![nsnap5[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/KM4fJ5p.jpg "nsnap5[1].jpg")
Did people hate Apple even back in the 90s? I thought they used to be cool.
Literally a worse operating system than Windows.
Until OS X they were basically a toy box.
>>55197277
>>55197298
Windows 3.1 was contemporary with the computer in OP.
If you actually had to use it you'd know it was shit.
Having to deal with Win32s, Trumpet Winsock, etc.
Messing with DOS config files to fix hardware compatibility issues.
Having used both in that timeframe, I'd take Mac over Windows any day.
>>55197277
>>55197277
No
Very few people used them back then
>>55197277
I used them in the 90's as a kid and then worked on them in the 2000's for work.
They were never cool and I hated every minute of it.
>>55197411
Mac had a pretty solid foothold in the desktop publishing and graphic design business.
>>55197372
Strange... I also have used both in that timeframe but I would never pick a Mac OS over windows because it always felt to me like it was aimed for retards or idiots who do not understand even the simple instructions. I'm not saying that Mac OS was ever easy to use or anything but rather it was like.... a cook book with 90% of the content missing and no instructions how to make a single meal, just pictures of meals somebody else made and took a photo.
>>55197483
Glad to see someone else is also feeling the same way about them.
>>55197372
aww POOR YOU. I bet it was real hard using that big boy computer huh?
>>55197796
This is the most retarded post I have ever read.
>>55197861
Well good for you anon. I see more retarded stuff posted here everyday.
>>55197844
>>55197372 here.
Started using Linux in 1994, used other unices before that.
Take your retarded elitism elsewhere.
>>55197844
DOS was better to use without Windows 3.1 to be honest.
>>55197912
>Said the one elitist nerd to another while tinkering with his gentoo
>>55197912
>used other unices
???
>>55197372
Well even DOS was more usable than Mac OS. You didn't have to use Windows 3.1
>>55197277
Why would you waste your money on that super expensive Apple system when you can buy much superior Amiga hardware right off the shelf with lower price?
>>55197277
I have some floppies for system 7. If I rip them is there a way to run the OS in a VM?
>>55198736
I think you can use an emulator, but I forgot the name of it.
>>55197298
>>55197796
I recently daily drove one of these for a while just for fun
Some highlights of the experience over my Windows systems of the same era:
>excellent peripheral support
>multi-monitor support out of the box, limited only by the amount of NuBus cards you can shove into your system
>integrated NIC that required no more configuration than installing a single control panel, filling in some network information and restarting
>classic interface makes fantastic use of low-resolution displays, no iconized bullshit or fuckhuge window borders wasting screen space, and full color support
>file management that isn't shit
>program management that isn't shit
>MPW gives you a Unix-like command line (or you can just install A/UX, Apple's official SysV that had the ability to run all Macintosh software in addition to native applications almost seamlessly)
>applications are generally self-contained and don't throw shit all over your system drive, and can be easily uninstalled
>extending and customizing the OS's capabilities blows Windows out of the water
But...
>virtual memory is absolutely half-assed and you're better off without it unless you go with third-party extensions
>memory management in general is just as shitty as Windows 3.x and DOS
>like Windows 3.x and DOS, it's an unstable kludge being extended way past its expiration date, running old software designed for earlier systems especially would generally cause errors or recoverable system crashes
>Apple's quality control was S H I T in the early '90s, certain systems almost always need a good recapping, and if you haven't done it yet, you're on borrowed time
>>55197844
Networking was a basic feature of almost every "big boy" computer since the mid '80s, and Windows in general wasn't nearly a "big boy" platform until the Pentium Pro and NT 3.5 dragged it out of the stone age, where it was something of a competitor to low-end offerings from Sun, SGI, IBM, DEC and other actual "big boy computer" vendors.
Back in elementary school, something like 3rd grade, we had the LC575. What an awesome computer. I played the shit out of oregon trail on it. We never really had Windows PC's at my school.
>>55197828
Mac was never cool in the 90s. they were basically the SHASTA of computers
>>55198554
>much superior Amiga hardware
>a fucking 68EC020
Apple never even shipped a 68020 system that low-end when that chip was current in the '80s, and by 1992 even the entry-level of their lineup featured full '030s with the exception of the Turd Classic that was just a fleet box for schools.
