5 ms·
How Critics Reviewed The Mac 2.0 In 1984
- joubert 17y agoGood ol' John C. Dvorak: San Francisco Examiner, John C. Dvorak, 19 Feb. 1984 The nature of the personal computer is simply not fully understood by companies like Apple (or anyone else for that matter). Apple makes the arrogant assumption of thinking that it knows what you want and need. It, unfortunately, leaves the “why” out of the equation — as in “why would I want this?” The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a ‘mouse’. There is no evidence that people want to use these things. I dont want one of these new fangled devices.
- edw519 17y agoThere is no evidence that people want to use these things. Reminds me of: "If I’d asked people what they wanted, they would have asked for a better horse" - Henry Ford, 1923
- pavlov 17y agoAnother anecdote: In 2006, Nokia discontinued their 7710 touchscreen smartphone and shut down the majority of R&D related to touchscreen interfaces, because market research indicated that people just don't want them. A year later, they were scrambling to figure out how to compete in the redefined touchscreen phone market.
- sp332 17y agoDon't forget the Apple Newton. 1989, baby! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_%28platform%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_%28platform%29
- chrischen 17y agoI was just about to mock that quote. But to be honest those who use vi still think the mouse is inferior to keyboard.
- die_sekte 17y agoThe mouse is inferior to the keyboard if you are doing nothing but editing text. But for nearly anything else, the mouse is better.
- chrischen 17y agoOnly because everything else is designed for a mouse.
- eru 17y agoDepends on what you mean by every thing else. For playing Quake you need a mouse and something like a keyboard. For Super Mario, I prefer a joy pad. For interacting with a windowmanager, XMonad shows that a keyboard interface can be quite productive. A CAD program will benefit from a mouse.
- jamesbritt 17y agoAny links to studies?
- silentbicycle 17y agoThe mouse is better for things that are primarily spatial, while the keyboard is better for things that can be expressed symbolically (with language). We're not having this discussion right now by pointing at word boxes on the screen and clicking, are we?
- pavlov 17y agoWhat does "Mac 2.0" in the title mean? AFAICT, the quotes in the article are about the very first 128k Macintosh.
- gojomo 17y agoSubmitter made an error, mashing together the original title, "Jan. 1984: How critics reviewed the Mac", with the name of the blog/column, "Apple 2.0".
- amichail 17y agoWas the Mac popular among tech entrepreneurs before OS X?
- tlb 17y agoYes. I liked Macs starting in 1988 or so. I fell out of love sometime around system 8, and spent many happy years with Unix variants. But OSX brought me back.
- tlb 17y ago"If your first version is so impressive that trolls don't make fun of it, you waited too long to launch." -- pg They seem to have gotten it about right. The 128k Mac was a way to start a conversation with customers and developers.
- jamesbritt 17y agoAlso previously posted as http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=910960 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=910960