Thread
128k Mac with Twiggy drive
not mine, but somebody is very lucky
http://www.applefritter.com/content/macintosh-128k-prototype-twiggy-drive
Thats pretty awesome - short of the PR shots that Apple did back in the day, I've never seen photos of a Twiggy Mac in the wild that still had the original Twiggy drive (pics surfaced on 'Fritter of a TwiggyMac a few years back that still had the Twiggy sized slot in the front, but with a 3.5" drive :-/ )
That is absolutely INCREDIBLE!!!
We may need to produce a few replicas of this amazing thing. I would never have imagined that one still existed. This should go to a museum for sure.
I wonder how much he paid for that.....
LOL. I'll give him a grand for it.
What an interesting machine. Would like to see some more photos, especially of the back/inside.
Looks like the case screws have been WAY overtightened - look at the top of the bezel?
What an interesting machine. Would like to see some more photos, especially of the back/inside.
Looks like the case screws have been WAY overtightened - look at the top of the bezel?
I can't imagine this Mac being worth any less than a twiggy drive Lisa. It would certainly be interesting to get the ROM dump from that one and inside pictures.
It has to be worth a LOT more than a Twiggy Lisa, they can't have made very many at all. It never made it out of prototyping, Lisa's shipped.
I find this item very cool. I want to see the insides once photo's are released.
I am a little suspicious that this might be a fake, but I hope not.
I am a little suspicious that this might be a fake, but I hope not.
The thought crossed my mind also that it could be fake, it wouldn't take too much photoshopping of that 1 picture. Plus, he already had it open and didn't post more pics? That's weird.
I can understand if it has the same blinking question mark 3.5" disk icon as an ordinary Mac, as he mentioned, because it seems reasonable that the ROM was updated later, possibly many times during development.
edit
Well, check again, there are more pics now. I'm convinced.
I can understand if it has the same blinking question mark 3.5" disk icon as an ordinary Mac, as he mentioned, because it seems reasonable that the ROM was updated later, possibly many times during development.
edit
Well, check again, there are more pics now. I'm convinced.
I'm convinced now. I hope they are able to do a ROM dump on it. I would also love to have a closer look at the logic board and someone had better send that guy a twiggy disk and an external 400k stat!
On one forum, he said he hadn't seen any 400k FDs in a while and didn't know if an HD floppy would format to 400k.
ISTR a tool that punched a hole in a lower density FD to turn it into a (mostly flaky) "higher capacity" FD. I wonder if a piece of tape over the hole would reverse the procedure . . . sort of like taping over the removed write protect tab on micro-cassettes and VHS casettes?
If it'll work, somebody let him know!
ISTR a tool that punched a hole in a lower density FD to turn it into a (mostly flaky) "higher capacity" FD. I wonder if a piece of tape over the hole would reverse the procedure . . . sort of like taping over the removed write protect tab on micro-cassettes and VHS casettes?
If it'll work, somebody let him know!
A 400KB disk is just a single sided 800KB disk, which can be had easily from 720KB PC floppies...I wonder if he can just use a 400KB external to boot it and grab the ROMs.
More on this
I wonder why he's posting it to a number of different message boards -- it's really cool and all, but it's not earth shattering.
I wonder why he's posting it to a number of different message boards -- it's really cool and all, but it's not earth shattering.
He knew Tom Owad would want it posted on 'fritter, which gets the most traffic due to the content on the site. The forums are a bust, unless they've picked up lately. On a cursory read, it looks to me like he's at home on the the vintage computer board. Is he new there too?
It IS earth shattering in the MacWorld. I'll bet there were a LOT more Paladin Prototypes made than TwiggyMacs.
edit: back again!
I've got some notions about this newest TwiggMac based on hacking research materials I've glommed off the web over the years.
ClearTwiggyProtoHoaxMacHacks™
It IS earth shattering in the MacWorld. I'll bet there were a LOT more Paladin Prototypes made than TwiggyMacs.
edit: back again!
