7 ms·

Before General Magic there was Paradigm (2018)

46 points by tobr 5y ago

oautholaf 5y ago
Sort of feel it would really be helpful to replace the narrative of the creation of the modern smartphone ("the iPhone sprung forth from the head of Jobs!") with a picture of the decade+ of efforts made by the computer industry to make consumer electronics. Note also that this article mentions the Danger Hiptop and folks who worked on it. Some folks who worked on that worked on iPhone 1.0 and some even still work on iPhones!
- tpmx 5y ago
  There are of course literally hundreds of products that led the way, in some way or another.
- bch 5y ago
  Of course Andy Rubin[0] from Danger (previously also General Magic as mentioned in article) went on to found Android as well - and Android itself owes (in a way) it’s own name to Apple (Andy’s nickname at Apple was apparently “Android”.) What’s also interesting to me is that the Danger used NetBSD in at least some it’s projects, which is an OS dear to my heart. Always nice to see some of the “alternate takes”, “near misses”, or “could have been…” technologies on the past road to where we happen to be now. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin
  - oautholaf 5y ago
    The original Danger OS was home grown by some of the same folks that later started Zircon!
- CharlesW 5y ago
  > Sort of feel it would really be helpful to replace the narrative of the creation of the modern smartphone ("the iPhone sprung forth from the head of Jobs!") with a picture of the decade+ of efforts made by the computer industry to make consumer electronics. The thing is that many other companies could've made an iPhone before a Jobs-led Apple, just like other people could've run a 4-minute mile before Roger Bannister. But as a hardware + software + marketplace system, it truly was a discontinuous leap. If you want to read an article that goes the other way and maybe overstates General Magic's contributions, you might also enjoy this oral history: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/general-magic-oral-history-of-the-influential-tech-company.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/general-magic-oral-h...
Cupertino95014 5y ago
General Magic also had some really dud ideas. They went to great lengths to spec out software "agents" that would actually travel to some other location and then execute there. Just imagine the security implications of that. It's not hyperbole to say that they missed the Internet, and this was at a period when the Internet was beginning to catch on. This is the real reason you may not have heard of them.
- wmf 5y ago
  Telescript was definitely a bet against the Internet, although I don't know if Magic Cap even included Telescript. Palm and Newton didn't bet on the Internet either because mobile Internet may not have even existed at the time, but they didn't explicitly bet against it.
  - AlbertCory 5y ago
    Palm did quite well for a while with no wireless connectivity to speak of, other than sync'ing with your PC.
    - wmf 5y ago
      Yeah, Palm didn't force people to pay for ridiculously expensive wireless hardware/service and they didn't try to invent their own alternative to the Internet.
  - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
    Palm had mobile data on the Palm VII in 99.
  - __d 5y ago
    Apple and NewtonOS supported a variety of different mobile networks (eg. ARDIS/DataTAC and CDPD) in the time before the Internet and TCP/IP became dominant. But it's fair to say that the OS was not built with networking in mind. Later releases of NewtonOS included a TCP/IP stack that worked with dialup PPP (over PSTN modems), wired Ethernet, and early releases of what became WiFi (at that time, WaveLAN). The devices' IR "beaming" hardware meant that NewtonOS had an inbox/outbox concept that allowed users to exchange email, documents, software, etc. This was adapted to work with always-on Internet connectivity, but it was clearly a retrofit (much like MacOS and Windows at the same time).
Wistar 5y ago
Always liked the name "General Magic," although I like "Industrial Light & Magic" more.
- hyperpallium2 5y ago
  Yeah, reminds me of Niven's Puppeteer's "General Products".
- mattkevan 5y ago
  It’s such a good name. I like any company name with ‘general’ in, it’s such a humblebrag, but General Magic especially so. ‘So, er what do you do?’ ‘Oh, you know. General Magic.’
gompertz 5y ago
I watched the General Magic documentary couple years back... I'm sure it was just my perception, and maybe the video editing, but by what I recall it looked like they mostly goofed off and it was more a think-tank than actually building stuff. It's possible the video was cut this was to align with the "fun, silicon valley" narratives. Perhaps others felt the same who saw the documentary?
- wmf 5y ago
  I got the same impression, although just from a few scenes. It's impressively bad that the Newton was a "clone" of General Magic yet it shipped years earlier.
  - __d 5y ago
    While acknowledging the influence of General Magic on Apple's Newton work, I think it's inaccurate to characterize it as a "clone". A brief use of Magic Cap and Newton OS reveals in my opinion very little in common in the shipped products.
    - GeekyBear 5y ago
      Agreed. Magic Cap was more like Microsoft Bob than it was like the Newton.
      - setpatchaddress 5y ago
        I wouldn’t be that pejorative about it — the Magic Cap UI was actually useful — but yes, that’s closer.
        GeekyBear 5y ago
        Both Magic Cap and Microsoft Bob had a user interface with a room based metaphor. You would select an object in a picture of a room to launch applications. You would navigate from room to room to find other groups of applications. That's not pejorative. It's descriptive.
joshu 5y ago
oh my god, side talking
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

