The reason why Apple Computers never had hardware sound synthesis

[Keatah]

The reason why Apple Computers never had hardware sound synthesis is because of a lawsuit from apple records. The lawsuit came about after they made the IIgs. And never again did Apple include any hardware synthesis. It's all done in software.

 

What is not commonly known is that they (Apple Computer Co.) were under order to shorten the lifespan of the IIgs (II series altogether) as part of the handshake settlement. So you can really blame the death of the 2 series on apple records. PFFAAAGGGHH!

 

But ssssshhhhhhhh, don't tell the ebayers that or else the price on the IIgs is gonna go up even more..

[Ransom]

IIgs are expensive now? Sheesh, wasn't it just a few years ago you couldn't give 'em away?

[JamesD]

I paid under $30 for my IIgs (core machine and keyboard) but that's been a while ago. Auctions for the computer alone (no keyboard or accessories) seem to start at over $50 recently, and complete systems are going for over $150. Some systems are listed over $200.

 

I guess numbers from the school auctions in the 90s finally ran out.

It was only a few years ago I could pick up a pallet of IIgs machines plus a pallet of IIe machines for $200.

I think there were close to 50 machines in that auction.

[Emehr]

I guess if I'm going to sell mine then now is the best time. I've had it for 8 years and I haven't done anything more than fire up my old programming disks from high school. lol

[Retro Rogue]

The reason why Apple Computers never had hardware sound synthesis is because of a lawsuit from apple records. The lawsuit came about after they made the IIgs. And never again did Apple include any hardware synthesis. It's all done in software.

 

What is not commonly known is that they (Apple Computer Co.) were under order to shorten the lifespan of the IIgs (II series altogether) as part of the handshake settlement. So you can really blame the death of the 2 series on apple records. PFFAAAGGGHH!

 

But ssssshhhhhhhh, don't tell the ebayers that or else the price on the IIgs is gonna go up even more..

 

Sounds a bit fishy, what's your source?

[Cebus Capucinis]

[Ransom]

I paid under $30 for my IIgs (core machine and keyboard) but that's been a while ago. Auctions for the computer alone (no keyboard or accessories) seem to start at over $50 recently, and complete systems are going for over $150. Some systems are listed over $200.

 

I guess numbers from the school auctions in the 90s finally ran out.

It was only a few years ago I could pick up a pallet of IIgs machines plus a pallet of IIe machines for $200.

I think there were close to 50 machines in that auction.

 

Wow.

 

Perhaps the death of Steve Jobs is influencing the market as well.

[Keatah]

The reason why Apple Computers never had hardware sound synthesis is because of a lawsuit from apple records. The lawsuit came about after they made the IIgs. And never again did Apple include any hardware synthesis. It's all done in software.

 

What is not commonly known is that they (Apple Computer Co.) were under order to shorten the lifespan of the IIgs (II series altogether) as part of the handshake settlement. So you can really blame the death of the 2 series on apple records. PFFAAAGGGHH!

 

But ssssshhhhhhhh, don't tell the ebayers that or else the price on the IIgs is gonna go up even more..

 

Sounds a bit fishy, what's your source?

 

Sorry guys. This topic came up in casual conversation when I was talking with some retired communications engineers. Let us take it for what it's worth. I can pry into it more and see what we can see.

[magnusfalkirk]

Found a Wikipedia page dealing with the lawsuits against Apple Computer by Apple Corp (Records) over the years, here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer . I remember reading in either Incider or A+ magazine, back when they were separate magazines, about Apple Corp suing Apple Computer because of the sound chip in the GS. I didn't realize, and it wasn't mentioned, that the lawsuit effectively killed the GS.

 

Dean

[Retro Rogue]

Ok, did a little research and this appears to be one of those tales that got blown way out of reality or your friends read Wikipedia. Same thing in either case.

 

There was a lawsuit in 1989, and it was in regards to Macintoshs not the Apple II line. Specifically the use of Mac's in music synthesis, midi, and recording - of which there was a push by Apple at the time for. The suit entailed hardware and software and was in regards to specifically marketing towards the music industry which would have violated the 1981 agreement.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...by-beatles.html

 

Their previous 1981 agreement had precluded Apple from using the logo and name in the music business, it did not preclude them from having sound synthesis capabilities in their computers (whether in hardware or software). It just dictated what markets they were allowed to promote in. They settled for 27 million and an agreement to not use the apple brand in certain uses in the music business and restrictions on music distribution mediums. That is until 2003 when they were sued by Apple Corps again over the iPod and iTunes.

 

So no, they weren't responsible for the killing of the Apple II line.

 

 

 

 

 

Found a Wikipedia page dealing with the lawsuits against Apple Computer by Apple Corp (Records) over the years, here's the link: http://en.wikipedia...._Apple_Computer . I remember reading in either Incider or A+ magazine, back when they were separate magazines, about Apple Corp suing Apple Computer because of the sound chip in the GS. I didn't realize, and it wasn't mentioned, that the lawsuit effectively killed the GS.

 

Dean

 

That's again a poor source. There's no actual reference and the claim has been unsourced since it was added at the article's creation back in 2006. You run across that kind of heresy all the time there because of course anyone can contribute info. It's precisely why info like that there has to backed up by reliable references.

[desiv]

Found a Wikipedia page dealing with the lawsuits against Apple Computer by Apple Corp (Records) over the years, here's the link: http://en.wikipedia...._Apple_Computer .

 

Of course, that section in the Wikepedia article has a "Citation needed" tag on it...

 

So using it as a Citation is iffy.

 

I did always wonder why the early Macs had such weak sound. I always assumed it was just cost and that they felt it had "enough" sound for a business machine.