>>55198736
PC floppy drives can't read 800K disks, but you can go grab disk images from the Macintosh Garden and run them in Mini vMac or Basilisk II.
>>55197277
Apple IIs were the shit. Literally used for everything
>>55197277
You got it backwards dude. That was actually when they were hated by normies and loved by computer geeks (because they had a somewhat esoteric CPU architecture and OS, compared to the endless lineup of Wintel machines you'd see in electronics shops). Nowadays it's the other way around, with normies loving them and computer geeks hating then (because they tend to be overpriced and non-repairable).
>>55197277
>that Trinitron
Beautiful...
>>55198736
http://igsi.tripod.com/mac/index.htm
>>55199034
Most "geek" types were more into Sun and other UNIX shit, usually dailying boxes they got from university/corporate surplus, but a lot of them did have a soft spot for Apple gear especially 68k shit that was pretty much workstation-class under the hood.
>>55199043
Sony made those?
>>55197483
Same. Used them in kindergarten through my senior year. From the little bomb to Mac osx or w/e. Was shit the entire time.
I still have a functional Powerbook G3 (Pismo) from back when Apple was good. It's running debian-ppc although I can't really be bother to fire it up and run screenfetch to prove it at this exact second. (fun fact: I once installed gentoo on it, like 10 years ago, it took like 4 days)
>>55199108
That CRT is vertically flat but horizontally curved, which means it's a Sony Trinitron. It's very easy to tell old CRTs apart once you learn to spot the cylindrical shape of Trinitrons versus spherical shape of shadow masks. I don't know if Sony made the rest of the electronics/casing of the monitor, though.
>>55199034
Really?
http://catb.org/jargon/html/M/Macintrash.html
http://catb.org/jargon/html/M/Macintoy.html
http://catb.org/jargon/html/M/macdink.html
>>55199160
>The term maggotbox has been reported in regular use in the Research Triangle area of North Carolina. Compare Macintoy. See also beige toaster, WIMP environment, point-and-drool interface, drool-proof paper, user-friendly.
kek
>>55199175
>point-and-drool interface
The more things change the more they stay the same.
>>55197277
>>55197372
>>55197298
OK so my question is, how the fuck did Apple fail to get in to the market when PCs built before 1996 were absolute trash
Like i got this old 1994 Gateway 4DX2 (486-66) from an estate sale. i like old shit, i like tinkering. Guy said it didn't work, $20
I go in, had to manually config the HDD (Head Count, Sector Size, LZ, etc) shit like that just to get it to boot
Then modifying config files to add drivers and change configurations so i can run certain software
Not to mention IRQs\DMAs\Ports\Jumpers\etc.,
Like This wasn't any big issue for me
But how did Apple not make bank when PCs were just nowhere near Normie friendly at the start of the Computer Hypetrain of the 90s? were normies less retarded then? was apple somehow shittier than that PC? I genuinely want to know, i missed that era, Our first PC was in 97 and i was too young to know about the before times
>>55199082
My dad had SUN workstations at his work and a Mac at home. I think he would have loved to have a SUN machine, but they were several times more expensive than what Apple had.
>>55199243
1) Most normies didn't own computers, and didn't need to.
2) Normies were also generally less retarded and more capable of figuring things out on their own.
3) Apples were still prohibitively expensive in comparison to other computers.
4) Apples were very locked down, and given that they also did their own proprietary hardware, there were no Apple OEMs besides Apple, whereas since Windows could work on any IBM Clone, you had half a dozen bigtime OEMs throwing support behind it (Compaq, HP, Dell, Gateway, etc, etc, etc).
>>55199243
Top of the line Quadra around that time was $7200. Does that answer your question?
>>55199160
>Microshit
>Windoze
>PeeCee
>Loonix
>slowlaris
>HP-sUX
>StinkPad
>Itanic
>Celery
>Eunuchs
It's nothing special when a big-name platform or product has derogatory nicknames assigned to it, there's no secret cabal of top nerds assigning a universal consensus surrounding a given platform.
