PC World is running an extensive feature called The 25 Greatest PCs of All Time. While I'm a bit skeptical of any such list that doesn't include the Commodore 64 (the list editors seem to think the Commodore Amiga 1000 was a "much better computer"), it nevertheless describes several interesting machines. The criteria are innovation, impact, industrial design, and "intangibles," which is the "misc" category. And, as if you need more, there's a companion article called the 25 Near-Greatest PCs of all Time. So, what's the #1 computer? The Apple II. Definitely not my pick, but I can appreciate the argument.
It's a bizarre list. I understand the so-called criteria, but the implementation is sloppy. The rankings seem arbitrary at best and they're across a too-wide range of product categories. It's no wonder the C-64 and others are not on there...
I think your picks are pretty much accurate. Apple isn't that great compared to Atari 800 but still deserves to be up there given the originality. Many later 8-bit computer arrivals lacked the originality that Apple and Atari 800 and Amiga had. They were basically copying other existing technologies. So I disagree with Loguidice's inexperienced remarks. Anyone can make an 8-bit computer have a couple of "better" features by taking existing technologies and extending it a bit like C64 did with sprites. But it takes a genius to come up with that technology to begin with.
"Loguidice's inexperienced remarks."? A bit confused are we, Divya16?
I'm not a believer in genius. There's even a new book on the topic called Where Good Ideas Come From that explodes that myth.
The so-called "genius inventor" always wants to convince you that the idea popped into his head out of nowhere, that he weren't inspired by ANYONE or ANYTHING, etc. It's mostly so he can get the "credit," which usually includes patent protection. I have nothing against patent systems so long as you have to submit a working prototype, but they did away with that requirement a long time ago. Now it's basically a race to see who can file an "original idea" first (and I won't go into all the various shenanigans such as submarine patents, ignoring prior art, and how small time folks get screwed). In reality, ideas exist in huge networks. Even if you don't realize it, you were influenced from many different things. The best thing for invention is to surround yourself with brilliant, well-informed people who like to discuss and share their ideas.
But anyway, I digress. At least he didn't call you The Loguidice. :)
Page does not come up for em (i get PC mag but says its not there). I have alwasy considered i had a pretty good Knowledge of PC.. but man 25? inst that really all of them? or are they breaking all the Amigas out (500,1000, 2000, 3000).. I know there are alot of 'also rans' but (and again, i cant find the artical on the website?) you have the XT's, the TRS-80's (and all the ones that go with it), apple (and yes I would say the apple II and Mac are 2 differnt computers) the current X86 machines, amigas, C-64 (again I agree the vic 20 and c-64 are both there own machine, but the c-64 was morphed into alot of other "new" computers, which where not new). the Atari 400-800-1200 (all lump to me.. ) etc... Sorry... I know without reading (can somebody update the link? or show me how to find it on PC World?) i shouldnt be comment on this at all :) I KNOW THAT :)
it just seems they must really be breaking some stuff out (or my memory is really foggy, most likely is).. I know there where alot of PC's in the early early days, but most where not worht mentioning really..
Dang I want to read it :)
I got to read it... and stand corrected.. dont agree with some of it.. but it was interesting... I cant see how the APPLE II was #1, it really would have to be the IBM XT (in my mind). And the C-64 not making the list while a Laptop with the first "nub" pointing device does? Or the 2nd gen Imac... something that flopped, they list it for invovation, um... nothing it had was used by anybody later.. and the stuff it did have was already out there.. Flat screen, swivil arm, PC in tiny base (there where several flat screens withe PC in behind them)..SO basicly a machine that used aftermarket ideas (none of there own) and flopped is a inovator? SORRY not in my book... that one chaffs me when the C-64 didnt make it...