I've got some notions about this newest TwiggMac based on hacking research materials I've glommed off the web over the years.
ClearTwiggyProtoHoaxMacHacks™
Freakin' sweetGriffin>
It would be cool to see what happens when a twiggy disk is inserted and if it can be formatted / read / write / ejected / etc. To see it work with an unmodified system software would be quite awesome.
I wonder if Apple had a buttonless (self injecting/ejecting) Twiggy Drive Revision underway?
ISTR, that he production yield of the Twiggy Drive was never high enough to keep up with Lisa Production. So much time, money and effort was spent on the ill-fated attempt to get the Twiggy's problems ironed out that I really doubt even SJ would have complicated matters with by changing the injection/ejection hardware for the Mac.
Woz developed the SWIM in order to use the Sony 3.5" FDDs, AFAIK.
Was that early example of an ASIC backward compatible with the Twiggy Drive?
Is there a SWIM IC on board the TwiggyMac's MoBo?
Dunno, since the TwiggyMacs were a design dead-end, killed off before fit & finish trials were completed, I'll hazard a guess that the Twiggy Drives used in that line of development were production rejects.
If this TwiggyMac was put together out of random prototype parts at a later date with a production Bucket, the FDD may, or may not be operable depending on the answers to these questions.
Only time, and the appearance of more pics and info will tell. :?:
Did the production 128k Buckets have cooling vents on top?
ISTR, that he production yield of the Twiggy Drive was never high enough to keep up with Lisa Production. So much time, money and effort was spent on the ill-fated attempt to get the Twiggy's problems ironed out that I really doubt even SJ would have complicated matters with by changing the injection/ejection hardware for the Mac.
Woz developed the SWIM in order to use the Sony 3.5" FDDs, AFAIK.
Was that early example of an ASIC backward compatible with the Twiggy Drive?
Is there a SWIM IC on board the TwiggyMac's MoBo?
Dunno, since the TwiggyMacs were a design dead-end, killed off before fit & finish trials were completed, I'll hazard a guess that the Twiggy Drives used in that line of development were production rejects.
If this TwiggyMac was put together out of random prototype parts at a later date with a production Bucket, the FDD may, or may not be operable depending on the answers to these questions.
Only time, and the appearance of more pics and info will tell. :?:
Did the production 128k Buckets have cooling vents on top?
Info on Google Images lead me to believe that this TwiggyMac's Bucket probably represents the very last stage of bucket prototyping . . .
. . . no cooling vents on top! 8-o
credit: DigiBarn
He'd better not be running that beautiful thing for any great length of time with that ventless proto-bucket on it! :O
I'm thinking more and more like TwiggyMac is an External FDD ONLY curiosity piece cobbled together out of proto-goodies remaining on hand after the 128k was released, rather than an actual working prototype in its own right.
The prototyping timelines don't appear to mesh at all to me. Without even the relatively ineffective provision for convection cooling of the 128k, it's certainly not meant to be a usable Mac as shown in the pictures.
It's still waaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyy
and I've been known to "ASSuuuME too much!" < /oblioque Star Wars reference >
It's in now way a "fake," it's probably just a conglomeration of really cool proto-part leftovers . . .
. . . that works so long as you don't leave it powered up for too long!
)
That's my take and I'm sticking to it! :approve:
. . . no cooling vents on top! 8-o
credit: DigiBarn
He'd better not be running that beautiful thing for any great length of time with that ventless proto-bucket on it! :O
I'm thinking more and more like TwiggyMac is an External FDD ONLY curiosity piece cobbled together out of proto-goodies remaining on hand after the 128k was released, rather than an actual working prototype in its own right.
The prototyping timelines don't appear to mesh at all to me. Without even the relatively ineffective provision for convection cooling of the 128k, it's certainly not meant to be a usable Mac as shown in the pictures.
It's still waaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyy
and I've been known to "ASSuuuME too much!" < /oblioque Star Wars reference >It's in now way a "fake," it's probably just a conglomeration of really cool proto-part leftovers . . .
. . . that works so long as you don't leave it powered up for too long!