46 points by tobr 5y ago

Sort of feel it would really be helpful to replace the narrative of the creation of the modern smartphone ("the iPhone sprung forth from the head of Jobs!") with a picture of the decade+ of efforts made by the computer industry to make consumer electronics. Note also that this article mentions the Danger Hiptop and folks who worked on it. Some folks who worked on that worked on iPhone 1.0 and some even still work on iPhones!

tpmx 5y ago
There are of course literally hundreds of products that led the way, in some way or another.
bch 5y ago
Of course Andy Rubin[0] from Danger (previously also General Magic as mentioned in article) went on to found Android as well - and Android itself owes (in a way) it’s own name to Apple (Andy’s nickname at Apple was apparently “Android”.) What’s also interesting to me is that the Danger used NetBSD in at least some it’s projects, which is an OS dear to my heart. Always nice to see some of the “alternate takes”, “near misses”, or “could have been…” technologies on the past road to where we happen to be now. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin
- oautholaf 5y ago
  The original Danger OS was home grown by some of the same folks that later started Zircon!
CharlesW 5y ago
> Sort of feel it would really be helpful to replace the narrative of the creation of the modern smartphone ("the iPhone sprung forth from the head of Jobs!") with a picture of the decade+ of efforts made by the computer industry to make consumer electronics. The thing is that many other companies could've made an iPhone before a Jobs-led Apple, just like other people could've run a 4-minute mile before Roger Bannister. But as a hardware + software + marketplace system, it truly was a discontinuous leap. If you want to read an article that goes the other way and maybe overstates General Magic's contributions, you might also enjoy this oral history: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/general-magic-oral-history-of-the-influential-tech-company.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/general-magic-oral-h...

Cupertino95014 5y ago

General Magic also had some really dud ideas. They went to great lengths to spec out software "agents" that would actually travel to some other location and then execute there. Just imagine the security implications of that. It's not hyperbole to say that they missed the Internet, and this was at a period when the Internet was beginning to catch on. This is the real reason you may not have heard of them.

wmf 5y ago
Telescript was definitely a bet against the Internet, although I don't know if Magic Cap even included Telescript. Palm and Newton didn't bet on the Internet either because mobile Internet may not have even existed at the time, but they didn't explicitly bet against it.
- AlbertCory 5y ago
  Palm did quite well for a while with no wireless connectivity to speak of, other than sync'ing with your PC.
  - wmf 5y ago
    Yeah, Palm didn't force people to pay for ridiculously expensive wireless hardware/service and they didn't try to invent their own alternative to the Internet.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
  Palm had mobile data on the Palm VII in 99.
- __d 5y ago
  Apple and NewtonOS supported a variety of different mobile networks (eg. ARDIS/DataTAC and CDPD) in the time before the Internet and TCP/IP became dominant. But it's fair to say that the OS was not built with networking in mind. Later releases of NewtonOS included a TCP/IP stack that worked with dialup PPP (over PSTN modems), wired Ethernet, and early releases of what became WiFi (at that time, WaveLAN). The devices' IR "beaming" hardware meant that NewtonOS had an inbox/outbox concept that allowed users to exchange email, documents, software, etc. This was adapted to work with always-on Internet connectivity, but it was clearly a retrofit (much like MacOS and Windows at the same time).

Wistar 5y ago

Always liked the name "General Magic," although I like "Industrial Light & Magic" more.

hyperpallium2 5y ago
Yeah, reminds me of Niven's Puppeteer's "General Products".
mattkevan 5y ago
It’s such a good name. I like any company name with ‘general’ in, it’s such a humblebrag, but General Magic especially so. ‘So, er what do you do?’ ‘Oh, you know. General Magic.’

gompertz 5y ago

I watched the General Magic documentary couple years back... I'm sure it was just my perception, and maybe the video editing, but by what I recall it looked like they mostly goofed off and it was more a think-tank than actually building stuff. It's possible the video was cut this was to align with the "fun, silicon valley" narratives. Perhaps others felt the same who saw the documentary?

wmf 5y ago
I got the same impression, although just from a few scenes. It's impressively bad that the Newton was a "clone" of General Magic yet it shipped years earlier.
- __d 5y ago
  While acknowledging the influence of General Magic on Apple's Newton work, I think it's inaccurate to characterize it as a "clone". A brief use of Magic Cap and Newton OS reveals in my opinion very little in common in the shipped products.
  - GeekyBear 5y ago
    Agreed. Magic Cap was more like Microsoft Bob than it was like the Newton.
    - setpatchaddress 5y ago
      I wouldn’t be that pejorative about it — the Magic Cap UI was actually useful — but yes, that’s closer.
      - GeekyBear 5y ago
        Both Magic Cap and Microsoft Bob had a user interface with a room based metaphor. You would select an object in a picture of a room to launch applications. You would navigate from room to room to find other groups of applications. That's not pejorative. It's descriptive.

joshu 5y ago

oh my god, side talking

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]