Oh boy, lots of replies. And lots of mistakes, too.
I'm going to answer four of the recent posts -- in order, not logically.
Bill wrote: >>> The Grid 1101 was the first production laptop <<<
Bill ... where did I go wrong teaching you, young Jedi? You're making the same mistake others have: you are guessing. To be VERY arbitrary about 'first' (see my point a few replies ago about what 'first' really means), let's say just hypothetically that 'first' here means 'first to officially be on sale to the public'. (I don't personally believe that should be the definition, so again, I'm using it in this reply ONLY to make a point to Bill.
)
Unless you were to find out which exact dates the Compass 1100, RoadRunner, T-3000, HX-20, and NewBrain all went on sale to the public, then you can't make any declarations about this or that one being first.
The HX-20 was very popular, but since it's from Japan, on U.S-centric Google you will not find many articles/interviews/lectures/etc. quoting its designers. Whereas the former Grid people are out there in force, still working in Silicon Valley, giving lectures at museums, etc. ... but really, that just means their story is the most popular, it doesn't make them 'first' of anything. Another common fact about the Compass (according to, for example, About.com and WIDELY copied around various web sites) is that its design began in 1979. If that is true -- a big if -- well then, do you think those other four laptops just sprang up overnight? No, their designs started a couple of years earlier as well. So, in closing to Bill, if we wish for our history to be taken seriously as 'proof' (and I know you do, since we're friends), then we can't just say, "X is the truth" -- we have to say, "X is the truth because of Y and Z".
You also said, >>> Data General made the first full-screen IBM-compatible LCD laptop. <<< .... I need to think about that for a while, but meanwhile, keep in mind that "full-screen" and "IBM<-compatible" are SUBJECTIVE criteria (I'll elaborate on that below).
Mike Chambers said, >>> yup, the osborne 1 is generally considered to be the first "laptop" ... that thing is pretty much useless. <<<
Huh? Mike, do your homework. Luggables and laptops are two completely separate categories of computer description. If you Google and find a web site declaring the Osborne a laptop, then assume the site was written by either a child or a moron (or by an adult acting childish or moronic). As for its usefulness, there are GOOD REASON why the Osborne was so popular! In the context of 1981, the Osborne was the epitome of executive toys. It ran all sorts of CP/M software, and you could TAKE IT WITH YOU without needing to carry anything else -- to home, on the airplane, into meetings. Stop and think about how groundbreaking that was in 1981.
Shark said: >>> i do not consider the HX-20's, the Tandy model 100's/102's/200's, NEC PC-8201a, PC-8300's, and that whole genre as a "laptop computer." For *ME*, a laptop was self-sustaining, untethered, had it's own storage... Laptop computer? Um, not in MY opinion. I see IT as a HUGE early PDA with a keyboard, because they were VERY limited. .... But, that's just MY opinion. <<<
Shark, I hate to say this, because you already admitted it (and since this IS a discussion forum for people to give their opinions), but .... your opinion is wrong.
As you said, these early products like the HX-20 / Kyocera lineage were indeed rather limited. They were also red-hot sellers --- why do you think they're so easy to find today? Except for the screen size compared to the Compass, the HX-20 / Kyocera lineage were much cheaper, much more self-sustaining (8 hours on 4 AA batteries vs. needing AC power), and a decent amount of RAM for their era (even long-term storage for the HX-20, re: cassette). As for calling them PDAs, that makes no sense at all. (The best way to define a PDA is to ignore the dumb-ass marketing term of "Personal Digital Assistant" and stick with the realistic definition of "electronic organizer". Is the device primarily a gadget for keeping your calandar and contacts, or is it mainly for running traditional computer applications like word processing, spreadsheets, databases, scientific programs, etc.?)
Finally, Tredsaw said, >>> We really need to come up with a list of criteria to determine what a laptop is. For instance: clam-shell design, flat screen, floppy drive, fixed disk drive ?, under 10 lbs., runs on battery, runs 'regular' software/OS ... I would like to know if there's an older laptop than the DG One that is equally comparable in design and function to today's laptop. <<<
See, you can't DO that -- you can't pick criteria which happen to define the product YOU think should get the credit, and then say, "But the others don't match MY criteria!" Consider this -- no smartphone on the market today matches the Apple iPhone's gorgeous screen and intuitive user interface -- does it mean in 30 years from now, when such levels of visual elegance are the de facto standard, that historians should consider the iPhone the "first" smartphone? Of course not. Same goes for laptops. Yes, modern laptops have big screens, large amounts of built-in hard disk space, and lithium-ion batteries. That doesn't mean they were ALWAYS that way, nor does it mean they will always BE that way.
In computers and in many other fields, nothing is spontaneously "invented"; everything is built on something else. That is why I say the 1981-1982 laptops are the first generation, which I think is good enough -- not because I'm lazy and unwilling to do further research (and you all can see, it's quite the opposite), but because any further level of detail to the 'first' question is subjective and not so important.
For laptops or any other part of computer history, it is not enough to take one data point and say, "I agree with that data point, so I'm going to tell everyone it is a fact." History is only useful to future generations if we are exhaustive in our search for as many factual (not circumstantial, hearsay, or opinionated) data points as humanly possible, followed by the extraction of logical and scientific conclusions.