac. Just because muych was
added/changed since Xerox does not negate that the roots of the GUI came
from Xerox Parc work.

In article <gunaJ.239146$T_8.19039@fx48.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > 1. The Lisa got its GUI from the work they were doing on the Mac, not
> > the other way around
>
>
> Suggest you read real history books.

suggest you listen to people who were there.

> Even the Isaccson biography of
> Steve Jobs speaks of the Xerox-> Lisa -> Mac.

what specifically does it say?

lisa did ship before mac, but that's about it. internally, they were
separate concurrent projects.

> Just because muych was
> added/changed since Xerox does not negate that the roots of the GUI came
> from Xerox Parc work.

very little did. they were only casually similar.

On 2021-10-15 3:43 p.m., JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-15 18:31, Alan wrote:
>
>> 1. The Lisa got its GUI from the work they were doing on the Mac, not
>> the other way around
>
>
> Suggest you read real history books. Even the Isaccson biography of
> Steve Jobs speaks of the Xerox-> Lisa -> Mac. Just because muych was
> added/changed since Xerox does not negate that the roots of the GUI came
> from Xerox Parc work.

Quote it.

And if he says that... ...he's just got it wrong.

Alan <nope@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2021-10-15 10:43 a.m., sms wrote:
>> On 10/15/2021 10:29 AM, JF Mezei wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-15 04:24, nospam wrote:
>>>
>>>> as usual, you ignore the numerous things where apple was first,
>>>> including the iphone itself
>>>
>>> Nokia 9000 in late 1990s, first smartphone.
>>
>> The IBM Simon, distributed by BellSouth Cellular Corporation beginning
>> in 1994, predated the Nokia 9000 as the first smart phone, see
>> <https://history-computer.com/products/simon-personal-communicator-complete-history-of-the-computer-by-ibs/>.
>>
>>
>> Steve Jobs' genius was the ability to look at product categories that
>> failed and then creating compelling products that addressed the flaws of
>> the failed products. The Xerox Star begat the Mac. The MPMan
>> F10/EigerMan F10 & F20 begat the iPod. The IBM Simon and Nokia 9000
>> begat the iPhone. Windows XP Tablet Edition tablets begat the iPad.
>
> Again: the Xerox Star did NOT beget the Mac.
>
> Apple was working on GUI concepts before anyone had seen it.

He probably meant to say the Xerox Alto.
The Alto was running a GUI before Apple even existed...

On 2021-10-15 18:59, nospam wrote:

>> Even the Isaccson biography of
>> Steve Jobs speaks of the Xerox-> Lisa -> Mac.
>
> what specifically does it say?

It explains the process by which Jobs saw the work at Xerox Parc and got
the moral equivalent of a licenmce to use the work. it was not stolen,
it was used with Xerox,s official blessing).

Lisa was already being developped, and they integrated the GUI design
from Parc into the Lisa.

The Macintosh started after that, And since Steve Job moved from the
Lisa to Macintosh he brought the Xerox concepts to thye Mac group as well.

On 2021-10-16 1:10 a.m., Rob wrote:
> Alan <nope@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2021-10-15 10:43 a.m., sms wrote:
>>> On 10/15/2021 10:29 AM, JF Mezei wrote:
>>>> On 2021-10-15 04:24, nospam wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> as usual, you ignore the numerous things where apple was first,
>>>>> including the iphone itself
>>>>
>>>> Nokia 9000 in late 1990s, first smartphone.
>>>
>>> The IBM Simon, distributed by BellSouth Cellular Corporation beginning
>>> in 1994, predated the Nokia 9000 as the first smart phone, see
>>> <https://history-computer.com/products/simon-personal-communicator-complete-history-of-the-computer-by-ibs/>.
>>>
>>>
>>> Steve Jobs' genius was the ability to look at product categories that
>>> failed and then creating compelling products that addressed the flaws of
>>> the failed products. The Xerox Star begat the Mac. The MPMan
>>> F10/EigerMan F10 & F20 begat the iPod. The IBM Simon and Nokia 9000
>>> begat the iPhone. Windows XP Tablet Edition tablets begat the iPad.
>>
>> Again: the Xerox Star did NOT beget the Mac.
>>
>> Apple was working on GUI concepts before anyone had seen it.
>
> He probably meant to say the Xerox Alto.
> The Alto was running a GUI before Apple even existed...
>

And that still doesn't mean Apple was copying it.

