Talk:History of Apple

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Macintosh. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as an article pertaining to the Macintosh, but is not currently working to improve it. WikiProject Macintosh itself is an attempt to improve, grow, standardize, and attain featured status for Wikipedia's articles related to Macintosh and Apple Inc. We need all your help, so join in today!
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top	This article is on a subject of top-importance within Macs for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a group devoted to the the study, and improvement of Wikipedia articles on the subject, of History. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Additional information:

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status:

Referencing and citation: not checked
Coverage and accuracy: not checked
Structure: not checked
Grammar: not checked
Supporting materials: not checked
Neutrality: not checked

To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call:

|B-Class-1=yes/no

|B-Class-2=yes/no

|B-Class-3=yes/no

|B-Class-4=yes/no

|B-Class-5=yes/no

|B-Class-6=yes/no

1 Quality
2 Explanation
3 Name
4 CEOs
5 Changes to Xylit (talk)'s redirects.
6 Article name
7 Organization of Article
8 Undos
9 Tone and improving references
10 Quibble about credit

[edit] Quality

~~This entry is poorly written. Far too many anecdotal stories, and a generally amateur feel.~~ This article is pointless. I'm just sorry that I spent 45 minutes editing it before realizing there's another Apple article that covers all these points in a much more succinct fashion.

[edit] Explanation

This is a copy of the history sections from Apple Computer. It's going to form the main article about the company's past; the original sections will be shortened to summaries. That way, the article on Apple will be a manageable size and will be able to focus more on non-historical things. —RadRafe 20:57, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Does anyone know why Apple is called Apple?

Yes, it's because it was Steve Jobs' favorite fruit as his diet was purely fruit at the time. Woz couldn't think of a better name, and Jobs joked that it got Apple ahead of Atari in the phonebook. I'm sure this is covered in the article. — Wackymacs 19:42, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

According to the first edition of MacWorld Macintosh Secrets by David Pogue, Apple was named after the apple that inspired Isaac Newton. That's why Apple's first logo depicts Newton under the apple tree. JHP 18:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

And how come there was no lawsuit ever over the name from the Apple Corporation (Apple Corps.), the entertainment company, started by The Beatles in 1968? And if there is (was) one, how come it's not in the article? - Ronnie S.217.132.251.50 (talk) 23:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

The reason is quite funny. Steve Jobs' own words:

"I was actually a fruitarian at that point in time. I ate only fruit. Now I'm a garbage can like everyone else. And we were about three months late in filing a fictitious business name so I threatened to call the company Apple Computer unless someone suggested a more interesting name by five o'clock that day. Hoping to stimulate creativity. And it stuck. And that's why we're called Apple."

Source: Fire in the Valley -- Stormwatch (talk) 19:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CEOs

This article should have a complete listing of every Apple CEO, right now the subject is barely touched. Paul^C/_T+ 01:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The section titled, "1985-1997: Sculley, Spindler, Amelio" doesn't even mention these CEOs (except for the single sentence referring to Gil Amelio getting fired.) Who was Michael Spindler? The article doesn't say. This article seems to be more of a product history, rather than a corporate history. JHP 18:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Changes to Xylit (talk)'s redirects.

First thanks Xylit (talk) for redirecting. I re-redirected those only to reflect the consistent corporate name "Apple Inc." (without comma) as it was shown in the root article. I also diverted the History of Apple back to History of Apple Inc., since the fruit, an apple, shouldn't have a separted main page for its history as everything about it is already contained in its root article. Thanks Godric/^Talk 07:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article name

Wouldn't it make sense for this article to be History of Apple? Normally we don't use "Inc." in the names of businesses; the only reason we have to in Apple's case is because Apple is already in use by the fruit and it's more desirable than something like Apple (company). Right now, History of Apple already redirects here anyway. —Cleared as filed. 16:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. It should be "History of Apple". — Wackymacs 17:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Organization of Article

the 2002-present section should be organized better perhaps add some more titles/sections? And the iPod section should either be moved to the section in the timeline where the iPod is introduced, orn it should be shortened or made into a completely diffrent article.Evanemak 05:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of that section, the wording "all variations have a graphics processor the has 256-bit power or can be expanded to 512-bit for ultimate performance" strikes me as a bit too similar to "hit its weak point for massive damage". I'm not familiar with technical details of Macs, so I've no idea what the heck that's supposed to mean to correct it. 85.216.229.175 22:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Undos

Sorry about the mess; I was trying to clean up the vandalism and I decided (unwisely) to try a feature I'd never used before. I didn't mean any harm. -lee 03:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tone and improving references

This article reads like a story book. The tone needs to be fixed to make it more encyclopedic. Also, there definitely needs to be more references. I am certain that there are plenty of books that can be used as references for the paragraphs in this article, so if someone has the time, please do so. Thanks. Gary King (talk) 18:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quibble about credit

Re: "the Apple II was released in 1977 and became the computer generally credited with creating the home computer market."

Generally there are 3 machines that pretty much captured the "mindshare" of the time: Commodore PET, Apple, and TRS-80. Apple was not the top seller of the three until the Visicalc era. This needs a rewrite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tablizer (talk • contribs) 05:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)