I hear every computer today uses a keyboard. I think they had those on typewriters back in the 19th century.
Fonts were an evolutionary change that was going to happen anyway. You can give Jobs some credit for pushing them early, but in the larger scheme of things, they were coming anyways.
At the time those 8X8 grids meant that Microsoft Windows Mouse Pointers and cursors were blocking and jumped only horizontally and vertically in those same 8x8 grids . . . while Apple's mouse pointer moved smoothly, pixel by pixel, in gentle arcs. It was a huge difference that took almost ten years for Microsoft to catch up!
The very definition of a trivial improvement, otherwise known as "cheese". Visually appealing, but functionally of no consequence.
It was a huge difference that took almost ten years for Microsoft to catch up! It meant that Apple used SQUARE pixel elements so that graphics were easy to calculate rotations, instead of the rectangular pixels used in PCs. . . and rotations in PCs required additional calculations to compensate for the distortions added by rectangular pixels.
I have no idea what you are trying to say here. A 1978 Apple II had a better graphics system than what the IBM PC developed probably for the first five years. That Apple IIs and later could do far better graphic manipulation for about a decade than could PCs, is more the result of IBM deliberately handicapping their machine when they built it.
If you look at IBM's design philosophy, they claim it was deliberate, so as to distinguish a "business" computer from a toy computer, such as Apple et al produced. IBM was *WAY BEHIND* on adding decent graphics to their machines, and it wasn't because they couldn't, it's because those bone heads didn't want to. Dumbness on the part of IBM does not equal "brilliance" on the part of Steve Jobs. Other companies weren't so stupid. Look at the Amiga. If I recall properly, it had even better graphics than Apple at the time.
It meant that because you were using vector graphics to draw Calligraphic fonts, esthetically pleasing fonts, you could RESIZE them to any point size you wanted. . . and that meant they were not limited to multiples of the 8x8 grid for printing seen on the screen! it meant kerning, spacing, and everything applicable to TYPESETTING. It meant that Apple computers became the go to computers of creation for newspapers, magazines, artists, and any other who needed flexibility and not constraint to an 8x8 distorted grid.
Ivan Sutherland, 1963. Not Steve Jobs.
You see, DiogenesLamp, insisting on Calligraphic fonts on computers was one of the least trivial additions to computers of the last 75 years. . . and STEVE JOBS did it.
No, I still say it's trivial. It's artistic crap. It is the computer equivalent of "pretty". The thing will work fine with out it, and very few jobs cannot be done using just a single font. "Style" is a concept you apply to clothes, but a belt will hold up your pants whether it be stylish or not. I think the nation has become overloaded and obsessed with style over substance.
On the LEFT, the esthetic design of smartphones before Steve Jobs' esthetic design sense created the iPhone in 2007.
On the Right, the esthetic design of smartphones after Steve Jobs esthetic design sense created the iPhone in 2007.
You mean after screens were developed. What you are saying is that if Steve Jobs hadn't put a screen on his phone, the world would never have developed phones with screens on them. I think that assessment is just ridiculous. Again, evolutionary, not revolutionary.
Oh! And what's this?
It's a "Logan's Run" Sandman "follower" from 1976. Sort of resembles an Early version of the Iphone, but it was before they had actual screens that worked like that.
Well no wonder Steve Jobs had so little trouble "inventing" it. All the "vision" work was already done for him.
Steve wouldn't let him. He insisted Woz come up with a higher number. Woz then said $250. . . but Steve still insisted on yet a higher number. . . and finally Woz said retail for $666.
It is pretty well established that Steve Jobs was pretty insistent upon getting top dollar for himself regarding other people's work. You talk about him increasing the costs of Apple Computers as though it were a good thing.
On the other hand, imagine how much more good could have been accomplished in the world had the Apple II been more affordable to young people.
My recollection is that an Apple II cost about $1,500 dollars in 1978. A lot of young people couldn't afford them because of the high price. (I was one of them.) Good to know we have Steve Jobs to thank for that bit of A$$holery as well.
What did he do next? He launched the "Apples for Teachers" program, which pretty much meant the Government would be making up a major portion of Apples foundational business, and that Apple would be welded into the Union education system and left wing politics.
Yeah, that was just great.
