• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

"The Apple II was the first time arcade games were in color" - Woz

Yeesh. I was hoping maybe he was just choosing words poorly or something.. but yeah. My problem is I like Woz. If it were Jobs making those claims I'd just wave it off as the usual Jobs/Apple arrogance. I just thought Woz wasn't like that. What I would have liked for that video is for the interviewer to get in there and really press him ("what about the Dazzler, what about this computer, this arcade? What do you mean yours is first?").

As a side note, this kind of thing is what makes doing any kind of documentary so difficult. When I did my first couple for youtube, I thought having access to primary sources was a boon. Instead I learned that people tend to change their stories a bit (or a lot) as they get older. Sometimes it's just poor memory, sometimes burnishing credentials to enhance your legacy before you check out, sometimes settling scores with other people in your field. It's a real challenge to get the story straight, and especially when videos like this come along and make you wonder for just a second if everything you thought you knew was wrong.
People do remember things differently as time goes by especially if it makes them more important or makes them look better. Some of this has to do with marketing so they can score some new gigs to pay the rent, or just to stay in the media over ego.

Woz was known for the Apple II and pretty much everything he did after that went to shit. Woz has to deal with his other half (Jobs) turning into a GOD to some people and having much larger success.

I have to say that any engineer being remembered these days is an accomplishment in itself where we mostly just remember the snake oil salesmen these days who hype themselves just as much as the product, they had little to no input in.
 
I remember reading once that Woz created the Grand Canyon when he got tired walking across the desert and let his mighty axe drag behind him. I think that was around the time Don Lancaster tamed a giant green oxen, but we all know that Woz’s blue one came first and was at least twice as big.
 
I remember reading once that Woz created the Grand Canyon when he got tired walking across the desert and let his mighty axe drag behind him. I think that was around the time Don Lancaster tamed a giant green oxen, but we all know that Woz’s blue one came first and was at least twice as big.
That must of happened during this photo op

ED2951CD-8C4C-4648-B13E-FB134251EDD4.jpeg
 
Steve Woz was a steel drivin‘ man, and Steve Woz invented the steam hammer what killed him. Keep your eye on Disney Plus for the upcoming documentary about this living legend, I hear tell it’s going to be a musical.


(I mean, not exactly this; it’s Silicon Valley he single-handedly carved, not the Rio Grande, but close enough.)

That must of happened during this photo op

View attachment 1247280

Oh lordy, please tell me that’s fake...

Oh jeeze, it’s not. I’m legit sad now. :(
 
There aren't any other 'graphics cards' that came before the Dazzler right? I'm saying graphics as opposed to video card.. Im assuming the VDM-1 takes the ribbon there.

To be serious again for a moment, a sideline here that might deserve mention is the Polymorphic VTI card; it came out around January 1976, which makes it a few months later than both the Dazzler and the VDM-1, but it might have been the first cheap memory-mapped card that combined both alphanumeric display and a semi-useful graphics resolution into a single unit. (Its resolution of 128x48 is the same number of dots as the GT-6144's 96x64.)

The GT-6144 is actually kind of an interesting animal to mention since it's *not* a memory mapped graphics card, it's an external device accessed over a parallel port. Conceptually I guess it's roughly analogous to later port-accessed graphics boards like the Matrox ALT-256/ALT-512.

Just to be clear here, are you trying to pinpoint the invention of "graphics" displays, or memory mapped displays, or just "the first one hooked to a microprocessor", or what? Graphics displays using vector/oscilloscope technology go back to the very dawn of electronic computing (late 1940's), and memory mapped raster-scan displays were a fairly common (if expensive) thing by the early 1960's on interactive mainframe/minicomputer applications. (See: NLS, home of the "The Mother Of All Demos" and PLATO terminals for just a couple examples.) Nobody invented anything here in applying these techniques to microprocessor driven computers.


That reminds me - I've read in some places that Woz did produce some kind of TV Typewriterish terminal prior to the Cream Soda computer, possibly around the same time or shortly after Don Lancaster's. One source, which I cannot find now, claims it was actually produced. Never seen a pic of one though. Supposedly this was borrowed from for the Apple-1.

You didn't take this seriously, did you? People say really stupid things on the Internet.

