Back in 1983, Apple released a gift catalog featuring Apple-branded merchandize such as mugs, T-shirts, and, amongst many other items, an Apple II jigsaw puzzle.

I bought it for 99 pence. Shortly after, it arrived - and, being so excited as I was, I put the jigsaw together.

Curious to find out more, I contacted the one man who knows the most about the Apple II: Steve Wozniak. He replied, in his e-mail saying:

"Wow. I know nothing of this jigsaw puzzle. It's quite a surprise to me. I must have missed or forgotten it."

I had an item so rare that not even the almighty Woz could tell me anything about it!

It's one of those rare finds that would make a hardcore Apple geek all giddy with excitement. I've had a few rare finds myself, and I know the feeling!

[via LowEndMac]

I’ve had many dealings with Apple computers in the past, though (and with their owners, of course). And each encounter was a marvel to the senses. I’ve always been fascinated by these lovely computers, from the way the hardware seems to be like functional sculptures, to the way the Mac OS seems to read my mind and just do the things I want it to do.

So to make up for lost time (that is, the time I wasn’t on a Mac) and considering I’m relatively too young to know about the Mac since its birth (I was still in preschool during the Macintosh’s launch in 1984), I have to read up on my Mac history. Among the resources I often refer to is LowEndMac, which has a series of articles that covers the highlights of each year since the Mac’s introduction.

On January 24, 1984, Apple announced the Macintosh to their Board of Directors and to the world. And the computer world has never been the same.

A year earlier, Apple had unveiled the $10,000 Lisa, the first business computer with a graphical user interface and a mouse. The Lisa never caught on, but Apple was enamored of the concept.

It was an era of conformity. Although you could still buy an Apple II, TRS-80, Commodore, or CP/M computer, MS-DOS was the de facto standard.

Apple made a bold move, thinking different long before it became an ad slogan. And the rest, as they say, is history, a history Low End Mac examines in a series of articles, each covering one year in the life of the Macintosh.

The articles highlight the innovations (or lack thereof) introduced each year. These also give some personal perspectives on the hot issues during those times, including those that pertained how developments affected Apple as a company.

Here are some notable highlights I’d like to cover in brief.

1. The Macintosh is introduced. What made it different from the rest of the (mostly IBM-compatible) personal computers that time: a 3.5″ floppy disk drive instead of 5.25″, a mouse, and most of all a GUI!
2. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak leave Apple this year. Macintosh XL is released–it was basically a rebranded Lisa 2. No innovation here!
3. Macintosh Plus is introduced. New UI features: arrow keys and a numeric keypad (which we take for granted today!). And SCSI becomes the hot new thing. The HFS file system is also introduced, and this allowed for hierarchical directory structures on the Mac’s file system.
4. Color comes to the Mac world with the Mac II, which supported 256 colors.
5. First Apple CD-ROM ships, making the company one of the first to adopt this technology. Mac IIx and Mac SE introduced; these could read DOS 3.5″ diskettes (another feature we take for granted nowadays).
6. Apple introduces the Mac Portable. It was BIG–at 16 pounds!–but it was an amazing piece of hardware in its time.
7. The “wicked fast” Mac IIfx is introduced, and it featured an accelerated graphics card, and other innovations that reduced CPU load, resulting in faster performance. Low-cost, consumer-oriented Macs also debuted, which were the Classic, the LC and the IIsi.
8. Apple begins to dominate the laptop market with the introduction of the PowerBook 100 series, which, at 7 pounds, iss less than half the weight of the Mac Portable. System 7 is also introduced, which brings in a lot of innovations software-wise.
9. Low-cost, but low-performing Performa line is introduced. Lighter PowerBook Duo (5 pounds!) series is also introduced (these were dockable, though, to retain expandability and functionality when needed).
10. Apple overwhelms the Mac community this year with several model releases in a span of a few months. Notable are the Color Classic and the audio-visual oriented Centris 660av and Quadra 840av. The PowerBook also begins to sport color screens! And the MacTV is introduced–a limited production model that combined the Mac with a TV tuner.
11. Dual-platform Quadra 610 could run DOS and Windows! This year marks the beginning of the end for the Motorola 68000 platform as Apple started shifting to the PowerPC architecture, with the PowerMac and a new line of PowerBooks (the 500 series). Apple also starts to use IDE as an alternative to SCSI.
12. First licensed Mac clone is introduced by Power Computing. Apple adopts PCI. PowerBook 5300 introduced, but initial releases were recalled due to combustible batteries (sound familiar?).
13. Apple discontinues last Motorola 68000-based Mac. Apple purchases NeXT, which brought Steve Jobs back to the company he co-founded.
14. Apple posts big losses this year. Mac OS 8 is released. Apple ends the clone licensing program. The G3 is introduced.
15. iMac ais introduced, which makes Apple known to the world as a cool company.
16. iBook is introduced in multiple colors. Blue Power Mac G3 is the first “tower” Mac. Power Mac G4 is introduced. iBook iss introduced. Later in the year, an upgraded iMac is introduced. Whoa.
17. Power Mac G4 Cube and Dual G4 Power Mac are introduced. The iMac gets an upgrade. OS X preview is released.
18. Lots of new things: Titanium PowerBooks, iTunes 1.0, white “chicklet” iBooks, the iPod! OS X also starts shipping this year.
19. Flat-panel iMacs introduced. iPhoto debuts. iPod became Windows-compatible and adopted the touch-sensitive clickwheel.
20. USB connection for the iPod became available. iTunes Music Store opened.
21. iPod mini introduced. Flat-screen iMacs with the entire processing unit behind the screen in the flat-panel housing were also introduced.
22. Mac Mini was introduced. Mac Os X Tiger was released. Mighty Mouse debuted. iPod Shuffle and Nano also introduced. The most shocking news: Apple was moving to the Intel x86 platform!

