On 2021-10-16 17:22, nope wrote:

> 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,

Until visit to Xerox Parc by Steve Jobs. Tye Lisa was already started,
and as you state started off as character cell and then changed to GUI.

To quote the very link you posted:
##
Now, the Lisa was very Star-like; the Lisa stole things from Star right
and left-- it stole people, it stole ideas, even stole the font names,
exactly. I didn't like that, and I thought we could do better. Certainly
the Macintosh benefited from Lisa development; later on, Lisa software
came over to Macintosh, and Macintosh software went over to Lisa. And
there was cross-pollination, which was fine
##

Since the Lisa started as character cell and changed to incorportare GUI
later, Have it ever occured to you that the same could have happened to
the Mac? (especially if Streve Jobs is the one who change the course on
the Lisa to make it go GUI and when Jobs moved to Macintosh team did the
same?

Also, your guy uses the "stole" term. Steve Jobs debunked this because
Apple got official rights to use the Xerox Parc designs. (Xerox saw no
strategic future of that tech for itself so had no problems with Apple
using it).

The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first product out
with GUI. Are you denyting that the Lisa was first to market before the
Mac?

Since Isaacson interviewed Steve Jobs extensively and Jobs approved his
biography, what you are saying is that Steve Jobs is the one who got it
wrong isntead of Raskin's interpretation.

On 2021-10-16 2:46 p.m., JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-16 17:22, nope wrote:
>
>> 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,
>
> Until visit to Xerox Parc by Steve Jobs. Tye Lisa was already started,
> and as you state started off as character cell and then changed to GUI.
>
>
> To quote the very link you posted:
> ##
> Now, the Lisa was very Star-like; the Lisa stole things from Star right
> and left-- it stole people, it stole ideas, even stole the font names,
> exactly. I didn't like that, and I thought we could do better. Certainly
> the Macintosh benefited from Lisa development; later on, Lisa software
> came over to Macintosh, and Macintosh software went over to Lisa. And
> there was cross-pollination, which was fine
> ##
>
>
> Since the Lisa started as character cell and changed to incorportare GUI
> later, Have it ever occured to you that the same could have happened to
> the Mac? (especially if Streve Jobs is the one who change the course on
> the Lisa to make it go GUI and when Jobs moved to Macintosh team did the
> same?

You have the order of operations wrong.

The GUI work pre-dates the PARC visit... ...which as only to sell Jobs
on the value of what they were ALREADY doing.

>
> Also, your guy uses the "stole" term. Steve Jobs debunked this because
> Apple got official rights to use the Xerox Parc designs. (Xerox saw no
> strategic future of that tech for itself so had no problems with Apple
> using it).
>
> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first product out
> with GUI. Are you denyting that the Lisa was first to market before the
> Mac?

No one stated that the Mac was the first product out with a GUI.

>
> Since Isaacson interviewed Steve Jobs extensively and Jobs approved his
> biography, what you are saying is that Steve Jobs is the one who got it
> wrong isntead of Raskin's interpretation.

I'm saying that Jobs lied when it suited him.

>
>

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

>> 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,

> Until visit to Xerox Parc by Steve Jobs.

Wrong, as Raskin spells out. Isaacson got it wrong.

> Tye Lisa was already started, and as you state started
> off as character cell and then changed to GUI.

Because Raskin rubbed their nose in what the Mac was doing.

Nothing to do with Parc.

>
> To quote the very link you posted:
> ##
> Now, the Lisa was very Star-like; the Lisa stole things from Star right
> and left-- it stole people, it stole ideas, even stole the font names,
> exactly. I didn't like that, and I thought we could do better. Certainly
> the Macintosh benefited from Lisa development; later on, Lisa software
> came over to Macintosh, and Macintosh software went over to Lisa. And
> there was cross-pollination, which was fine
> ##

Says nothing useful about why the Lisa went from character to bit mapped.

> Since the Lisa started as character cell and changed to incorportare GUI
> later, Have it ever occured to you that the same could have happened to
> the Mac?

Raskin who was involved with the Mac says that it didn’t happen that way.

> (especially if Streve Jobs is the one who change
> the course on the Lisa to make it go GUI

He didn’t, as Raskin points out.

> and when Jobs moved to Macintosh team did the same?

You have that backwards, as always.

> Since Isaacson interviewed Steve Jobs extensively and Jobs approved his
> biography, what you are saying is that Steve Jobs is the one who got it
> wrong isntead of Raskin's interpretation.

You don’t know what Jobs told Isaacson. Raskin does know how the Lisa went
bit mapped and GUI.

In article <3LHaJ.194817$o45.102213@fx46.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first product out
> with GUI.

nobody said that

On 2021-10-16 18:25, nospam wrote:

>> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first product out
>> with GUI.
>
> nobody said that

Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response that
Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.

