Steve Wozniak supports Right to Repair!

[Katarok]

 

[emosun]

course he does. the guy literally hand made computers

[Roswell]

3 hours ago, Hakemon said:

Why do you think so many chips were socketed on the Apple II?  Or why the Apple I even had a breadboard area on the PCB?

Because computers were 95% composed of off the shelf parts back then.

Don’t assume it was because of some charitable notion from the founders because that had absolutely nothing to do with it.

[da na]

5 hours ago, Hakemon said:

Of all the people in the tech industry, Woz is the one I had no doubts would support right to repair.  Why do you think so many chips were socketed on the Apple II?  Or why the Apple I even had a breadboard area on the PCB?  He welcomed tinkering, hacking, and repairing.  It was Jobs that was the business man that hated the concept of fixing your own stuff.

Yeah, it was because of The Woz that we got 8 expansion slots on the Apple II than the 2 slots that Jobs wanted. And 40 years later here I am with 6 of them filled. Thanks!

[kelvinhall05]

2 hours ago, Roswell said:

Don’t assume it was because of some charitable notion from the founders because that had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Mhm, because the full schematics and bundled software source code that came with the Apple II were totally purchased off the shelf...

 

 

You aren't wrong in saying that stuff was made primarily of off the shelf hardware back then but immediately dismissing anything as muh corporate money making is pretty ignorant.

[Roswell]

2 hours ago, kelvinhall05 said:

Mhm, because the full schematics and bundled software source code that came with the Apple II were totally purchased off the shelf...

 

 

You aren't wrong in saying that stuff was made primarily of off the shelf hardware back then but immediately dismissing anything as muh corporate money making is pretty ignorant.

I never mentioned software, schematics or "corporate money making". Not really sure what you're talking about.

[McRo]

  

 

5 hours ago, Roswell said:

Because computers were 95% composed of off the shelf parts back then.

Don’t assume it was because of some charitable notion from the founders because that had absolutely nothing to do with it.

 

I agree that the socket stuff was probably because they were off the shelf parts, but, not having seen the insides of one, I still have to wonder about the breadboard area. If the breadboard area was designed as a feature rather than a byproduct, then it would totally point to the machine having tinkerability as part of the design.

 

33 minutes ago, Roswell said:

I never mentioned software, schematics or "corporate money making". Not really sure what you're talking about.

The "because that had absolutely nothing to do with it." is totally an assumption on your part. When you say it had absolutely nothing to do with it, at least with the way you said it, you are saying they didn't care about it being modifiable. You are saying they had zero care for it being fixable, modifiable, etc. Maybe that's not what you meant to say, but that's how it reads, so that's what you said.

[Roswell]

6 minutes ago, McRo said:

  

 

 

I agree that the socket stuff was probably because they were off the shelf parts, but, not having seen the insides of one, I still have to wonder about the breadboard area. If the breadboard area was designed as a feature rather than a byproduct, then it would totally point to the machine having tinkerability as part of the design.

 

The "because that had absolutely nothing to do with it." is totally an assumption on your part. When you say it had absolutely nothing to do with it, at least with the way you said it, you are saying they didn't care about it being modifiable. You are saying they had zero care for it being fixable, modifiable, etc. Maybe that's not what you meant to say, but that's how it reads, so that's what you said.

It has nothing to do with it because it wasn’t an option one way or another. They used off the shelf chips because that was their only option, just like every other manufacturer. Thus, a bunch of easily removable components.

 

The Apple I has a breadboard for expansion purposes before expansion slots were conceived as an idea. 

[McRo]

32 minutes ago, Roswell said:

It has nothing to do with it because it wasn’t an option one way or another. They used off the shelf chips because that was their only option, just like every other manufacturer. Thus, a bunch of easily removable components.

 

The Apple I has a breadboard for expansion purposes before expansion slots were conceived as an idea. 

I understand it was the only option. I was just telling you how you sounded. Since you don't seem like you understand how that sounded to some people. Kinda like if I said "I don't like guys". I didn't say "I like girls", but yet I did say I like girls. lol

Oh, I thought the breadboard part was talking about the Apple II. That makes sense.

So was the expansion capability not "charitable" though? Or is there something I'm missing?

Edited July 8, 2021 by McRo
posted before i was done lol

[kelvinhall05]

7 hours ago, Roswell said:

I never mentioned software, schematics or "corporate money making". Not really sure what you're talking about.

You dismissed the Apple II's serviceability as being purely because it was built from off the shelf parts, but Apple including full schematics among other things disproves that.