>>55199243
There were a lot of reasons. Mainly: they didn't cater to the same market (management didn't share Jobs' delusions of grandeur), they were very expensive (and very fast), and they just didn't have the selection that PCs did. You could have whatever the fuck you wanted for a PC, and while they certainly weren't the best, they were so compatible and catered to such a diverse market that they were a much safer choice than a Macintosh that was mainly designed for 2D graphics work like desktop publishing and later film/image editing, something they did very, very well.
That doesn't mean Macs weren't still good as consumer systems, and they even shared a lot of PC mainstays like Microsoft Office, but people were doing a lot more niche shit on PCs for which Macintosh counterparts were expensive or simply unavailable.
And overall, user friendliness was significant but not a huge concern, especially for business customers where everything their users would need to do with their computers is thoroughly documented and outlined anyway, CLIs aren't hard, just unintuitive.
>>55199296
Yeah, people usually got them in surplus, the early 2000s especially was a fucking great time to be into Unix gear, we're talking $50 for a loaded quad-processor SPARCStation great.
>>55199358
>2) Normies were also generally less retarded and more capable of figuring things out on their own.
No, god no they weren't. They were more retarded if anything, and you didn't have to be smart to remember a pool of three or four commands to run Lotus 1-2-3.
>4) Apples were very locked down
What the fuck are you even talking about? Where does this "locked down" idea come from?
>>55199243
>OK so my question is, how the fuck did Apple fail to get in to the market when PCs built before 1996 were absolute trash
Because despite the fact that PCs back then were absolute trash, Macs still managed to be worse.
Also none of that configuration shit was an issue with prebuilts. Just because some guy fucked up the OS on his 486 doesn't mean it came like that out of the box.
>>55199408
I remember I got an Ultra 3 in 2007 for free. Lost it in a fire :(.
>>55197380
What am I looking at? It just looks like the standard dock animation.
>>55199422
>Also none of that configuration shit was an issue with prebuilts
Not really, expansion and upgrades were routine back then, almost a requirement. There were no all-in-one expansion solutions like USB in those days, not even close.
>>55199429
>Ultra 3
Hot damn, that sucks ass.
I've always wanted the shit out of a SPARC laptop.
>>55199370
What about the everyday shit? like a classic (2\color)? those were more around the range and shit for what offices need
>>55199408
>What the fuck are you even talking about? Where does this "locked down" idea come from?
if you read the rest of that sentence, anon states how the software was "locked down" in the sense that it could only run on a more limited set of hardware.
>>55199460
Even then it was a non-issue considering Macs came with zero user serviceability. People who would have no issue with a Mac would have no issue with a prebuilt PC.
Not like the instructions were even hard. These days even smartphone games are more complicated than assigning IRQs/master-slave/etc and making sure there are no duplicates conflicts.
>>55199408
>Yeah, people usually got them in surplus, the early 2000s especially was a fucking great time to be into Unix gear, we're talking $50 for a loaded quad-processor SPARCStation great.
I think he was too busy playing with his PowerMac G4 Sawtooth, which I have in my closet and still werks.
>>55199408
>What the fuck are you even talking about? Where does this "locked down" idea come from?
From *your own post*:
>You could have whatever the fuck you wanted for a PC, and while they certainly weren't the best, they were so compatible and catered to such a diverse market that they were a much safer choice than a Macintosh that was mainly designed for 2D graphics work
Being more compatible with lots of shit is correlated very, very strongly with being more open and less locked down.
>>55197277
I always thought 90s Macs were some of the better looking beige boxes out there, and I wouldn't mind seeing a return to a modernized version of such styles.
>>55199511
>Macs came with zero user serviceability
But that's a lie.
>>55199561
yeah, i'm with ya
>>55199151
i'm stuck with my lombards (no AP)
>>55199500
The thing is, by the time those were cheap, you could already get a much faster Intel machine for a fraction of the price.
>>55199592
Without voiding the warranty.