In article <iH1bJ.72695$md6.6627@fx36.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> >> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first product out
> >> with GUI.
> >
> > nobody said that
>
>
> Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
> mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response that
> Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.

nope. what was said was the mac was yet another thing that apple did
which did *not* follow the rest of the industry.

in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.

the xerox star did exist, but in very small numbers, mainly because it
was very slow and very expensive.

the mac was well ahead of its time, which changed the entire computing
industry. microsoft immediately started copying it.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> the mac was well ahead of its time, which changed the entire computing
> industry. microsoft immediately started copying it.

In my humble opinion, Apple did a few things which revolutionized their
respective industries, but the Mac wasn't all that much more of an influence
than the IBM AT was, IMHO.

The iPod was pretty damn good though (I still have half a dozen but stopped
buying them when they stopped working with SharePod freeware instead of the
iTunes abomination).

Of course, the first iPhone revolutionalized the smartphone, but perhaps not
much more than the blackberry did before it (and certainly Google took only
a few years to overcome the iPhone in every way possible).

I had them all - (I still have those big black rectangular cases - don't
believe me - ask for a photo) - and still have a few iPods and somewhere is
the AT&T iPhone I had to jailbreak to work on T-Mobile (and of course, I
have iPads & I just recently bought a 128GB iPhone 12 mini for half price).

Back to the fundamental statement above - which do you feel revolutionalized
the PC industry more than the other (if by a lot)... the Mac or the IBM AT?

On 2021-10-17 18:58, nospam wrote:

> in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.

Read about X-Windows. And there wwere many graphical systems attached
much earlier on computers such as PDP-11s.

Where Xerox/Apple made big change is the document based apprioach
(clicking on document opens relevant app which automatically opens that
clicked document). The existint systems were all app based when you
chose an app from a menu and from the app, you would open the document
in file selection menu.

You forget that outside of personal computers, there were other computers.

On 2021-10-17 19:19, Robin Goodfellow wrote:

> In my humble opinion, Apple did a few things which revolutionized their
> respective industries, but the Mac wasn't all that much more of an influence
> than the IBM AT was, IMHO.

The IBM PC continued the command line approach of CPM, commdore PET and
others. It is because of the Mac that IBM/Microsoft worked on an
application called Windows to emulate graphics on a PC. IBM PC took
over because IBM was the dominant computer company and DIgital (the then
#2) chose not to follow into that market. IBM got PCs into companies
because it was already into every company via its mainframe business,
and that took the wind out of the Apple II (which had made inroads even
into banks prior to IBM PC). The IBM PC was a business success, not a
technological one. It had far inferior 8086 chip than Apple's 68k
selection. 640k with segment register nightmare.

The LIsa and Mac had mouse driver and window server integrated into the
operating system whereas the IBM PC, it was all layered as an
application caled "Windows" (no mouse when in DOS mode). And all that
came much later than the Mac.

> Of course, the first iPhone revolutionalized the smartphone, but perhaps not
> much more than the blackberry did before it

Many phones had email clients and WAP browsers before Blackberry.
Blackberry had a keyboard instead of just the numeric keypad. And it had
different business model where all data flowed through Blackberry/RIM
servers before going to the Internet (since RIM handled encryption).
But my old Siemens or Ericsson 790 had same apps/functions as a
Blackberry, just more ackward to use because smaller.

In article <uB2bJ.110487$Dr.109458@fx40.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.
>
> Read about X-Windows.

i used x-windows. it was very poorly designed and did absolutely
nothing to the industry.

> And there wwere many graphical systems attached
> much earlier on computers such as PDP-11s.

spacewar, which ran on a pdp-1, doesn't count.

> Where Xerox/Apple made big change is the document based apprioach
> (clicking on document opens relevant app which automatically opens that
> clicked document). The existint systems were all app based when you
> chose an app from a menu and from the app, you would open the document
> in file selection menu.

apple did much, much more than that

> You forget that outside of personal computers, there were other computers.

apple makes personal computers and therefore those other companies are
not relevant.

In article <BK2bJ.193226$rl3.156844@fx45.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> The IBM PC continued the command line approach of CPM, commdore PET and
> others. It is because of the Mac that IBM/Microsoft worked on an
> application called Windows to emulate graphics on a PC.

so you finally admit apple was first and others copied what they did.

BTW, just as you think Apple was alone with windowing software:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS#Graphical_user_interfaces

The original graphical user interface for VMS was a proprietary
windowing system known as the VMS Workstation Software (VWS), which was
first released for the VAXstation I in 1984.[114] It exposed an API
called the User Interface Services (UIS).[115] It ran on a limited
selection of VAX hardware.[116]

VWS was replaced with X-Windows on VMS since X-WIndows provided industry
standard API which made it easier for software to run on VMS and Unix.