[Avocado Diaboli]

40 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

You dismissed the Apple II's serviceability as being purely because it was built from off the shelf parts, but Apple including full schematics among other things disproves that.

I own several pieces of electronics from that era up to the early 90s that came with full schematics and guides on how to assemble and disassemble them. This isn't something unique to Apple, this was common practice for a large number of electronics before things got locked down more and more, parts ceased to be user-replaceable, etc. Or are you trying to tell me that Sony, who made my LaserDisc player and included a complete breakdown of the machine in the manual, are massive proponents of right to repair? No, they did this because it was expected of them. Nowadays, it's expected of you to throw out your broken electronics to buy new ones, which is why you don't get any repair manuals anymore. 

 

Now mind you, I'm not here to argue over if Wozniak was for right to repair back then, because again, this was standard practice for the entire industry and I can't read Wozniak's mind. But it's also silly to then turn around and use this standard practice, ignore that everybody did that and simply claim that the early Apple computers were random outliers.

[kelvinhall05]

16 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

I own several pieces of electronics from that era up to the early 90s that came with full schematics and guides on how to assemble and disassemble them. This isn't something unique to Apple, this was common practice for a large number of electronics before things got locked down more and more, parts ceased to be user-replaceable, etc. Or are you trying to tell me that Sony, who made my LaserDisc player and included a complete breakdown of the machine in the manual, are massive proponents of right to repair? No, they did this because it was expected of them. Nowadays, it's expected of you to throw out your broken electronics to buy new ones, which is why you don't get any repair manuals anymore. 

 

Now mind you, I'm not here to argue over if Wozniak was for right to repair back then, because again, this was standard practice for the entire industry and I can't read Wozniak's mind. But it's also silly to then turn around and use this standard practice, ignore that everybody did that and simply claim that the early Apple computers were random outliers.

I never said it was unique to Apple lol. All I said was that dismissing it as "oh it was only because chips were off the shelf" is ignorant.

[Avocado Diaboli]

5 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

I never said it was unique to Apple lol. All I said was that dismissing it as "oh it was only because chips were off the shelf" is ignorant.

I don't think dismissing the notion that early Apple computers were somehow built in the spirit of right to repair or particularly serviceable thanks to provided schematics is ignorant, regardless of if they're built from off the shelf components or not. As I outlined above, it wasn't uncommon for electronics to be easier to repair for laypeople thanks to less complex parts and also better documentation for customers. Sure, Apple products used to be more user serviceable back then compared current Apple products. But so was every other piece of electronics. This is neither a point for or against Wozniak. But @Hakemon's first post that started this back and forth insinuated that Apple was some sort of outlier.

[kelvinhall05]

2 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

I don't think dismissing the notion that early Apple computers were somehow built in the spirit of right to repair or particularly serviceable thanks to provided schematics is ignorant, regardless of if they're built from off the shelf components or not.

I never said that either! Stop putting words in my mouth...

[Avocado Diaboli]

3 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

I never said that either! Stop putting words in my mouth...

Then what was your entire first response to @Roswelleven about? Roswell only pointed out that Hakemon's initial claim about the design of early Apple computers didn't have anything to do with right to repair but due to the fact that they use off the shelf parts. You then interjected with the following (ironically putting words into Roswell's mouth):

11 hours ago, kelvinhall05 said:

You aren't wrong in saying that stuff was made primarily of off the shelf hardware back then but immediately dismissing anything as muh corporate money making is pretty ignorant.

 

Then you pivoted to this:

1 hour ago, kelvinhall05 said:

You dismissed the Apple II's serviceability as being purely because it was built from off the shelf parts, but Apple including full schematics among other things disproves that.

To which I pointed out that serviceability thanks to provided schematics was something common back then, because my assumption was you were still talking about this whole thing under the aspect of right to repair.

 

So again, what even are you trying to express here?

[kelvinhall05]

11 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

(ironically putting words into Roswell's mouth):

How? They literally said:

13 hours ago, Roswell said:

Don’t assume it was because of some charitable notion from the founders because that had absolutely nothing to do with it.

My response to that:

11 hours ago, kelvinhall05 said:

dismissing anything as muh corporate money making is pretty ignorant.

Where did I put words in their mouth? Genuinely don't see it.

13 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

So again, what even are you trying to express here?

That dismissing the Apple II's socketed chips and included schematics as "oh it was normal back then" or  "yeah but it's not a 'charitable notion from the founders'" is ignorant. Wozniak himself said in the video in OP that "the Apple II was modifiable and extendable to the maximum". Knowing his whole attitude as an engineer and tinkerer it's pretty damn clear to me that his goal was for people to mess with the machine and improve it as they see fit.

