
What was the first personal computer? (1999) - jacquesm
http://www.blinkenlights.com/pc.shtml
======
yzzxy
The criteria used here seem arbitrary and and silly. This whole page feels
like an exercise in pedantry to me. Most of the time it's not even mentioned
what disqualified a given computer.

Does anyone know why the specific decisions and guidelines used here may have
been made? Is there some reasonable semantic reason why "SIMON" counts as a PC
when it _can only know 4 numbers[0]?_

[0]
[http://www.blinkenlights.com/classiccmp/berkeley/simonfaq.ht...](http://www.blinkenlights.com/classiccmp/berkeley/simonfaq.html)

~~~
jff
> Does anyone know why the specific decisions and guidelines used here may
> have been made?

Presumably the guidelines were designed in such a way as to disqualify all
_previous_ definitions of "the first personal computer", allowing the author
to select one even older and more obscure.

~~~
dragontamer
While this is true, the point of the article isn't to choose a valid first
computer.

It is a funny way to step through computing history with more and more obscure
devices.

------
wwweston
"The `paperclip computer` was introduced in 1967 in a book called How To Build
a Working Digital Computer by Alcosser, Phillips, and Wolk. The book describes
how you can build a simple computer with things around the house, like
paperclips for switches, and a tin can for drum memory."

This sounds pretty cool, and possibly worthy of its own post.

[http://www.evilmadscientist.com/2013/paperclip/](http://www.evilmadscientist.com/2013/paperclip/)

Apparently not first, though.

~~~
SixSigma
Bell-labs released their cardboard computer, the Cardiac, in 1968

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARDboard_Illustrative_Aid_to_C...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARDboard_Illustrative_Aid_to_Computation)

------
Negitivefrags
> It must be programmable by the end-user.

I guess that rules out the iPhone.

~~~
gilgoomesh
I sigh at your lazy millenial attitude. A 1950's programmer would have rooted
the device and rewritten the baseband software by now.

But even a lazy programmer can load Javascript into Safari on the iPhone to
program it. You can even embed the Javascript into a link and save it as a
bookmark the home screen.

~~~
throwaway00011
With all due respect, that is quite rude and unnecessary. Almost anything is
more effective than sneering at someone.

------
jzwinck
I forgot who made the first computer I used. It was similar to the BBC Micro
(conspicuously absent from this list), but this was in the US. It hooked up to
a (black and white) TV and let you program in BASIC (with no permanent
storage, most of the time was indeed spent programming). We rented it from the
public library--there wasn't much demand, so you could keep it at home for
days.

~~~
jff
Unfortunately that describes a huge variety of microcomputers from the 70s and
80s. You probably could have hooked up a cassette recorder for permanent
storage, but they took a very long time to store or load.

------
oofabz
After reading this list, I'm still satisfied giving it to the Altair.

The only bad thing the article has to say about the Altair is that it was
linked to Microsoft. Well, Microsoft had a lot to do with the early history of
the personal computer, and there's nothing wrong with giving them their due.
It's been more than a decade since their monopolistic behavior, I think it's
time to lay down the personal vendettas and put them in their deserved
historical context.

------
ot
Missing from the list the Olivetti Programma 101 (1964) [1], of which the HP
9100 (mentioned in the post) was basically a ripoff. It was the first general-
purpose programmable calculator designed to be operated by non-technical
people, and it was even used in the Apollo 11 program.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programma_101](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programma_101)

~~~
jzwinck
I grew up with another Olivetti model just one year older: the Praxis 48. It's
now in the SF MOMA collection:
[http://www.sfmoma.org/explore/collection/artwork/118397](http://www.sfmoma.org/explore/collection/artwork/118397)

Lovely designs from that firm:
[http://www.storiaolivetti.it/fotogallery.asp?idPercorso=632#...](http://www.storiaolivetti.it/fotogallery.asp?idPercorso=632#viewfotogallery)

It's worth seeing in person, the photographs online don't do justice to the
fine industrial design.

Oh, and before you say it's not a computer, read the page labeled 5 (actually
the fourth page) of this:
[http://www.machinesoflovinggrace.com/manuals/OlivettiPraxis4...](http://www.machinesoflovinggrace.com/manuals/OlivettiPraxis48manual.pdf)

------
fit2rule
For me personally it was the Tandy Model-100 for a short stint, and then for
quite a few decent years, it was the Atari Portfolio. I took that thing
everywhere, used it to write tons of code, kept all sorts of notes on it - it
was truly 'my' computer in that it stayed with me at all times, which was very
unusual back in those days ..

------
ratsmack
I'm surprised that the Olivetti P6060 was not mentioned in the list.

------
kitd
Sinclair ZX81 was my first.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZX81](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZX81)

------
agumonkey
The PDP-8 is such a beauty. I didn't know half of them, thanks for the
submission.

~~~
spydum
indeed, sleek looking device. The PDP-1 is pretty awesome as well, and I
recently got a chance to see a recently restored, fully functional PDP-1 power
up, and run some apps at the computer history museum:
[http://pdp-1.computerhistory.org/pdp-1/](http://pdp-1.computerhistory.org/pdp-1/)

------
danesparza
An Apple IIe.

------
dguillamot
The brain

------
rasz_pl
Stupid post. What is a personal computer? It definitely is NOT a kit. Kit
requires an engineer, not an ordinary person. Same with scientific
calculators, all forms of boxes with switches and lamps, not to mention
devices that cost more than a house.

Personal computer is a home appliance, something ordinary person can buy in a
corner shop and use by himself. Look at that list again and what do you get?
Apple I. Wozniak is Henry Ford of computer industry.

~~~
jacquesm
Those kits were bought by non-engineers simply because they wanted a computer
of any kind, and were willing to learn the skills to assemble them if they did
not already have those.

The 'barrier to entry' to learn how to program in those days was quite a bit
higher than it is today.

What is a PC is an arbitrary thing, the writer of this article sees the
Personal Computer as a computer intended for use by a single person rather
than a whole department or company. It being a kit or not isn't all that
important.

Even the Apple I, which you seem to prefer came without a case, keyboard,
transformer and display.

------
nailer
Probably the BlackBerry - people actually lived their lives on them. Palm were
around years before and great but didn't have internet connectivity which
limited the time spent of them.

Then touchscreen devices came and living your life inside a device went from
being a BlackBerry thing to an everyone thing in a few short years.

(Yes, like the other posts I reject the criteria on this page - my definition
of a personal computer is a computer that people us to get stuff done, to the
point it just becomes a part of their lives).

~~~
bhaak
I spent much more time with my Palm than I do now with my iPhone. Or at least
it seems that way.

My Palm felt much more like an extension of my brain than the iPhone does.
Maybe because I didn't have internet connectivity with the Palm device and
could only use stuff I synced onto it.

Whereas with the iPhone, everything is just a fingertip (and a network lag)
away.

Considering the need of many apps to use the network, I also often feel the
apps to be much slower than the ones I used on the Palm.

Probably because