>>55199500
Classics were trash, later entry-level offerings were okay though, you could have a Quadra 605 for $900-$1500 that would be enough for fleet jobs, but it wasn't really worth bothering when you could get a much better deal ordering a fleet of PCs and no training/software migration headaches.
>>55199510
I noticed that right after I submitted, I was hitting the character limit anyway.
>>55199511
>Even then it was a non-issue considering Macs came with zero user serviceability
You know that Apple made computers before the iMac existed, right? Most desktop 68k systems included at least a PDS slot that was very frequently utilized for processor upgrades and cache (or even more on lower-end boxes), more commonly a suite of 2 to 5 NuBus slots. Processors during the '040 era were also socketed, and the systems could be completely disassembled, sometimes needing only one or two screws to remove.
>>55199529
That isn't "locked down", there was nothing restricting you from developing NuBus cards or PDS accelerators, and Apple had their own pretty prolific hardware space as well, particularly vendors like Radius, SuperMac, NewerTech and DayStar come to mind, and there were a ton more, though it was nowhere near as diverse as the PC's huge-ass market for sure.
>>55199617
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EVsXmAOQ9o
not really
>>55199151
Those things had enough expandability and upgradability to make a thinkpad blush. Funny how things have changed.
Wouldn't mind getting my hands on one if I could find one in good condition for cheap.
>>55199561
This and their "snow white" design was great
Can anyone make things using their design style and not get sued or some shit by apple?
>>55199635
90s, not 80s.
>>55199422
>Because despite the fact that PCs back then were absolute trash, Macs still managed to be worse.
Maybe in the early 90s, but not for the latter half. System 7.5 - Mac OS 9.x gave me WAY, WAY less trouble than any of the Win9x PCs I used. The only thing I really had to watch out for was running multiple behemoth applications like Photoshop. I still hate Win9x to this day and if it weren't for Win2K I would have abandoned windows permanently.
>>55199653
no different for the '90s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtAm9tf3HQ0
power macs in the '00s were even easier than either of those, practically the entire assembly flips out without opening a single screw
>>55199452
I honestly think it's supposed to be loss.jpg
>>55199690
The PowerMac 7X00's folded out similar to Steve Job's PowerMac G3/G4. I think I almost like this design better than the PowerMac G5's because you could line the floor with HDD's. The only problem is those damn IDE cables don't like going sideways. Did the last gen quad CPU G5's have room for 4 HDD's or was that introduced after they switched to Intel?
I ghad my commadore 64 untill 1994 because windows 3.1 pcs where far too expenise at the time and i was a neet with a solo parent
My friend had a windows 3.1 PC that shit blew my mind when i saw GUI interface for the first time.
>>55199243
>macs where in all the schools
Used a Mac at school that was the best place for Mac's seriously it stops gamers and hackers and most kids are dumb as fuck to get to anything sensitive.
it was in 1995 when PC got cheap enough and powerful enough to do school shit that all changed the death kneel for apple was the coming of Office applications for windows in 1995
>>55199978
That was an Intel thing, unless you used thin 2.5" drives. Then I think you could fit 4.
>>55199978
I've got a couple of those, the way they designed the Outrigger case seemed to make it really easy to destroy the power button if you weren't careful. Getting that outer shell back on was a bitch.
>>55200072
>it was in 1995 when PC got cheap enough and powerful enough to do school shit that all changed
"School shit" isn't that demanding, Apple was a fixture in that market because most of those schools used Apple IIs before and simply upgraded their fleet to the next Apple product in the line, usually a Mac Classic or LC with a IIe-on-a-card for older applications.
>the death kneel for apple was the coming of Office applications for windows in 1995
PCs had that shit since the beginning, that was their entire niche. MS Office itself was first released for Windows in 1990, the components of the Office suite themselves were far older.
>>55200233
are you talking about DOS you realise i'm talking about GUI right? there was really nothing like that the only things i could think about where the DOS Applications and those are not user friendly.
Fuck off idiot I'm talking about idiot poof software running on the PC and Mac.
Every DOS person knew that DOS was hard to use
that's why where is a huge manual on how to use it in the A+ exambook and Manual came with PC's back then.
the 1990 version for windows 3.1 was trash it was too fussy a program and was way too complex for what it had to do just to save on ram.
that's why I said in 1995 because it was the only one that was comparable to the Mac version (Example: user friendly).