On 2021-10-16 1:24 a.m., JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-15 18:59, nospam wrote:
>
>>> Even the Isaccson biography of
>>> Steve Jobs speaks of the Xerox-> Lisa -> Mac.
>>
>> what specifically does it say?
>
> It explains the process by which Jobs saw the work at Xerox Parc and got
> the moral equivalent of a licenmce to use the work. it was not stolen,
> it was used with Xerox,s official blessing).

Except the GUI was already in development BEFORE that visit.

>
> Lisa was already being developped, and they integrated the GUI design
> from Parc into the Lisa.

No. They didn't.

>
> The Macintosh started after that,

Nope. That's wrong.

> And since Steve Job moved from the
> Lisa to Macintosh he brought the Xerox concepts to thye Mac group as well.

Also wrong.

On 2021-10-16 10:58, nope@nope.com
>> And since Steve Job moved from the
>> Lisa to Macintosh he brought the Xerox concepts to thye Mac group as well.
>
> Also wrong.

dear nameless person without anu credentials, suggest you at least look
up the entry for Lisa in Wikipedia and read that history, if you're
unwilling to read the Steve Jobs biography by Isaacson.

On 2021-10-16 2:07 p.m., JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-16 10:58, nope@nope.com
>>> And since Steve Job moved from the
>>> Lisa to Macintosh he brought the Xerox concepts to thye Mac group as well.
>>
>> Also wrong.
>
>
> dear nameless person without anu credentials, suggest you at least look
> up the entry for Lisa in Wikipedia and read that history, if you're
> unwilling to read the Steve Jobs biography by Isaacson.
>
>

I suggest you remember all the posts I made on this very subject,
including quotes from Jef Raskin...

....or don't you even know who that is?

On 2021-10-16 2:07 p.m., JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-16 10:58, nope@nope.com
>>> And since Steve Job moved from the
>>> Lisa to Macintosh he brought the Xerox concepts to thye Mac group as well.
>>
>> Also wrong.
>
>
> dear nameless person without anu credentials, suggest you at least look
> up the entry for Lisa in Wikipedia and read that history, if you're
> unwilling to read the Steve Jobs biography by Isaacson.

I'll take pity on you and your ignorance.

This is Jef Raskin:

'CHRONOLOGY

The fact was that the Macintosh project was officially started-- it had
really been started in 1978-- it was approved and was a going project
before that visit took place. So it's chronologically not possible for
that visit to have sparked the Macintosh. I have read over and over that
that visit is what started the Macintosh project, that Jobs saw it and
said, "There shall be Macintosh." But no, the Macintosh project was
already in existence. Actually, I had worked with Bill Atkinson and some
other people because I was on the outs with Jobs by then, and Bill
Atkinson was on his wonderful list; so I had finagled things to get Jobs
to PARC so he could begin to understand what I was trying to do.

Most people don't know also that the Lisa machine in those early days--
this was 1979-- was a character-generator, green-screen machine; it
didn't have a bitmapped screen, it was not Macintosh-like. That all came
from the Macintosh project to the Lisa. I went over then to Ken
Rothmuller, and I was telling him why this was a dumb thing you're
doing, that the future is in bit-mapped screens, and take a look at what
we're doing on the Macintosh project. But it was Lisa that got all the
funding, and Jobs behind it, and two hundred engineers, and cost
$15,000, and my little project with just a handful of people was doing
the right thing.

But the basic idea of a graphics-based, user interface-oriented machine
for Lisa came from the Macintosh project. The only book I've ever seen
that mentions that is Owen Linzmeyer's Apple Confidential. Everyone else
has gotten it wrong: they say that the Macintosh was a downsized Lisa,
when really the Lisa was an upsized Macintosh. Exactly backwards.'

<https://web.stanford.edu/dept/SUL/sites/mac/primary/interviews/raskin/parc.html>