What has Apple given us this 2006? I’d say a lot. From the release of Intel-powered Macs like the MacBooks and MacBook Pros, to the MBP Core 2 Duo upgrade, and even the official support for Windows in Intel-Powered Macs, among others, I can say 2006 is a very good year for Apple.

A couple of colleagues of mine also went on their respective laptop shopping sprees almost the same time as mine, and snapped up more powerful Core Duo and Core 2 Duo machines. They wouldn’t go for anything with integrated graphics. It had to be discrete (from either ATI or NVIDIA), and it had to have at least 256 megabytes of video RAM. They chose to go with buld-to-order ODM/”whitebox” models rather than the major brands. To them, it’s a choice of specs/performance over brand/design, and they preferred to have full control of what peripherals their laptop featured.

I could understand that it’s because of our respective needs. I’m a writer, and my colleagues are developers and designers. They’re quite the avid gamers, too, hence, the need for discrete graphics. I could probably find a need for blazing fast graphics with a discrete GPU and non-choke multitasking with two processor cores sometime in the near future (meaning when Power-hungry Windows Vista comes), but I couldn’t bring myself to justify the added cost right now. Hey, I got the Presario for less than half the price my friends got their higher-end laptops. And the Mac? The cost is almost negligible–I practically just resurrected the Pismo from the dead. Now it runs Tiger pretty decently. So I can say I pretty much got a good deal.

Get a Mac

Thing is, I’d been goading people I know to go for Apple computers (especially laptops) for the longest time, particularly considering the price of the MacBook–which his even tad cheaper than the Windows-based laptops my good friends bought. Sure, comparing the specs, the MacBook would be lagging behind. But with some added RAM and perhaps a hard drive upgrade, it would already be on par performance- and price-wise, except probably for the discrete GPU (here’s where the more expensive MacBook Pro would excel).

However, the tech evangelist that I am, I have a low batting average when it comes to convincing people to get a Mac. One reason they cite for sticking to PCs is that they’re power users, and that Macs just wouldn’t satisfy their need to control just about everything that goes under the hood, in terms of hardware.

They reason that while Macs today can run Windows (which gamers would require, since most popular games today are Windows-only), one would be limited when it comes to having a choice of processors, hard drives, graphics adaptors, sound cards, and even the motherboard itself. You have a plethora of manufacturers and parts to choose from when you’re building, upgrading or modifying a PC. With a Mac, you generally have to stick with Apple-provided or approved hardware.

Defining the Mac “Power User”

So does this this mean that Macs are, indeed, not suited for the power users?

I wouldn’t exactly say so. This is because in general, Mac and PC users have different definitions of what it is to be a power user. Here’s something I found on LEM that’s been up for a few years now, but which I think still hits it right on the mark when it comes to defining the “power user” from a Mac and PC perspective.

We tend to define “power users” differently in the PC and Mac camps. In the Mac world, we consider power users to be the people who do a lot of Photoshop or video editing, and sometimes the serious gamers with tweaked out systems. We define power users by their applications more than their hardware.

In the PC world, power users run fast Pentium and Athlon processors, which are overclocked more often than not. They choose their hard drives, video cards, and other components based on performance. The goal seems to be having the best hardware, not productivity.

Using cars as an analogy, PC hardware users build tricked out hot rods while Mac users buy production cars and trucks to get the job done.

(Emphases are mine.)

It’s all about the applications, and it always has been so. It’s in how you use your computer, and not how powerful it is, that makes you a power user. You can have a top-of-the-line four-core Mac Pro, but if all you use it for is some web mail and document editing, then I doubt if you can be called a power user. In the same light, you can own a G4 Mac Mini, but if you use it to edit videos, manipulate photos, and even manage your servers using the command line, you would be considered a power user.