Have you even used the 1990 version of office or are you baiting me?
>>55200394
here is a example of a debate in 1995 on Mac vs PC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8oLr1UOeRM
>>55200394
Can you try that again, and speak English this time? That
Post
Is
Fucking
Unreadable
>Have you even used the 1990 version of office or are you baiting me?
I have a 486 running Windows 3.1 right next to me, the Windows Office version is identical to the Macintosh version, and not difficult at all to use, neither really are the DOS office programs that millions of people got work done on just fine that proceeded them, nor was Office '95 really all that different, it just looked less like shit thanks to Microsoft finally pulling their head out of their ass and giving Windows a proper interface that doesn't look like shit at a typical PC resolution.
>>55200574
You just answered it with your last sentence
I'm talking about Office 95 vs Mac on complexly related to the downfall of the MAc domation and i was saying it was connected to schools
since most nomies didn't have a PC or a Mac.
and the only real access for the adverage user was at school or office.
>>55200665
>I'm talking about Office 95 vs Mac on complexly related to the downfall of the MAc domation and i was saying it was connected to schools
But that's really true, because there were still thousands of schools and universities that continued buying Mac fleets, Apple continued to make tons of special systems for the education market only, and they continue to do so to this day.
Hell, the "Macs were only in schools solely because of user-friendliness" argument falls through pretty easily since most of those schools in the late '80s and early '90s were still running fleets of pure command-line Apple IIs. Windows 95/NT certainly gave them some more competition, but it didn't kill them.
>>55200776
>But that's really true
But that's NOT really true*
I hate the quick reply window sometimes.
>>55197298
Can confirm
>>55200233
>"School shit" isn't that demanding, Apple was a fixture in that market because most of those schools used Apple IIs before and simply upgraded their fleet to the next Apple product in the line, usually a Mac Classic or LC with a IIe-on-a-card for older applications.
Here in california apple gave schools thousands of free imacs when they were new. I think this is actually the root of their success in the early 2000s because it forced normies into the iMeme and then the ipod and iphone came out a few years later.
>>55202218
probably considering how absolutely awful schools are at managing windows networks in general, probably made their shit look real good in comparison
though I would say their success is more to their edgy design and marketing tactics moreso than that, everyone had their dicks out when the iMac hit the stage
People love Apple now, you just never talk to normal people.
I shitpost on /g/ all the time and I only use Apple computers.
>>55202755
>i only eat shit from my hands
baka desu senpai
>>55202772
You're just mad cause I'm styling on you.
>>55202719
>marketing tactics
Throwing free iShit at schools is marketing though.
Edgy design also helped a lot though.
>>55203024
sure, but that wasn't really the driving force behind their success, the students who fondly remember their school's colorful G3 fleets are still either college-aged or otherwise young and too poor, Apple had way more tricks up their sleeve, especially media exposure, memorable TV ads, and sending PC design on its ass every three years
>>55197277
My dad started using macs for his business back when photoshop only ran on them. There was a period of time when they were the absolute only choice for serious digital art. He continued using them long after apple pivoted away from being a platform for professionals. For me the mac died when they made final cut into prosumer bullshit, and even before that windows had become just as good an option.
> can't do anything useful
> rearranges 'documents' for fancy 'printer' so that faggots at office can have clipart in 1988
literally useless. everyone hated them then as well.
>>55197277
Macs were overpriced shit in the 90s that were only used for desktop publishing and music recording.
>>55198985
Yeah, but even the entry level Macs were ridiculously expensive.
>>55198554
I loved the fact that you could perfectly emulate a 68k Mac on an Amiga. It's actually half the reason I still used my Amiga in the 2000s.
I learned BASIC on an apple IIe in fourth grade.
>>55198886
The only person on /g/ that actually knows what he's talking about.
>>55198886
>A/UX
I wish they developed this into OS X. I had the chance to use it and it was just such a polished product.
>>55197277
I've hated apple since they abandoned dos.
