What was the first personal computer? (1999)(blinkenlights.com)
blinkenlights.com
What was the first personal computer? (1999)
http://www.blinkenlights.com/pc.shtml
17 comments
In a way it's like asking "when did you first grow a beard?" The answer is going to depend on the definition -- surely my current beard counts, but did the stubble I had when I was a teenager count? What about going for 3 days without shaving in my mid-20s?
> Does anyone know why the specific decisions and guidelines used here may have been made?
Presumably the guidelines were designed in such a way as to disqualify all previous definitions of "the first personal computer", allowing the author to select one even older and more obscure.
Presumably the guidelines were designed in such a way as to disqualify all previous definitions of "the first personal computer", allowing the author to select one even older and more obscure.
While this is true, the point of the article isn't to choose a valid first computer.
It is a funny way to step through computing history with more and more obscure devices.
It is a funny way to step through computing history with more and more obscure devices.
The more sensible criterion would be "What computer was first referred to as a PC?". That's answered here:
http://www.technobuffalo.com/2010/03/17/who-coined-the-term-...
http://www.technobuffalo.com/2010/03/17/who-coined-the-term-...
"The `paperclip computer` was introduced in 1967 in a book called How To Build a Working Digital Computer by Alcosser, Phillips, and Wolk. The book describes how you can build a simple computer with things around the house, like paperclips for switches, and a tin can for drum memory."
This sounds pretty cool, and possibly worthy of its own post.
http://www.evilmadscientist.com/2013/paperclip/
Apparently not first, though.
This sounds pretty cool, and possibly worthy of its own post.
http://www.evilmadscientist.com/2013/paperclip/
Apparently not first, though.
Bell-labs released their cardboard computer, the Cardiac, in 1968
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARDboard_Illustrative_Aid_to_C...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARDboard_Illustrative_Aid_to_C...
> It must be programmable by the end-user.
I guess that rules out the iPhone.
I guess that rules out the iPhone.
I sigh at your lazy millenial attitude. A 1950's programmer would have rooted the device and rewritten the baseband software by now.
But even a lazy programmer can load Javascript into Safari on the iPhone to program it. You can even embed the Javascript into a link and save it as a bookmark the home screen.
But even a lazy programmer can load Javascript into Safari on the iPhone to program it. You can even embed the Javascript into a link and save it as a bookmark the home screen.
With all due respect, that is quite rude and unnecessary. Almost anything is more effective than sneering at someone.
I forgot who made the first computer I used. It was similar to the BBC Micro (conspicuously absent from this list), but this was in the US. It hooked up to a (black and white) TV and let you program in BASIC (with no permanent storage, most of the time was indeed spent programming). We rented it from the public library--there wasn't much demand, so you could keep it at home for days.
Unfortunately that describes a huge variety of microcomputers from the 70s and 80s. You probably could have hooked up a cassette recorder for permanent storage, but they took a very long time to store or load.
After reading this list, I'm still satisfied giving it to the Altair.
The only bad thing the article has to say about the Altair is that it was linked to Microsoft. Well, Microsoft had a lot to do with the early history of the personal computer, and there's nothing wrong with giving them their due. It's been more than a decade since their monopolistic behavior, I think it's time to lay down the personal vendettas and put them in their deserved historical context.
The only bad thing the article has to say about the Altair is that it was linked to Microsoft. Well, Microsoft had a lot to do with the early history of the personal computer, and there's nothing wrong with giving them their due. It's been more than a decade since their monopolistic behavior, I think it's time to lay down the personal vendettas and put them in their deserved historical context.
Missing from the list the Olivetti Programma 101 (1964) [1], of which the HP 9100 (mentioned in the post) was basically a ripoff. It was the first general-purpose programmable calculator designed to be operated by non-technical people, and it was even used in the Apollo 11 program.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programma_101
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programma_101
I grew up with another Olivetti model just one year older: the Praxis 48. It's now in the SF MOMA collection: http://www.sfmoma.org/explore/collection/artwork/118397
Lovely designs from that firm: http://www.storiaolivetti.it/fotogallery.asp?idPercorso=632#...
It's worth seeing in person, the photographs online don't do justice to the fine industrial design.
Oh, and before you say it's not a computer, read the page labeled 5 (actually the fourth page) of this: http://www.machinesoflovinggrace.com/manuals/OlivettiPraxis4...