) That's my take and I'm sticking to it! :approve:
I worked with a lot of prototype parts in my previous job and I can say from that experience that when you're developing firmware and software, you grab and cobble together any parts that are available. I certainly did not take the time or expense to always use the latest revision prototype, especially if things were at least mostly functionally compatible. If I could manually cut a trace, or what have you, to bring an old available part up to spec, I'd do that if it was faster. This could even be a prototype that somebody threw together even after the 512k was released if there was some specific thing they were working on where they might damage something and would prefer to blow up older spare parts.
The functionality of the twiggy drive should give us some good thoughts.
The functionality of the twiggy drive should give us some good thoughts.
I seem to recall somewhere on Folklore.org reading that computer-controlled eject was a design requirement by Jobs well before the "what drive is it actually going to use" stage. Further, none of the promo pictures of apparently-functional Twiggy-drive-d Macs show an eject button hole. Thus I'd assume that the mechanism in this machine has auto-eject. I haven't seen a picture of the front of the mechanism in this thing yet, so... on what basis are you assuming that it's exactly the same mechanism used in the Lisa? Is there a picture I haven't seen?
The original Mac had the IWM, no "s", and the IWM IC was also used in the original Lisa. The "high-speed" mode of the IWM (not used when the IC was employed, for instance, in the original Apple IIc) was specifically tailored to the Twiggy, and in fact the Sony 3.5 drive mechanism as used by Apple is substantially hacked to make it compatible with the IWM, not the other way around. (The 400k/800k drive's high average rotational velocity, nearly twice that of a generic 3 1/2 drive, and variable speed are both Twiggy "features" Apple had Sony incorporate into their version.)
Thanks for the info!
I'm not ASSuMEing anything, especially about the Twiggy Drive, except that it was a POS.
It's amazing that SJ would dick around with the Twiggy Drive when it didn't really work as a production unit for the Lisa Program. Was there ever a successful self injecting/ejecting 5.25" FDD?
I know SJ was absolutely set on the 128k/Twiggy concept, but he never had any engineering chops, nor did he ever need to develop them in his role as "idea man/ultimate huckster."
The the 3.5" Sony option was developed under his radar by real engineers who actually had at least a tenuous grasp on the realities of the development process. I find this amazing
I'm just trying to come up with and list the questions to elicit answers like the one you just gave to clear up FDD controller issue.
I wouldn't assume that the Mac/Lisa drives worked or that there was even a drive installed Brochure Picture TwiggyProp Mac.
I'm not ASSuMEing anything, especially about the Twiggy Drive, except that it was a POS.
It's amazing that SJ would dick around with the Twiggy Drive when it didn't really work as a production unit for the Lisa Program. Was there ever a successful self injecting/ejecting 5.25" FDD?
I know SJ was absolutely set on the 128k/Twiggy concept, but he never had any engineering chops, nor did he ever need to develop them in his role as "idea man/ultimate huckster."
The the 3.5" Sony option was developed under his radar by real engineers who actually had at least a tenuous grasp on the realities of the development process. I find this amazing
I'm just trying to come up with and list the questions to elicit answers like the one you just gave to clear up FDD controller issue.
I wouldn't assume that the Mac/Lisa drives worked or that there was even a drive installed Brochure Picture TwiggyProp Mac.
Actually, a little more research reveals that the Lisa Twiggys also had auto-eject. The eject buttons above them on the original bezels aren't mechanical, they're electrical, and they request that the OS eject the disk rather than force the mechanism to do so.
So it all circles around again: why *not* assume that? Clearly the engineers were using Twiggy and had been using it for at least, what, maybe a year and a half before the 11th hour decision to switch to 3 1/2 drives. (*Really* old Mac prototypes were equipped with Apple II-style Disk ][ units but those predated the case tooling.) The 18 page brochure/magazine ad in which several photos of a Twiggy Macintosh appear came out in December 1983; that's only three months after the trigger was pulled on using the Sony drive so honestly I'd suspect there's a fair chance that there were more working Twiggy Macs than Sony Macs floating around the labs, at least with complete cases, which is why they photographed the Twiggy unit.