 

desiv

[Mirage]

Progress was responsible for killing off the Apple 2 line. Yes, I know, A2 fanboys will say it had a lot more life left in it, whatever, sure you could make that argument, but still, it was killed off for newer tech that more people wanted, just like any other obsolete or dead-end technology, since the company, like most, is in the business of making money. [wow, that was a run-on sentence!]

 

I always wanted a gs, wish I'd picked one up years ago. Ah well.

Edited January 14, 2012 by Mirage

[desiv]

....it was killed off for newer tech that more people wanted,

Which is why the Apple II sales carried Apple why they kept trying to be successful with what "people wanted?"

 

Apple IIs initially vastly outsold the newer tech of the Mac... For quite a while!!!!

Sounds like people still wanted the Apple IIs.

 

Obviously, 8 bit can't last forever, but the GS was an interesting machine..

Given some of the demos/games/apps I've seen, even tho it was an 8-bit at heart (Yes, I know it's a 16-bit CPU, I mean it's history), it could have held it's own...

Yeah, it would have needed work, but I could see it lasting quite a bit longer...

 

If it was successfull enough (Fantasy world time), maybe a 32 bit version of the 6502 line would have happened?? 65c832?

 

I know, I know..

 

But it's fun to wonder...

 

desiv

Edited January 15, 2012 by desiv

[Keatah]

I've always dreamed of a hi-speed 6502, running at hundreds of MHz - even back in the day. The thing that was magic about the II series was that it was open, built of basic logic gates, all documentation was available, and the slots.

 

While the IIgs had custom chips going, the slots and rom listings were still open and allowed for enormous flexibility. But expansion slots were too technical for the average day-to-day user. The MAC had the right idea of not having slots (except for the hidden diagnostic connector that got sneaked in past steve jobs).

 

Expansion slots are too technical. People get scared and perplexed if their computer has anything additional aside from a screen and keyboard and mouse. And nice friendly-looking connectors were the wave of the future, eventually mutating into the likes of USB. Shit, man.. Even the standard VGA connector looks scary, whereas the USB thing looks nice and gentle.

 

As far as hardware vs software sound. Back in the day, when processor power and memory was limited, wave synthesis of any kind was welcome and considered technically advanced. Today with gigs of storage space, digitized sound is just fine. And what isn't digitized can be built-up by the CPU when it has a free moment.

 

Today, hardware synthesis of sound could be considered restrictive and less versatile. I, personally, believe the pinnacle of PC synthesized audio was reached with the wavetable stuff of the late 90's. And once CPUs started running +1GHz is when software audio began to take off.

 

Today, PC's just have a basic D/A converter style of sound chip. And it's purpose is to playback data from the CPU, whether that data is recorded like in a wav file or built up as in a vocaloid.

[Mirage]

....it was killed off for newer tech that more people wanted,

Which is why the Apple II sales carried Apple why they kept trying to be successful with what "people wanted?"

 

Apple IIs initially vastly outsold the newer tech of the Mac... For quite a while!!!!

Sounds like people still wanted the Apple IIs.

 

 

You're taking what I said in a way too short-term view. Thing long term. Like you said, the 8-bit couldn't last forever. It had to make way for the newer tech, it was inevitable, just as it still is today.

[The Usotsuki]

The Apple ][ line had it both ways, at least from 1984-1986:

 

You wanted expandability, you got the Enhanced //e. You wanted a closed quick-setup box, you got the //c.

 

They were like 99% compatible with each other.

 

There really shoulda been an Apple IIgsc to go along with the IIgs. And perhaps a 7.16 MHz version of the IIgs.

[Keatah]

That's what the 7MHz Zip GSx card was for.

[epobirs]

Sorry but the GS was horrible. It was the most painful platform to support of that era. Users expected results comparable to the Amiga and Atari ST but that was simply impossible due to the crippling and astoundingly stupid design of the video memory. It was a static page, locked in place. The simple page flipping that was the mainstay of Apple ][ games could not be used, along with numerous other techniques reliant of freedom to move video memory location. This made simple scrolling a major undertaking.

 

The Courtland upgrade for the //e that was supposed to make it into a GS? Garbage. So wildly incompatible that nobody supported it.

 

The sound chip was impressive but in the first generation of the GS it too had a crippling RAM implementation, making its usability very limited. Developers had to decide if they were going to tell first gen GS buyers they were out of luck or essentially write their games with two different audio forks, one of far lesser quality than the other.

 

At Cinemaware we felt pretty sure this was all intentional sabotage. That Apple wanted to be done with the ][ as a platform once and for all. It would have been more reasonable if they had a board for a low-end Mac to run ][ software, especially in schools making the transition. This is exactly what they eventually did in the Mac LC but only after inflicting the GS on the ][ user base. This was just one of numerous incidents that drove me away from Apple. To this day I've never bought into any of their platforms. I'll use it if somebody else is providing the gear and wants something done but it won't be my money.

[SpaceDice2010]

Ok, did a little research and this appears to be one of those tales that got blown way out of reality or your friends read Wikipedia. Same thing in either case.

 

There was a lawsuit in 1989, and it was in regards to Macintoshs not the Apple II line. Specifically the use of Mac's in music synthesis, midi, and recording - of which there was a push by Apple at the time for. The suit entailed hardware and software and was in regards to specifically marketing towards the music industry which would have violated the 1981 agreement.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...by-beatles.html

 

 

 

 

This is factually incorrect. The IIgs line was included in the lawsuit. The suit cited the IIgs as well as Apple's midi interface for the IIgs and the Mac.

 

NYT can be an unreliable source as well. In this artcle they chose for whatever reason not to mention the fact that the IIgs line was included in the lawsuit.