5 ms·

Interesting though they might be, these low quality static images give little away about the actual state of the software. How much of what is shown represents

Interesting though they might be, these low quality static images give little away about the actual state of the software. How much of what is shown represents real software functionality, how much of it is heavily stubbed software (i.e. implies more functionality than written), how much are contemporaneous mock-ups (i.e. pixel art), and how much of it is not even contemporaneous? Images 02 and 08 show slightly different desktop icon arrangements but utterly identical application states. Do the applications actually work and can they be used to create the documents shown? Or are they mock-ups to demonstrate possible functionality? Image 05 appears to be, at best, a collage of images and not a user interface. The apparent differences in pixel pitch between the different elements looks strange and suspicious. Image 10 is an entirely different operating system.

knuckleheadsmif 4y ago
The first 12 images are all real working software but from different times and systems (XDE, Star and possible Interlisp.) As an FYI, one actual shows an overlapping window in Star, actually a property sheet. Most people didn’t know that Star support overlapping windows but hardly used them and users could not freely move the windows anywhere. This was a usability decision not a technical one. Many years later that restriction was removed. The one that looks like the Lisa is the only one I, confused about.
- knuckleheadsmif 4y ago
  I think the one with the Lisa is a complete mock-up. The car is clipping the window and I only think that happened in the graphic editors.
  - masswerk 4y ago
    Mind the substitute system font. This (img. 5) isn't just a screenshot from a real Lisa, but either a handmade drawing, or maybe some kind of emulation (which I deem rather unlikely), or a prototype image leaking from Apple.
  - achairapart 4y ago
    Perhaps it was a mockup made to show the greater real estate picture of the Xerox Star screen (and maybe capability also – given the "high resolution" car) compared to the Lisa one? Like 1024×808 vs 720x364?
  - justsomehnguy 4y ago
    I didn't notice the car clipping till your comment, but what I wondered is how old the concept of a 'desktop wallpaper' is.
    - knuckleheadsmif 4y ago
      Interesting question but I suspect desktop wallpaper is fairly old (70’s) from some Alto environment.
dghughes 4y ago
I would have been amazed for the time. I had an Atari 600XL a few years later and it was amazing to a 14 year-old. The Xerox Star 8010 would have been like something from 100 years in the future to me.
AlbertCory 4y ago
Your suspicions are (almost entirely) unfounded, except for 10, which is XDE, as knucklehead says). The software was real and worked, for some value of "worked." It was very slow, though. Dave Smith, who demo'ed it at NCC, said he had to be careful to only do things that worked. As for 02 and 08: that is a real table, which I also used for Records Processing, and was extremely slow. I talk about that extensively in Inventing the Future. There are many academic papers published about the software, including the graphics.
- knuckleheadsmif 4y ago
  It was also not slower than the Lisa which came out later. I remember going to a Lisa demo at UCLA and it was super well scripted as someone would click on the screen while talking about something and the 20 seconds later start talking about what they clicked on so that the computer and the demoed were in sync. It was a master class in deception about speed.
- simondotau 4y ago
  You can't say... > Your suspicions are (almost entirely) unfounded ...and then say... > The software was real and worked, for some value of "worked." What does "worked" mean? The screenshots imply a LOT of functionality. Can it take a two-dimension table of data and generate a stacked bar chart? Can the word processor interleave and flow a varying number of columns of text correctly? Are there any useful tools for doing any of these things within a graphical interface? I'm not saying that basic tools don't exist, but I've not seen any screenshots showing typeface options, layout options, etc. I haven't seen anything that confirms that these documents could be made visually rather than using a markup syntax. If the Star really can do all these things, it's deserving of some serious exposure in the form of documentary film. These polaroids really aren't doing it justice. > except for 10 And 05?

knuckleheadsmif 4y ago

The first 12 images are all real working software but from different times and systems (XDE, Star and possible Interlisp.) As an FYI, one actual shows an overlapping window in Star, actually a property sheet. Most people didn’t know that Star support overlapping windows but hardly used them and users could not freely move the windows anywhere. This was a usability decision not a technical one. Many years later that restriction was removed. The one that looks like the Lisa is the only one I, confused about.

knuckleheadsmif 4y ago
I think the one with the Lisa is a complete mock-up. The car is clipping the window and I only think that happened in the graphic editors.
- masswerk 4y ago
  Mind the substitute system font. This (img. 5) isn't just a screenshot from a real Lisa, but either a handmade drawing, or maybe some kind of emulation (which I deem rather unlikely), or a prototype image leaking from Apple.
- achairapart 4y ago
  Perhaps it was a mockup made to show the greater real estate picture of the Xerox Star screen (and maybe capability also – given the "high resolution" car) compared to the Lisa one? Like 1024×808 vs 720x364?
- justsomehnguy 4y ago
  I didn't notice the car clipping till your comment, but what I wondered is how old the concept of a 'desktop wallpaper' is.
  - knuckleheadsmif 4y ago
    Interesting question but I suspect desktop wallpaper is fairly old (70’s) from some Alto environment.

dghughes 4y ago

I would have been amazed for the time. I had an Atari 600XL a few years later and it was amazing to a 14 year-old. The Xerox Star 8010 would have been like something from 100 years in the future to me.

AlbertCory 4y ago

Your suspicions are (almost entirely) unfounded, except for 10, which is XDE, as knucklehead says). The software was real and worked, for some value of "worked." It was very slow, though. Dave Smith, who demo'ed it at NCC, said he had to be careful to only do things that worked. As for 02 and 08: that is a real table, which I also used for Records Processing, and was extremely slow. I talk about that extensively in Inventing the Future. There are many academic papers published about the software, including the graphics.

knuckleheadsmif 4y ago
It was also not slower than the Lisa which came out later. I remember going to a Lisa demo at UCLA and it was super well scripted as someone would click on the screen while talking about something and the 20 seconds later start talking about what they clicked on so that the computer and the demoed were in sync. It was a master class in deception about speed.
simondotau 4y ago
You can't say... > Your suspicions are (almost entirely) unfounded ...and then say... > The software was real and worked, for some value of "worked." What does "worked" mean? The screenshots imply a LOT of functionality. Can it take a two-dimension table of data and generate a stacked bar chart? Can the word processor interleave and flow a varying number of columns of text correctly? Are there any useful tools for doing any of these things within a graphical interface? I'm not saying that basic tools don't exist, but I've not seen any screenshots showing typeface options, layout options, etc. I haven't seen anything that confirms that these documents could be made visually rather than using a markup syntax. If the Star really can do all these things, it's deserving of some serious exposure in the form of documentary film. These polaroids really aren't doing it justice. > except for 10 And 05?