>>55205804
But they haven't. Even the newest mac still requires MS-DOS just to boot. :^)
>>55197298
Go watch cartoons kid. Adults are talking.
>>55197372
Hell, the UI alone was shit before Win95. Program v. file explorer? Retard graphics? No wonder Apple took over the publishing industry while Windows was left running accounting software.
>>55197796
I don't believe that you ever touched a classic Mac.
>>55206013
Poo in the fucking loo Rajeesh.
>>55198886
>this anon knows
My only complaint is that I don't consider Mac OS classic a "kludge" like DOS+Windows. If you did any programming on it, it was a fairly well designed OS and set of APIs.
The problem is that the original developers ditched preemptive multitasking, protected memory, and a clean 32-bit memory model, all things the Lisa team had in their machine.
Why? The first Mac only had 128K of RAM.
All the problems and kludges trace to that.
>>55197306
Stock photos are amazing when taken out of context
>>55197306
>ywn have a 1984 qt gf
>>55206070
>Mac OS classic
>well designed OS
>>55199511
>People who would have no issue with a Mac would have no issue with a prebuilt PC.
Were you alive back then?
Because every fucking PC I ever encountered...prebuilt or not....had issues. I got tired of being asked by friends/family to fix their shit so I finally started charging.
Windows was a steaming pile of crap until Win2k.
>>55197528
>Mac had a pretty solid foothold in the desktop publishing and graphic design business.
>at highest point, between 8% and 10%
k
>>55206113
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNuJQnWeyqk
>>55206113
>wasn't even born
>has an opinion on technology from the era
You're going to be late for summer school.
>>55206130
>world wide marketshare = specific industry marketshare
k
>>55205830
you're.... you're.... you're a retard, anon.
>>55206070
Ditching the Lisa for the Mac was just fucking baffling.
>>55197298
what about a/ux
>>55206177
>mactoddler pretending his opinion matters
How cute.
>>55197277
>Did people hate Apple even back in the 90s?
>implying people outside of your neckbeard forum hates Apple
Fucking go outside you turbonerd. Most people don't give a shit. Computers are fucking tools not some sort of identity.
Late 80s/early 90s Macs were prevalent in schools in the US from what I remember growing up back then. I'm sure they were expensive. It was a pretty big deal to have a computer in the classroom.
All computers were expensive though. Our first PC at home was an IBM with a 100 Mhz Pentium. Cost my Dad like $4000 in '95.
>>55206469
>Computers are fucking tools not some sort of identity.
ok kid
>>55206499
me in the middle
>>55199034
>Nowadays it's the other way around, with normies loving them and computer geeks hating then (because they tend to be overpriced and non-repairable).
/g/ is full of hipster normies that don't develop software or know how to program. Between windows and osx, osx is a much better platform to develop on.
>>55206492
In the UK, even up to the mid-late 90s, most schools still had BBC Micro and Acorn computers because of some government scheme. They were some of the most expensive 8-bit and 16-bit computers you could get. I remember the unbelieveable excitement when our classroom got an Acorn Archimedes. Nobody had a fucking clue how to use it. It barely got used for the rest of the year, apart from typing in essays in the crappy Notepad program.
At high school the computing classes had moved on to Macs - again the most expensive option, fuck knows why. The art department had an Amiga 2000 that sat there gathering dust, and they had 2 word processing classrooms, one with old green screen word processor type PCs and the other had modern Windows PCs.
>>55206499
Are you honestly saying that you associate your computer choice with your identity because some other autists do it? If so, you're honestly retarded.
>>55197277
They were seen as an underdog (and a failed company before Microsoft threw them a rope).
Before Jobs got back there, there weren't those annoying cult practices and consumer-screwing to hate. Or at least it wasn't too visible because you didn't have the internet world of today.
Classic Mac OS was a rotten operating system, worse than W9x.
>>55207233
>(and a failed company before Microsoft threw them a rope).
Do explain yourself.
>>55206519
With the inclusion of ubuntu in the windows store that is no longer true.
>>55207273
What?
>>55207242
Literally bailed them out of bankruptcy, with a mountain of cash.