VWS came with a wicked simulator to land a LEM on the moon. When VMS
moved to X-Windows, the moon lander simulator was replaced with a
"physics realistic" flight simulator with pieces of software donated by
CAE that used VMS to power the real flight simulators back then. (but
the graphcs were wire-frame)

On 2021-10-17 20:16, nospam wrote:
> In article <BK2bJ.193226$rl3.156844@fx45.iad>, JF Mezei
> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>> The IBM PC continued the command line approach of CPM, commdore PET and
>> others. It is because of the Mac that IBM/Microsoft worked on an
>> application called Windows to emulate graphics on a PC.
>
> so you finally admit apple was first and others copied what they did.

I never argued that Microsoft Windows was before Mac.

Your ilk argued that the Mac was first with graphical user interface. It
was not. There were others oustide of Mac/PC arena. And ther was the
Lisa before the Mac, so even inside of Apple, the Mac was not first.

In article <xl3bJ.193227$rl3.63384@fx45.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS#Graphical_user_interfaces
>
> The original graphical user interface for VMS was a proprietary
> windowing system known as the VMS Workstation Software (VWS), which was
> first released for the VAXstation I in 1984.

from the citation,
The first release of the V station I was available in late 1984.

that was *after* the mac and certainly well after the lisa

unlike what apple did, it had zero influence on the industry.

In article <lo3bJ.193228$rl3.74287@fx45.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> >
> >> The IBM PC continued the command line approach of CPM, commdore PET and
> >> others. It is because of the Mac that IBM/Microsoft worked on an
> >> application called Windows to emulate graphics on a PC.
> >
> > so you finally admit apple was first and others copied what they did.
>
> I never argued that Microsoft Windows was before Mac.

nobody said you did.

> Your ilk argued that the Mac was first with graphical user interface. It
> was not.

nobody said that either.

> There were others oustide of Mac/PC arena. And ther was the
> Lisa before the Mac, so even inside of Apple, the Mac was not first.

mac & lisa were *separate* projects.

the mac project began before lisa, however, lisa was released before
mac. that's what happens when two projects are on separate tracks.

On 10/17/2021 3:44 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-16 18:25, nospam wrote:
>
>>> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first product out
>>> with GUI.
>>
>> nobody said that
>
>
> Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
> mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response that
> Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.

And shortly after Lisa, and long before Windows, there was Digital
Research GEM.

But it's certainly accurate that Apple popularized the GUI, as well as
digital music players, smart phones, and tablets, even if they were not
the first company to come out with thee products.

On 2021-10-17 3:44 p.m., JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-16 18:25, nospam wrote:
>
>>> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first product out
>>> with GUI.
>>
>> nobody said that
>
>
> Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
> mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response that
> Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.
>

Quote it.

On 2021-10-17 4:19 p.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> the mac was well ahead of its time, which changed the entire computing
>> industry. microsoft immediately started copying it.
>
> In my humble opinion, Apple did a few things which revolutionized their
> respective industries, but the Mac wasn't all that much more of an influence
> than the IBM AT was, IMHO.

The IBM PC was in direct response to the grown success of the Apple II

>
> The iPod was pretty damn good though (I still have half a dozen but stopped
> buying them when they stopped working with SharePod freeware instead of the
> iTunes abomination).

The iPod revolutionized MP3 players.

>
> Of course, the first iPhone revolutionalized the smartphone, but perhaps not
> much more than the blackberry did before it (and certainly Google took only
> a few years to overcome the iPhone in every way possible).

Much more than the Blackberry did.

>
> I had them all - (I still have those big black rectangular cases - don't
> believe me - ask for a photo) - and still have a few iPods and somewhere is
> the AT&T iPhone I had to jailbreak to work on T-Mobile (and of course, I
> have iPads & I just recently bought a 128GB iPhone 12 mini for half price).
>
> Back to the fundamental statement above - which do you feel revolutionalized
> the PC industry more than the other (if by a lot)... the Mac or the IBM AT?

All personal computers today follow the model that the Mac started.

All smartphones today follow the model that the iPhone started.

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

>>>> The original post had Apple apologist state
>>>> the Mac wa first product out with GUI.
>> >
>> > nobody said that
>>
>>
>> Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
>> mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response that
>> Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.
>
> nope. what was said was the mac was yet another thing that apple did
> which did *not* follow the rest of the industry.
>
> in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.
>
> the xerox star did exist, but in very small numbers, mainly because it
> was very slow and very expensive.
>
> the mac was well ahead of its time, which changed the entire computing
> industry. microsoft immediately started copying it.