Lovely designs from that firm: http://www.storiaolivetti.it/fotogallery.asp?idPercorso=632#...
It's worth seeing in person, the photographs online don't do justice to the fine industrial design.
Oh, and before you say it's not a computer, read the page labeled 5 (actually the fourth page) of this: http://www.machinesoflovinggrace.com/manuals/OlivettiPraxis4...
Hah! Now there's a blast from the past. A friend of mine from school got one as a gift and we spent the better part of one summer messing around with it (while listening to Kraftwerks 'Computer World').
For me personally it was the Tandy Model-100 for a short stint, and then for quite a few decent years, it was the Atari Portfolio. I took that thing everywhere, used it to write tons of code, kept all sorts of notes on it - it was truly 'my' computer in that it stayed with me at all times, which was very unusual back in those days ..
I'm surprised that the Olivetti P6060 was not mentioned in the list.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Sinclair ZX81 was my first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZX81
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZX81
The PDP-8 is such a beauty. I didn't know half of them, thanks for the submission.
indeed, sleek looking device. The PDP-1 is pretty awesome as well, and I recently got a chance to see a recently restored, fully functional PDP-1 power up, and run some apps at the computer history museum: http://pdp-1.computerhistory.org/pdp-1/
An Apple IIe.
[deleted]
The brain
Stupid post. What is a personal computer? It definitely is NOT a kit. Kit requires an engineer, not an ordinary person. Same with scientific calculators, all forms of boxes with switches and lamps, not to mention devices that cost more than a house.
Personal computer is a home appliance, something ordinary person can buy in a corner shop and use by himself. Look at that list again and what do you get? Apple I. Wozniak is Henry Ford of computer industry.
Personal computer is a home appliance, something ordinary person can buy in a corner shop and use by himself. Look at that list again and what do you get? Apple I. Wozniak is Henry Ford of computer industry.
Those kits were bought by non-engineers simply because they wanted a computer of any kind, and were willing to learn the skills to assemble them if they did not already have those.
The 'barrier to entry' to learn how to program in those days was quite a bit higher than it is today.
What is a PC is an arbitrary thing, the writer of this article sees the Personal Computer as a computer intended for use by a single person rather than a whole department or company. It being a kit or not isn't all that important.
Even the Apple I, which you seem to prefer came without a case, keyboard, transformer and display.
The 'barrier to entry' to learn how to program in those days was quite a bit higher than it is today.
What is a PC is an arbitrary thing, the writer of this article sees the Personal Computer as a computer intended for use by a single person rather than a whole department or company. It being a kit or not isn't all that important.
Even the Apple I, which you seem to prefer came without a case, keyboard, transformer and display.
Probably the BlackBerry - people actually lived their lives on them. Palm were around years before and great but didn't have internet connectivity which limited the time spent of them.
Then touchscreen devices came and living your life inside a device went from being a BlackBerry thing to an everyone thing in a few short years.
(Yes, like the other posts I reject the criteria on this page - my definition of a personal computer is a computer that people us to get stuff done, to the point it just becomes a part of their lives).
Then touchscreen devices came and living your life inside a device went from being a BlackBerry thing to an everyone thing in a few short years.
(Yes, like the other posts I reject the criteria on this page - my definition of a personal computer is a computer that people us to get stuff done, to the point it just becomes a part of their lives).
I spent much more time with my Palm than I do now with my iPhone. Or at least it seems that way.
My Palm felt much more like an extension of my brain than the iPhone does. Maybe because I didn't have internet connectivity with the Palm device and could only use stuff I synced onto it.
Whereas with the iPhone, everything is just a fingertip (and a network lag) away.
Considering the need of many apps to use the network, I also often feel the apps to be much slower than the ones I used on the Palm.
Probably because
My Palm felt much more like an extension of my brain than the iPhone does. Maybe because I didn't have internet connectivity with the Palm device and could only use stuff I synced onto it.
Whereas with the iPhone, everything is just a fingertip (and a network lag) away.
Considering the need of many apps to use the network, I also often feel the apps to be much slower than the ones I used on the Palm.
Probably because
Does anyone know why the specific decisions and guidelines used here may have been made? Is there some reasonable semantic reason why "SIMON" counts as a PC when it can only know 4 numbers[0]?
[0] http://www.blinkenlights.com/classiccmp/berkeley/simonfaq.ht...