The Twiggy had perpetual reliability and performance *problems* but it did "work". Those niggling problems combined with the overall mediocrity of the product lead to its ultimate demise but the Mac team (ie, Steve Jobs) was officially in denial about those issues and kept plugging away on it right up to the end. So unless you can find a Mac engineer who can come right out and tell you that the Twiggy Macs *never* worked I'd say you're overreaching.
There is still the question of the "provenance" of this particular unit, IE, why is it that the boot ROM displays an icon of a 3.5" disk instead of a Twiggy disk, but all that conclusively demonstrates is the ROM version it's equipped with is newer than the hardware. It does *not* prove that Mac ROM versions tuned for a Twiggy disk never existed. The story behind the unit (as quoted by the buyer in another forum) is that the previous owner received the unit from Apple to use as a physical model for making a medallion of some sort (probably to be awarded to the Mac team), and Apple never bothered taking it back. The simplest explanation for the mixed-up nature of this beast would be that they grabbed a development unit off someone's desk (which is why it has a more recent ROM), and since 3.5" drives and faceplates were probably in short supply and there'd be no point in wasting one on something like this they shipped an older chassis with a Twiggy drive.
The real question that remains to be answered is if the ROM image in it actually works with a Twiggy drive or if they grabbed a "working, but not pretty" 3.5" development unit and downgraded it to a leftover Twiggy drive before fitting a set of Twiggy skins. It would be fascinating to see if the shipping Mac ROM still had hidden in it the ability to sense a Twiggy drive and function appropriately with it. The drive interface in the Mac does have some rudimentary ability to provide device ID information...
So it all circles around again: why *not* assume that? Clearly the engineers were using Twiggy and had been using it for at least, what, maybe a year and a half before the 11th hour decision to switch to 3 1/2 drives. (*Really* old Mac prototypes were equipped with Apple II-style Disk ][ units but those predated the case tooling.) The 18 page brochure/magazine ad in which several photos of a Twiggy Macintosh appear came out in December 1983; that's only three months after the trigger was pulled on using the Sony drive so honestly I'd suspect there's a fair chance that there were more working Twiggy Macs than Sony Macs floating around the labs, at least with complete cases, which is why they photographed the Twiggy unit.
The Twiggy had perpetual reliability and performance *problems* but it did "work". Those niggling problems combined with the overall mediocrity of the product lead to its ultimate demise but the Mac team (ie, Steve Jobs) was officially in denial about those issues and kept plugging away on it right up to the end. So unless you can find a Mac engineer who can come right out and tell you that the Twiggy Macs *never* worked I'd say you're overreaching.
There is still the question of the "provenance" of this particular unit, IE, why is it that the boot ROM displays an icon of a 3.5" disk instead of a Twiggy disk, but all that conclusively demonstrates is the ROM version it's equipped with is newer than the hardware. It does *not* prove that Mac ROM versions tuned for a Twiggy disk never existed. The story behind the unit (as quoted by the buyer in another forum) is that the previous owner received the unit from Apple to use as a physical model for making a medallion of some sort (probably to be awarded to the Mac team), and Apple never bothered taking it back. The simplest explanation for the mixed-up nature of this beast would be that they grabbed a development unit off someone's desk (which is why it has a more recent ROM), and since 3.5" drives and faceplates were probably in short supply and there'd be no point in wasting one on something like this they shipped an older chassis with a Twiggy drive.
The real question that remains to be answered is if the ROM image in it actually works with a Twiggy drive or if they grabbed a "working, but not pretty" 3.5" development unit and downgraded it to a leftover Twiggy drive before fitting a set of Twiggy skins. It would be fascinating to see if the shipping Mac ROM still had hidden in it the ability to sense a Twiggy drive and function appropriately with it. The drive interface in the Mac does have some rudimentary ability to provide device ID information...
