deadmeow Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 (edited) It's settled, the August 2006 edition of PC World chose the top 25 "Greatest PCs of All Time" and the Apple II was king of the hill at #1. Atari didn't get shutout, the Atari 800 made the list at #14. The link to the article is at the bottom of the list. (01)1977 Apple II (02)1986 Compaq Deskpro 386 (03)1981 Xerox 8010 Information System (04)1986 Apple Macintosh Plus (05)1992 IBM ThinkPad 700C (06)1981 IBM Personal Computer, Model 5150 (07)1985 Commodore Amiga 1000 (08)1983 Tandy TRS-80 Model 100 (09)1982 Columbia Data Products MPC 1600-1 (10)1991 Apple PowerBook 100 (11)1998 Sony VAIO 505GX (12)1975 MITS Altair 8800 (13)1984 IBM Personal Computer/AT Model 5170 (14)1979 Atari 800 (15)2001 Shuttle SV24 Barebone System (16)1977 Tandy TRS-80 Model I (17)1987 Toshiba T1000 (18)1993 Hewlett-Packard OmniBook 300 (19)2002 Apple iMac, second generation (20)1996 Gateway 2000 Destination (21)1998 Alienware Area-51 (22)1993 Hewlett-Packard 100LX (23)1997 Apple eMate 300 (24)2006 Toshiba Qosmio G35-AV650 (25)1982 Non-Linear Systems Kaypro II http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,126692-p...ms/article.html :) Edited January 3, 2007 by deadmeow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempest Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Wait, a Trash-80 beat out the 800? No way! Tempest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+remowilliams Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 That list is retarded for a number of reasons, which were all discussed in another thread somewhere here IIRC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory DG Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Yeah, that's the list that shutout the Commodore 64. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inky Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Feh. That list is full of machines that are not "real computers" </sarcasm> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris++ Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 It's just the usual revisionist stuff, claiming Apple did more to revolutionize the 8-bit industry than Commodore. Not so. Commodore did everything first, but gets left out of a lot of mentions, including the fact that the Amiga was the first PC we'd think of as "multi-media" these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Almost Rice Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 I thought that list was retarded since when is comparing a computer from 1975 through 2006 going to work? We would have over 20 years to judge what was revolutionary and compare it to something still in production? How would we know the features in the Toshiba would be useless in a month? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Student Driver Posted January 4, 2007 Share Posted January 4, 2007 The Kaypro II beat out the Osborne I? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clint Thompson Posted January 4, 2007 Share Posted January 4, 2007 Creative bunch they are... what a waste of time. Atari 800 #14, spare me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasholzer Posted January 4, 2007 Share Posted January 4, 2007 Amiga multi-media first? don't tell the MSX guys..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DracIsBack Posted January 4, 2007 Share Posted January 4, 2007 Wait, a Trash-80 beat out the 800? No way! Tempest Easy now! (Tandy Co Co III fan) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 Where's my 99/4a? And why all the AT clones? Some of those are jokes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercat Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 It's just the usual revisionist stuff, claiming Apple did more to revolutionize the 8-bit industry than Commodore. Not so. Commodore did everything first, but gets left out of a lot of mentions, including the fact that the Amiga was the first PC we'd think of as "multi-media" these days. Actually, Apple did some significant things first with the Apple ][. While the Apple ][ was hardly cheap by later standards, at the time it debuted I don't think there was anything even remotely comparable for anything near the price. Certain aspects of the Apple's I/O architecture are also very interesting, though some aspects are absurdly sloppy. At a time when it was hardly clear what sort of printer interface would emerge as a standard, the Apple was well equipped to deal with any that might come down the line and have software support them. To be sure, there were some pretty severe problems including the fact that the interfaces often weren't even 7-bit clean, but the idea of having ROM extensions in I/O cards was probably a good one. Still, I find it hard to justify omitting both the Commodore VIC-20 and Commodore 64. While I'll confess to having some bias toward these machines, the fact remains that the VIC-20 was certainly a milestone in personal computing and the Commodore 64 offered Apple ][-level power at a very affordable price. To be sure, an Apple //e with an extended 80-column card could do things the C64 could barely dream of, but then again it came out later and cost more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kripto Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 Yes, the Apple ][ is in fact the greatest computer of all time, future not withstanding. I am also, in fact, using my original Apple ][ from the early '80's to post this message right now. The computer is currently connected to several large racks filled with 40-column cards that I have multiplexed so as to generate an ASCI driven, 1280x1024 display. The heat generated is unfortunately quite extreme and requires me to wear an industrial-grade thermal suit in addition to the full lead apron required to protect my reproductive capability from the intense radiation. It is, however, worth it as that I can post here while also being able to quickly re-boot and play Stellar Seven or my favorite version of Karateka. Apple ][ Forever Bitches! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchysuperman Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 More C64s were sold than any other computer - ever. Commodore was doing 3 voice music when the best Apple & IBM could muster was "beep". And still they left it off the list. I would say PC World had lost all credibility, but then they never had any in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercat Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 I would say PC World had lost all credibility, but then they never had any in the first place. Indeed, they couldn't even properly describe the IBM XT, which should have been something they'd know about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetset Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 Apple II Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE146 Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 I actually love the Apple 2. One thing they did that Commodore didn't.. was be available outside of the states! I'm guessing I would have liked Commodore.... if I had ever even seen one to purchase. But they were phantom hardware as far as I was concerned. Now Apple though, those Apple 2's you could find in Bangalore I'm sure So it gets my nod as THE computer system of my youth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_B Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 Yep, it's a total mockery of a list; just a bunch of anonymous DOS/Windows boxes with a few other machines thrown in as a vague attempt to make it look comprehensive. For my money, the best PC is one that you build yourself out of components that you've hand picked as being best for your requirements. With the exception of games machines, and some other very specialist hardware, that's pretty much always been the case even going back to the days of CP/M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kripto Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 In all seriousness, the Apple][ was a killer machine for its time. Users pushed that machine far past what anyone thought it could do. In regard to its sound capabilities, while it had but a single oscillator it was possible through programming tricks to create sounds that strongly resembled pulse-width modulation, chorusing and more. In fact, I had a program called "The Voice From Muse" which allowed you to sample and playback audio! Yes it did sound like "Dog Ass" but I was quite happy it could be done at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastRobPlus Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 I want to give PC World the benefit of the doubt that the list is not simply about the capabilities or revolutionary features of the individual machine, but the impact on the economic landscape or the way they changed folks interaction with computers overall. So from that point of view, I agree the Apple II should be at or near the top. My one true love, the Amiga 1000 seems about right at #7. And this at least helps me to understand how systems like the Shuttle and Area 51 would be on the list – they represent shifts in the physical way computers were used, but I have to say some of the contributions seem weak in the overall equation. I’m not a huge C64 fan, but lets be honest: The C64 taught the industry about competition. Modeling a computer whose design was continually cost reduced to stay competitive over an entire 5-year computer lifetime was Jack Trammel’s legacy and has had a greater impact than is generally acknowledged by the industry today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icbrkr Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 I actually love the Apple 2. One thing they did that Commodore didn't.. was be available outside of the states! I'm guessing I would have liked Commodore.... if I had ever even seen one to purchase. But they were phantom hardware as far as I was concerned. Now Apple though, those Apple 2's you could find in Bangalore I'm sure So it gets my nod as THE computer system of my youth What? Commodore UK and Commodore Germany are the two companies that kept CBM afloat for many years. The market for C64 products in these two countries was incredible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE146 Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 I actually love the Apple 2. One thing they did that Commodore didn't.. was be available outside of the states! I'm guessing I would have liked Commodore.... if I had ever even seen one to purchase. But they were phantom hardware as far as I was concerned. Now Apple though, those Apple 2's you could find in Bangalore I'm sure So it gets my nod as THE computer system of my youth What? Commodore UK and Commodore Germany are the two companies that kept CBM afloat for many years. The market for C64 products in these two countries was incredible. that's not Saipan though.. where I shopped Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+batari Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 (edited) More C64s were sold than any other computer - ever. Commodore was doing 3 voice music when the best Apple & IBM could muster was "beep". And still they left it off the list. The C64 was an awesome machine, and I had one back in the day. I don't think it should have been left off, but I don't think it would be near the top. C64 wasn't doing 3 voice music in 1981 when the PC was released, or 1977 when the Apple was released, because it wasn't released until 1982. In 1977, nothing held a candle to the Apple II and nothing did until the Atari 800. Granted, there's no excuse for the PC's poor sound, but the Apple II was released five years before the C64. That may have been why it was left off. In a sense, the C64 was evolutionary, not revolutionary. Edited January 5, 2007 by batari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercat Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 C64 wasn't doing 3 voice music in 1981 when the PC was released, or 1977 when the Apple was released, because it wasn't released until 1982. In 1977, nothing held a candle to the Apple II and nothing did until the Atari 800. Granted, there's no excuse for the PC's poor sound, but the Apple II was released five years before the C64. That may have been why it was left off. In a sense, the C64 was evolutionary, not revolutionary. The Commodore VIC-20 broke some pretty major ground, and then the C64 broke even more ground, in turning computers in to mass-market items. The 22-column display was somewhat feeble and its 5.5K RAM was rather limiting, but the RAM was expandable and the machine provided a better introduction to computing IMHO than anything else even close to the price. The Sinclair ZX81 was cheaper, but the VIC-20 was much more useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.