Anyway, around the time Don Lancaster was building the TVT-1 Woz was working at Hewlett Packard. HP had been making computers for years and while their first home-grown terminal didn't go on sale until 1974 it was doubtless under development at the time and HP was selling rebranded Datapoint and Beehive terminals that I'm sure young Mr. Wozniak got to play with and learn about at work. And yes, at some point prior to joining the Homebrew Computer Club in early 1975 he'd apparently already built his own. What's the point? He didn't invent anything, terminals based on semiconductor shift register memory like the TVT-1 and what Woz glued to a 650x CPU in early 1976 had been a commercial product since 1967. (There are earlier units like the IBM 2260 from 1964 that used acoustic delay lines.) That he built a copy of a thing he saw at work to have at home is, well, good for him, it's nice that he was in the privileged position to do such a thing.

Anyway, this whole deal with the "Cream Soda Computer" feels like another item that needs to be seriously debunked. That dingus he built in 1971 was made out of a couple Intel bitslice ALU chips and some SRAM chips his dad got him from work. These ALU chips had been around for a few years and were becoming standard building blocks for making minicomputers and small mainframes. Said chips would have been on the expensive and exotic side for mere mortals to lay hands on in 1971, but by the end of the 1970's building a rudimentary computer out of them was pretty much a standard part of a college computer engineer course. In all of these interviews Woz dredges up this thing as evidence that he's some kind of revolutionary super-genius doing stuff nobody ever thought of before, but... I dunno, a really jaded person might just congratulate him for being able to read a manual.

Suffice it to say the "Cream Soda Computer" is a considerably less impressive achievement than the Kenbak-1 in my book, because the latter is actually built from small-scale TTL logic, not, uhm, actual "computer chips". But yeah, Woz, yours had a lower chip count, we heard you.
 
Last edited:
...and memory mapped raster-scan displays were a fairly common (if expensive) thing by the early 1960's on interactive mainframe/minicomputer applications. (See: NLS, home of the "The Mother Of All Demos" and PLATO terminals for just a couple examples.) Nobody invented anything here in applying these techniques to microprocessor driven computers.

To be reasonably accurate, raster display graphics were pretty uncommon early on. Memory was neither cheap enough nor fast enough for that. PLATO, for example, used a very expensive addressable plasma display. You turned a dot on or off. It was a hugely expensive technology, but gave crisp, unflickering displays.

(BTW, those not familiar with PLATO and interactive gaming, owe themselves a chance to investigate it. While attending an NCC around 1978, I wandered by the CDC booth promoting PLATO and two marketing types just standing there with brochures. I asked if I could play with the unit they had there (I was at the time, no longer a CDC employee, but had wasted hours in front of the orange glow) I brought up AIRFIGHT and within minutes the booth was filled to overflowing with people watching the game progress. I don't think that Bill Norris approved of his expensive technology being used to play games, but really, that's where the money really was.
And now you know what the inspiration for Microsoft Flight Simulator was...

The Control Data IGS 200 and even the venerable DD60 console were vector display. The IGS had its own dedicated computer to keep refreshing the display and the DD60 used a CDC 6000 PPU to constantly rewrite the screens. If your console display driver hung, the screens went blank. Naturally, the earlier oscilloscope-oriented ones were also vector displays. The IGS used long-persistence RADAR-type phosphors to even things out.
 
Last edited:
To be reasonably accurate, raster display graphics were pretty uncommon early on. Memory was neither cheap enough nor fast enough for that.

Yeah, I'll admit to maybe being a little over-generous in saying "common". I guess it'd be a lot more precise to say the concept was nothing new by the mid-1960's and was something you could have on a big/expensive enough computer. It becoming "common" did rely a lot on the development of semiconductor memory...

Again, though, the point here is there seems to be all this grasping at the idea that a certain someone invented this, that, or the other thing, and it's clear that wasn't the case.

The Control Data IGS 200 and even the venerable DD60 console were vector display. The IGS had its own dedicated computer to keep refreshing the display and the DD60 used a CDC 6000 PPU to constantly rewrite the screens. If your console display driver hung, the screens went blank. Naturally, the earlier oscilloscope-oriented ones were also vector displays. The IGS used long-persistence RADAR-type phosphors to even things out.

A variation on the straight-up vector displays I find particularly fascinating was Charactron tubes. On one hand, cool idea, lets you splat out fully formed characters in a single fully formed piece, you don't need to frantically draw vectors for every letter. Downside of course is the tube had to be incredibly long for all those "steer the beam" stages; the 19" direct-view models used for SAGE were so huge the consoles had to be about six feet deep.

On the subject of PLATO, it's kind of mind boggling to me just how advanced the hardware and the concept under it was for the time. Using one in the 1960s must have felt like something out of a science fiction movie.

d6532678057491f93a1c78ccdbd7eff61b2ce06a.jpg


This is an early PLATO II, circa 1961-ish? Also particularly love the "Star Trek but Woodgrain" aesthetic of this PLATO III in the computer history museum collection.