[Avocado Diaboli]

26 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

Where did I put words in their mouth? Genuinely don't see it.

You assumed that Roswell was talking about greedy practices when nothing what they said indicates that and expressed it as "muh corporate money making". This explanation ties into my next response.

 

26 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

That dismissing the Apple II's socketed chips and included schematics as "oh it was normal back then" or  "yeah but it's not a 'charitable notion from the founders'" is ignorant. Wozniak himself said in the video in OP that "the Apple II was modifiable and extendable to the maximum".

Again, I don't think it's ignorant, because there was no other way around it. Building computers from off the shelf parts back then was the norm for companies of that size and scope. Providing schematics for electronics back then was the norm. So you simply cannot use it as an example of Wozniak's attitude when he literally had no other choice available. That's what Roswell was pointing out regarding socketed components and what I was pointing out regarding schematics.

 

Again, this has nothing to do with Wozniak himself being for or against right to repair at any point in his life, it's just that you can't use circumstances that don't permit alternatives as proof for intent. I don't doubt Wozniak's sincerity and that he was always a tinkerer who wanted his customers to have the same freedoms he had designing the machines. But there's nothing inherent to his designs that points towards that that wasn't common at the time, ergo using it as an example is a bit misguided.

[kelvinhall05]

5 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

So you simply cannot use it as an example of Wozniak's attitude when he literally had no other choice available.

He did have other choices. IBM didn't include schematics with the PC and that's just one of many examples. I'm sure there are systems not built with off the shelf parts but I'm not super well versed in vintage stuff so can't name any examples. Also fwiw chip sockets add considerable cost and extra labour to a system compared to just soldering the chips directly. Sure there are manufacturing advantages (such as easily configured RAM and ROM) but I think it's still worth mentioning.

[Guest]

No Way!

[Murasaki]

Thank you, Steve!

[Roswell]

6 hours ago, kelvinhall05 said:

He did have other choices. IBM didn't include schematics with the PC and that's just one of many examples. I'm sure there are systems not built with off the shelf parts but I'm not super well versed in vintage stuff so can't name any examples. Also fwiw chip sockets add considerable cost and extra labour to a system compared to just soldering the chips directly. Sure there are manufacturing advantages (such as easily configured RAM and ROM) but I think it's still worth mentioning.

What? IBM PC didn’t exist when the Apple I came out. Not even close…

 

Beyond that, as others have pointed out, everything came with schematics back then because repairs were expected to be done on-site in the 70s and earlier. Shipping to repair centers wasn’t a thing… Your local repair dude would come to your home, reference the schematics and fix your stuff. Or of course you could do it yourself if you were so inclined.

 

There’s nothing wrong with being misinformed, the problem comes when you continually double down on it in the face of logic and conflicting fact.

[WolframaticAlpha]

Steve Wozniak is real, wholesome and good natured. I like him.

11 hours ago, Murasaki said:

Thank you, Steve!

Is this a reference to GN's reference to Intel's Steve?

[Roswell]

33 minutes ago, SGT-AMD said:

"In personal computing, notable expansion buses and expansion card standards include the S-100 bus from 1974 associated with the CP/M operating system, the 50-pin expansion slots of the original Apple II computer from 1977 (unique to Apple)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansion_card

 

 I’m not sure if you think you’re proving a point, but the Altair machines came out around the same time as the Apple 1 according to Wikipedia (1975-76).

 

I’m sorry that my precise 70s computing history wasn’t accurate enough down to the month, but the point still stands. The breadboard was there for expansion because expansion slots weren’t a thing in the industry…(except for one Altair model that released months before as you so helpfully pointed out).

[whm1974]

9 hours ago, Roswell said:

 I’m not sure if you think you’re proving a point, but the Altair machines came out around the same time as the Apple 1 according to Wikipedia (1975-76).

 

I’m sorry that my precise 70s computing history wasn’t accurate enough down to the month, but the point still stands. The breadboard was there for expansion because expansion slots weren’t a thing in the industry…(except for one Altair model that released months before as you so helpfully pointed out).

With the Altair everything came on expansion cards. The Mainboard was a passive backplane. Microsoft got it's start by providing BASIC on Papertape for the Machine. Of course you had to buy a 4K Memory Card and Papertape reader. But first you use the toggle switches to load a bootstrap to use BASIC.