I re-iterate, I'm NOT set on anything, I'm just trying to elicit the kind of answers you're providing to niggling questions I have!
I'm not certain that recollections from the team's members would be accurate, given the ludicrous work schedules and anxiety SJ's demands placed upon the team. I'm NOT saying I doubt any statements as a rule of thumb, just that eye witnesses accounts in courtrooms are considered suspect, even when witnesses were fit as a fiddle when observing events in question.
The ONLY thing I'm sure of whatsoever is this new TwiggyMac had best not be powered up for very long with that Ventless ProtoBucket attached! 8-o
Cool beans regarding your identification of the function of the Lisa's eject button, thanks! :approve:
All else is idle speculation aimed at keeping the discussion rolling and hopefully jogging others into coming up with more observations, examples of possible inconsistencies and relevant data points!
Developing time-line content documentation of the prototyping process of the Mac from the Team's Memoirs, reminiscences and historical references to release dates is something I'd find far more fascinating than simply discussing this singular TwiggyMac example!
)
I'm not certain that recollections from the team's members would be accurate, given the ludicrous work schedules and anxiety SJ's demands placed upon the team. I'm NOT saying I doubt any statements as a rule of thumb, just that eye witnesses accounts in courtrooms are considered suspect, even when witnesses were fit as a fiddle when observing events in question.
The ONLY thing I'm sure of whatsoever is this new TwiggyMac had best not be powered up for very long with that Ventless ProtoBucket attached! 8-o
Cool beans regarding your identification of the function of the Lisa's eject button, thanks! :approve:
All else is idle speculation aimed at keeping the discussion rolling and hopefully jogging others into coming up with more observations, examples of possible inconsistencies and relevant data points!
Developing time-line content documentation of the prototyping process of the Mac from the Team's Memoirs, reminiscences and historical references to release dates is something I'd find far more fascinating than simply discussing this singular TwiggyMac example!
)
Someone should contact Andy Hertzfeld for further info. He seems to do the odd interview and would probably be interested to see this one. If anyone would know, it would be him.
I heard the interview of the owner of the TwiggyMac on RetroMacCast and it sounds like he is going to flip it to someone else. It's really too bad the original "owner" didn't offer to sell it to someplace like the Computer History Museum since he only let it go for $500.
He's selling it already? Lol my offer of 1k still stands...
I can't find any original Twiggy disks for the Lisa or Mac prototype on eBay or general Google search.
Maybe he picked it up and determined it would be more hassle that it's worth? Or he wanted to flip it?
Maybe he picked it up and determined it would be more hassle that it's worth? Or he wanted to flip it?
He could just be doing the work to "flip" it for the "original owner." Having it documented on 'fritter seems like a great way to set it up for private bids. It was a given that T.O. would ask him to do an article. I haven't been following info anywhere but in this thread, but it seemed like the guy is only interested in the 'fritter documentation, not in getting it running as "one of us" would.
Remember the Old-time Radio Hack, that one was sold on eBay. It was listed as "as featured on Applefritter."
Tombstone Mac
Dunno, just suspicious, as a ventless shelled "prototype," configured for self-meltdown is about as questionable a proposition as I can recall.
Remember the Old-time Radio Hack, that one was sold on eBay. It was listed as "as featured on Applefritter."
Tombstone Mac
Dunno, just suspicious, as a ventless shelled "prototype," configured for self-meltdown is about as questionable a proposition as I can recall.
Keep in mind Steve Jobs was the guy that *INSISTED* that not only should the Apple /// not have a fan, it shouldn't even have any ventilation slots. It doesn't surprise me one bit that an early rev of the Mac case bucket would have fewer holes than what finally shipped. (Once the laws of physics had clearly won the day, even to SJ's satisfaction.) The case isn't *completely* ventless. Those lines that just look like lines from the angle Trash posted *are* actually open vents (See the Applefritter pictures.); It's just missing the panel openings in the top. Knowing Steve the last "non-negotiable" design whim they had to talk him out of was a smooth featureless upper surface, making the vented panels a *very* late addition to the bucket.