Dumbed-Down Computers?

Also, there’s this argument that Macs are for dummies because Apple computers through history have been comparatively easier to use than PCs (what an understatement, huh?). When PC users were running programs through a DOS command line in the 1980′s, Macheads were already using point-and-click graphical user interfaces with mice! When Windows users had to learn to tweak their registries and use DOS commands to fix their computers when they screwed up, Mac users could still count on the GUI to do all that.

However, with the introduction of OS X, this changed because of the UNIX-like nature of the operating system. Mac users thus began to enjoy the best of both worlds–the cool, intuitive graphical interface on top of a BSD core. And if ever there’s a need to tweak the innards of OS X, then there’s always the command line. Now beginners won’t have to deal with tweaking registry keys, and advanced users have that familiar command line to play and hack with.

It’s All About the Person

I would say that being a power user is also about the productivity. If you can get the most out of your computer in terms of work done, no matter the specs and the speed of the machine, then I would say you’re a power user. But if you have the fastest and most powerful machine in the world, but don’t know how to make heads nor tails out of it, then sorry–your computer is just another white elephant.

Still, command-line or not, Windows or Mac, I would say the definition of a power user should always be based on the person and not the computer. To expand on LEM’s car analogy, a power user would be like a race between Michael Schumacher driving a Volvo station wagon and an inexperienced driver on a Ferrari. Schumey has the driving prowess and skills to finish the race and get pole position at that (all while enjoying the view), while the newbie will most likely crash his speedster less than halfway through the race.

So who’s the power user? Look not under the hood, but behind the wheel!

That was the time when an x86 version of OS X (Project Marklar) was still very much under wraps, and all sorts of leaks–whether fabricated or true–to that effect had been making the rounds of email lists, forums and early blogs. Apparently, the author’s worry was that porting OS X into the x86 architecture would make no sense for Apple as it would only lead to the demise of the company.

While we know how things have turned out, it’s quite interesting to revisit the past, and to recall how we once thought of our favorite tech company/companies. Sometimes we get a good laugh over our past experiences. When we see how things eventually turn out, it’s either I thought so, or What was I thinking? Or perhaps it’s Why didn’t I think of that?

Fast forward to 2006. As history would have it, Apple did switch to the x86 platform, but it did not turn out the way the author originally envisioned it to be. The author had his points and I would say they were valid and very much reasonable. But history sure has a funny way of making things turn out not as expected.

Point 1: Apple will never be able to offer its OS at a price point that Microsoft can’t undercut.

My take: Apple never has to. By this time, Apple already has a cult following loyal enough (or more than loyal) to stick with the company even with comparatively higher prices. While this statement was made with the view that a switch to x86 would mean that OS X would eventually be sold separately from Apple hardware (i.e., for use with other-branded PCs like Dell, HP, IBM, etc.), I don’t think it’s reasonable to pit OS X against Windows this way. They’re simply different (this is the understatement of the century), and they cater to different people with different needs and preferences.

Point 2: No hardware vendor would risk its Microsoft Windows contract by offering a competing OS.

To the contrary, there are hardware vendors that will sell you OS-less computers or those bundled with another OS like some flavor of Linux. Dell, IBM and HP are not marketing this aggressively, though, but ask and you shall receive. The same goes for the Intel stronghold on the hardware market. Manufacturers like HP are giving consumers a choice by marketing AMD-powered laptops and desktops along with Intel-powered ones.

Point 3: Converting to x86 is tantamount to admitting that recent ad campaigns touting the power of the G4 against the Pentium were just so much hot air, which devalues all of Apple’s carefully shepherded advertising dollars.

Okay, you got me there. When Apple first released the MacBook Pro, they even go as far as saying “Up to five times faster than the PowerBook G4.” Tsk! Have we just been had?

Point 4: If an x86 machine can run OS X, then if Apple rebrands some machine that can do that with an Apple logo, it stands to reason that the same machine could run Windows.

One word: BootCamp!

(Or maybe two words? Okay, it’s a compound word!)

Steve Jobs standing in a room and seeing an Apple-branded machine running Windows natively. Yup – that’s what I thought. Jobs would rather sell Pixar to Disney than see that.

Wonder of wonders! Steve Jobs did sell Pixar to Disney. And Steve Jobs probably sees Windows running on Macs natively every day, by virtue of BootCamp.

My bold prediction

Arguing with something written in the past is probably pointless. Or at the very least, it’s quite amusing. We have yet to see whether Apple’s switch to the x86 platform proves to be a stupid business decision, indeed. But using Apple’s steady market share so far as an indicator, I would say the switch has probably even improved the company’s standing in today’s increasingly competitive industry.

Now here’s my bold prediction that I’ll probably either support or contradict four years from now.

OS X will eventually run officially on non-Apple hardware.

What say you, my fellow MacHeads?