Nope, realised that a GUI was a good idea, just like Jobs did.

On 2021-10-17 4:46 p.m., JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-10-17 18:58, nospam wrote:
>
>> in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.
>
> Read about X-Windows. And there wwere many graphical systems attached
> much earlier on computers such as PDP-11s.

Initial release...

....AFTER the Mac.

>
> Where Xerox/Apple made big change is the document based apprioach
> (clicking on document opens relevant app which automatically opens that
> clicked document).

No, actually. Many of the things we take for granted was "obvious"
didn't exist in the Xerox WIMP OSes.

> The existint systems were all app based when you
> chose an app from a menu and from the app, you would open the document
> in file selection menu.
>
> You forget that outside of personal computers, there were other computers.
>

On 2021-10-17 7:29 p.m., Rod Speed wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
>> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote
>
>>>>> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first
>>>>> product out with GUI.
>>> > > nobody said that
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
>>> mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response that
>>> Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.
>>
>> nope. what was said was the mac was yet another thing that apple did
>> which did *not* follow the rest of the industry.
>> in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.
>> the xerox star did exist, but in very small numbers, mainly because it
>> was very slow and very expensive.
>> the mac was well ahead of its time, which changed the entire computing
>> industry. microsoft immediately started copying it.
>
> Nope, realised that a GUI was a good idea, just like Jobs did.

And copied code wholesale from the Mac OS...

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS#Graphical_user_interfaces

Well, that didn't take you long.

--
Because you can't cotton to evil. No Sir. You have to smack evil on
the nose with the rolled-up newspaper of justice and say, 'Bad
evil. Bad BAD evil"'

Alan <nope@nope.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
>>> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote

>>>>>> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first product
>>>>>> out with GUI.
>>>> > > nobody said that
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
>>>> mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response that
>>>> Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.
>>>
>>> nope. what was said was the mac was yet another thing that apple did
>>> which did *not* follow the rest of the industry.
>>> in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.
>>> the xerox star did exist, but in very small numbers, mainly because it
>>> was very slow and very expensive.
>>> the mac was well ahead of its time, which changed the entire computing
>>> industry. microsoft immediately started copying it.
>>
>> Nope, realised that a GUI was a good idea, just like Jobs did.
>
> And copied code wholesale from the Mac OS...

Nope, lots of the detail is very different.

On 2021-10-17 10:06 p.m., Rod Speed wrote:
> Alan <nope@nope.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
>>>> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote
>
>>>>>>> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first
>>>>>>> product out with GUI.
>>>>> > > nobody said that
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
>>>>> mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response
>>>>> that
>>>>> Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.
>>>>
>>>> nope. what was said was the mac was yet another thing that apple did
>>>> which did *not* follow the rest of the industry.
>>>> in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.
>>>> the xerox star did exist, but in very small numbers, mainly because it
>>>> was very slow and very expensive.
>>>> the mac was well ahead of its time, which changed the entire computing
>>>> industry. microsoft immediately started copying it.
>>>
>>> Nope, realised that a GUI was a good idea, just like Jobs did.
>>
>> And copied code wholesale from the Mac OS...
>
> Nope, lots of the detail is very different.

I'm sorry, but there was a time when you could actually read the source
code and see that some functions in Windows had precisely the same names
as the same functions in Mac OS.

Alan <nope@nope.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Alan <nope@nope.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
>>>>> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote
>>
>>>>>>>> The original post had Apple apologist state the Mac wa first
>>>>>>>> product out with GUI.
>>>>>> > > nobody said that
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. One of your apologist ilk showed all the firsts for Apple, and
>>>>>> mentioned Mac being first GUI. Which is what triggered my response
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> Lisa was first. With expected automatic denials by your ilk.
>>>>>
>>>>> nope. what was said was the mac was yet another thing that apple did
>>>>> which did *not* follow the rest of the industry.
>>>>> in 1984, everything was command line. the mac was not.
>>>>> the xerox star did exist, but in very small numbers, mainly because it
>>>>> was very slow and very expensive.
>>>>> the mac was well ahead of its time, which changed the entire computing
>>>>> industry. microsoft immediately started copying it.
>>>>
>>>> Nope, realised that a GUI was a good idea, just like Jobs did.
>>>
>>> And copied code wholesale from the Mac OS...
>>
>> Nope, lots of the detail is very different.

> I'm sorry,

Obvious lie.

> but there was a time when you could actually read the source code

Like hell you could with both Mac OS and the first Win.

> and see that some functions in Windows had precisely the same names as the
> same functions in Mac OS.

Hardly surprising that the same NAME was used.

Doesn’t mean that the CODE was stolen.

It cant have been when the detail of the GUI was so different.