>>55197277
They were sooo shit that my school used Novell clients to remote into a windows server so we didn't have to use mac os.
>>55207346
kek
>>55207242
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY
In 1997 Microsoft released Microsoft Office for Mac and bought a ton of Apple stock with no voting power.
It seems that this move was to fight antitrust cases against Microsoft as fall of Apple would've made Microsoft Windows the only commercial consumer OS.
>>55197277
had some macs (no as old as the one in OP, the oldest one was a G3 in library and we had full class of G5s) in high school
these things were fucking shit
I haven't had much of experience with the new Intel ones but I've played for a while with friend's Retina MacBooks (his brother's a total macfag and gives him his old Apple products) and they're way way better than this PowerPC crap (in comparison with other PCs their age of course)
in school we had one ancient 2000 PC with ubuntu and it was way better
>>55207404
the court ordered them to bail out Apple as far as I can remember.
Macfags were so outraged, it was funny.
>>55199592
when Jobs wasn't there (read: late-80s up to 1998), Apple adopted an open system policy, where you could actually upgrade the parts in a Mac, starting with the Mac II
When Jobs came back, the machines began to become more "appliance" like again, with reduced expandability.
>>55206299
It wasn't, really. The Lisa was expensive as fuck ($10k), slow as fuck (even with an 8MHz 68k like in the Mac, a Lisa would still drag when doing anything), and wasn't really bringing in money.
The Mac was designed to be a $1k machine (and sold for over twice that, but at least it's not fucking $10k) and to be less bloated on the rather limited hardware. It was a machine that ordinary people could actually hope to own.
>>55206070
Fundamentally, the Mac OS's design is supposed to be pretty clean.
But the problems are pretty much that when it came time for Apple to shed the baggage stemming from the original 128k Mac, they completely fucked up (really, it needed to happen when System 7 came out).
OS 9 at least got preemptive multitasking, although you had to specifically develop programs to be aware of it, and it really, really was a kludge. It's actually pretty similar to how Windows 9x does it, but done like five years later, and most programs weren't preemptive aware, unlike on 9x.
>>55206013
There were a fair few machines running Windows back then for desktop publishing. Shit, that was one of the only places it really took off until 3.0.
Windows 95's UI is brilliant though. It's a System 7 clone in many ways, but it looked like it was designed by people who liked System 7 and thought it had good shit to copy instead of it being done by people who copied the look and feel solely because Apple did it.
and then every later release, even as they fix some issues (in particular, some configuration areas are a bit poorly laid out in 95, like setting file extensions), post 95/NT4 Windows seems to fuddle things up
>>55207863
>Fundamentally, the Mac OS's design is supposed to be pretty clean
That is possible, but it just weren't a modern robust system properly prepared for multithreading, multi-tasking like NT. But most importantly, IIRC it didn't have memory protection, which is the critical showstopper. And what puts it into the Windows 3.1/9* league.
>>55207233
>Classic Mac OS was a rotten operating system, worse than W9x.
Nothing was worse than Win 9x.
See that picture? Still better than 9x.
>>55207479
>lol wut?
G3 Power Macs raped PCs of the time. I remember my first G3 and it destroyed any other computer I worked on performance wise.
The G5 was pretty good to when it was released but it was hot as fuck, expensive as fuck, and never going to be scaled down for a notebook or for lower temps / higher clocks. Apple made the right move switching to Intel when that last part became apparent.
>>55207863
>There were a fair few machines running Windows back then for desktop publishing.
Wouldn't say they were nearly as good at it though, at least not until the mid '90s. Aldus did release PageMaker for as early as Win2.x but every screenshot I've seen of it looks like absolute ass, not to mention that they didn't have the LaserWriter
>>55207404
>In 1997 Microsoft released Microsoft Office for Mac
MS had Office on Mac from the beginning, and even before, hell they even released Multiplan for the 128k.
>>55197298
>I wasn't alive during the early 80s, the post
Apple III was da bomb dot com
>>55197380
>his only complaint is a gif entirely irrelevant to the thread
>even in threads where the gif has relevance such as OS X discussion it's fucking stupid because it's a complaint about a feature that's turned off by default