102743309.01.02.lg.JPG


I guess to be fair it needs to be pointed out that the really early CRT PLATO terminals didn't actually use fully bitmapped displays; they used a system where the course material was rendered on slides that were played on the monitor via a TV signal; a character generator overlay was genlocked to this feed for the interactive prompts and student responses... but it's still pretty amazing. (And strictly speaking that genlocked material was raster scanned...)

 
Last edited:
That reminds me - I've read in some places that Woz did produce some kind of TV Typewriterish terminal prior to the Cream Soda computer, possibly around the same time or shortly after Don Lancaster's. One source, which I cannot find now, claims it was actually produced. Never seen a pic of one though. Supposedly this was borrowed from for the Apple-1.
Exectly backwards. Woz produced a small quantity of terminals for Call Computer, which is where the video interface came from in the Apple 1. I have been told most never worked by someone who worked there.
I was told by someone else that Woz was told about the color encoding at lunch by someone at Fairchild.

'genius' has many fathers.
 
On the subject of PLATO, it's kind of mind boggling to me just how advanced the hardware and the concept under it was for the time. Using one in the 1960s must have felt like something out of a science fiction movie.

The PLATO box that I was most familiar with was the PLATO V black box with the plasma display--after CDC had acquired the operation.

I believe that the serial comms was at something like 2000 bps.

It is recorded that the guys from Xerox PARC visited UIUC around 1972 and came home with ideas about their GUI-based system.

Fundamental ideas are only rarely developed in isolation. I would be mildly surprised to learn that no early computer graphics used the field-sequential (CBS) color system. Certainly early CRT-to-still film systems used it, using a small white phosphor CRT and a 3-color wheel.
 
Exectly backwards. Woz produced a small quantity of terminals for Call Computer, which is where the video interface came from in the Apple 1. I have been told most never worked by someone who worked there.

Do you remember when this was? Just did some digging around on the "Call Computer" thing, and the best, albeit fragmentary, references I can find about this seems to indicate that this was sometime in 1975. And FWIW, one of those references is actually on the Apple I registry website:

"... The unusual display section is a result of the so-called 'Computer Converser' which Steve Wozniak and Alex Kamradt designed as a terminal. The idea came from an article in the magazine Popular Electronics 1975."

The Wikipedia article on Woz misleadingly suggests this was sometime around 1972, but that appears to be completely, 100% false. This extremely muddled transcript of a speech by Wozniak in 1986 even implies Call Computer is a thing he got into after joining the Homebrew Computer Club, which would push things into mid-1975 at the earliest.

So, alas, looks like another lifeline for being "first" at something doesn't seem to have played out. And, gotta say it's "interesting" that the one source specifically mentions the design was... shall we say "influenced", by a Popular Electronics article.
 
The IGS used long-persistence RADAR-type phosphors to even things out.

Those duachrome radar displays displayed active data as green and older items faded to red.

I’m told a slight modification of that phosphor and circuit driver would allow you to PWM the beam to create areas of green, yellow, orange or red on the screen despite it being monochrome.

At a high enough refresh you could keep multiple persistent colors on the screen (a monochrome one at that), besides an irritating red trailing image on moving graphics I often wondered why this tech wasn’t used in monochrome screens, what financial institution wouldn’t want their green screens showing red on losses?
 
A bit off-topic, but the keyboard in this PLATO video looks to me like a mechanical unit from a Teletype M33, and I seem to hear a corresponding "clunk" when a key is depressed. In normal operation this mechanical keyboard creates an encoding using a set of bars/rails whose positions are then serialized using a rotating shaft to produce an ASCII bit-sequence on the transmission line. Is this keyboard in fact from an M33, and does anyone know how the mechanical bar/rail-encoding was transmitted electronically in this PLATO use?
 
I did some research when I first heard the call computer story from the person who worked there last month
You can figure out the timeline from this.


I had to go to the way back machine for the homepage.mac.com reference, which had the most info. Sadly this one puts Woz in a pretty bad light as well, basically saying he took the money, slapped out a barely working prototype, and ghosted on ever working the bugs out of it.

Anyway, yeah, this whole thing was clearly in 1975 after Woz joined the Homebrew computer club, not even remotely close to before Don Lancaster publishing the TVT-1 design. Whatever source put this earlier is completely full of it.
 
Back
Top