4 ms·

The Jonathan Computer

20 points by bane 11y ago

acqq 11y ago
Now the company doesn't exist anymore, but Burroughs was very influential company once and they had their model B25 which they already advertised in 1984 and it already used the "books on a shelf" method: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CTOS-B25.JPG https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CTOS-B25.JPG The magazine ad in "Black Enterprise, Jul 1984," obviously produced earlier: http://s10.postimg.org/si1xx4l89/B25.jpg http://s10.postimg.org/si1xx4l89/B25.jpg To compare, the article about the Jonathan computer starts with "in late 1984" and the mockup was "unveiled to the Apple Executive staff in June 1985." There were the real products in use in the "books on a shelf" form and the form seems to be convenient. The reasons for the rejection are certainly interesting, maybe the real reason why the form didn't survive. > Jean-Louis Gassée, who at time was Apple’s VP of Product Development, observed that they would have to sell two or three Jonathans to equal the profit of a single Macintosh II. Apple even today prefers to sell "everything at once" (like the iMac, or the effective weakening of the newest Mac mini lineup).
- bane 11y ago
  It seems to be an idea that keeps coming up. https://www.purdue.edu/uns/html4ever/2006/060112.Shim.computer.html https://www.purdue.edu/uns/html4ever/2006/060112.Shim.comput... http://www.razerzone.com/christine http://www.razerzone.com/christine http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=1059&st=1 http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=1059&st=1 And I guess now project Aria carries on this in a spiritual sense (since now this idea makes less and less sense for desktop computing).
- Manfred 11y ago
  I had one of those, conceptually the most interesting hardware I've ever had. I never took advantage of the modularity.
jefurii 11y ago
Looks like a more user-friendly version of the everything-is-a-module S-100 bus, letting the user plug things together without "forcing" them to open a case and look at circuit boards. This form factor has been fascinating to me recently. I don't see it in consumer systems but you can see it in industrial, scientific, and military systems by certain manufacturers[1] and in the PICMG family of standards[2]. A recent HN post linked to a NASA proposal[3] that employed a bunch of PICMG systems. Aside from greater flexibility of design, you can unplug and swap out parts without disassembling the whole system. Mounting cards in slots would minimize vibration, making it easier to ruggedize. [1] http://www.chassis-plans.com/backplanes.html#BackplanePrimer http://www.chassis-plans.com/backplanes.html#BackplanePrimer [2] https://www.picmg.org/ https://www.picmg.org/ [3] http://www.vadatech.com/media/pdf_SGSS-NASA-Paper-001.pdf http://www.vadatech.com/media/pdf_SGSS-NASA-Paper-001.pdf

20 points by bane 11y ago

acqq 11y ago

Now the company doesn't exist anymore, but Burroughs was very influential company once and they had their model B25 which they already advertised in 1984 and it already used the "books on a shelf" method: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CTOS-B25.JPG https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CTOS-B25.JPG The magazine ad in "Black Enterprise, Jul 1984," obviously produced earlier: http://s10.postimg.org/si1xx4l89/B25.jpg http://s10.postimg.org/si1xx4l89/B25.jpg To compare, the article about the Jonathan computer starts with "in late 1984" and the mockup was "unveiled to the Apple Executive staff in June 1985." There were the real products in use in the "books on a shelf" form and the form seems to be convenient. The reasons for the rejection are certainly interesting, maybe the real reason why the form didn't survive. > Jean-Louis Gassée, who at time was Apple’s VP of Product Development, observed that they would have to sell two or three Jonathans to equal the profit of a single Macintosh II. Apple even today prefers to sell "everything at once" (like the iMac, or the effective weakening of the newest Mac mini lineup).

bane 11y ago
It seems to be an idea that keeps coming up. https://www.purdue.edu/uns/html4ever/2006/060112.Shim.computer.html https://www.purdue.edu/uns/html4ever/2006/060112.Shim.comput... http://www.razerzone.com/christine http://www.razerzone.com/christine http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=1059&st=1 http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=1059&st=1 And I guess now project Aria carries on this in a spiritual sense (since now this idea makes less and less sense for desktop computing).
Manfred 11y ago
I had one of those, conceptually the most interesting hardware I've ever had. I never took advantage of the modularity.

jefurii 11y ago

Looks like a more user-friendly version of the everything-is-a-module S-100 bus, letting the user plug things together without "forcing" them to open a case and look at circuit boards. This form factor has been fascinating to me recently. I don't see it in consumer systems but you can see it in industrial, scientific, and military systems by certain manufacturers[1] and in the PICMG family of standards[2]. A recent HN post linked to a NASA proposal[3] that employed a bunch of PICMG systems. Aside from greater flexibility of design, you can unplug and swap out parts without disassembling the whole system. Mounting cards in slots would minimize vibration, making it easier to ruggedize. [1] http://www.chassis-plans.com/backplanes.html#BackplanePrimer http://www.chassis-plans.com/backplanes.html#BackplanePrimer [2] https://www.picmg.org/ https://www.picmg.org/ [3] http://www.vadatech.com/media/pdf_SGSS-NASA-Paper-001.pdf http://www.vadatech.com/media/pdf_SGSS-NASA-Paper-001.pdf