PDA

View Full Version : The First Laptop?



dailymess
April 18th, 2006, 01:23 PM
I have one of these (http://old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=1079&st=1) bad boys in perfect working condition with briefcase, ac adaptor, and user manual. Although I can't find much info about them. Mostly... how much they're worth. Anyone know?

alexkerhead
April 18th, 2006, 02:32 PM
Nice find, no idea on value though.

DOS-Master
April 20th, 2006, 06:14 PM
it's worth like 2 cents

Terry Yager
April 20th, 2006, 08:13 PM
it's worth like 2 cents

I dunno...the Olivetti that sold on eBay last week went for over 40 buck$. The Kyocera/Olivetti/Tandy thinggies are not all that rare. BTW, the Epson HX-20 (1981) is widely recognised as being the 'first' true laptop. It was somewhat limited by it's 16K of RAM and it's 40-column display, but it's still pretty kewl to play with today, if you have one.

--T

alexkerhead
April 20th, 2006, 08:50 PM
it's worth like 2 cents
That was negative and uncalled for, please refrain from it, or I will PM a mod.

Terry Yager
April 20th, 2006, 09:07 PM
Pm who...me?? (What can I say, I'll chastize myself...)...

--T

CP/M User
April 20th, 2006, 10:22 PM
Certainally if this machine was popular - then couldn't it
have an interest group?

People who are generally interested in these computers would
pay a bit of money for them. Having looked at this machine
(via your link) & noticing it seems to have a simular
appearance to the Amstrad NC-100 computer, so maybe an Amstrad
NC-100 enthusiest would be interested?

For everyone else - I just had a look at another simular
machine in the Texas Instruments CC-40, wouldn't this be along
the same principal as a laptop? Pictures I have of it
certainally suggest that. But how old it is exactly I don't
know.

CP/M User.

dailymess
April 21st, 2006, 06:29 AM
Thank you everyone for your input. I figured that because there's little-to-no info about this model available on the internet, and no known owners (per my google searches), that it must be worth something.

But like most vintage computers, or anything rare for that matter, I guess it's worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it. I already did a search of completed listings on ebay, and have found none listing this product. So this weekend I will be the first to list it, and we'll see exactly how much it's worth to someone.

I'm not trying to make a fortune off this thing, I just want it to go to a good home. But any suggestions for a reserve price, as not to get totally gypped on this?

Terry Yager
April 21st, 2006, 06:54 AM
I'm sorry, I should've directed you to this link:

www.club100.org

Software & hardware wise, the NEC 8201A and the TRS-80 Model 100 are virtually identical to the Kyocera 85, and yes there is a big interest in the Kyocera laptop 'family'. This family includes the Model 100, the Kyocera 85, the Olivetti M-10, and the NEC 8201A, all of which are basically the same, with just cosmetic differences, and all were built by Kyocera. The Model 100 and the NEC were aimed at the US market, while the Kyocera was sold mainly in Japan, and the Olivetti was mainly in Europe. That's probably the reason you don't see it much on an American marketplace like eBay.
Hope the link is useful to you. BTW, if you're going to auction it, I'd start the bidding around $40.00, and see where it goes from there.

--T

dailymess
April 21st, 2006, 07:32 AM
The Model 100 and the NEC were aimed at the US market, while the Kyocera was sold mainly in Japan, and the Olivetti was mainly in Europe. That's probably the reason you don't see it much on an American marketplace like eBay.

From what I've read, the Model 100 and NEC were based on the Kyocera, is that correct? And if the Kyocera was primarily sold in Japan, does that mean that my English language version was one of the few sold in the US, or were they all programmed in English?



Hope the link is useful to you. BTW, if you're going to auction it, I'd start the bidding around $40.00, and see where it goes from there.

Thanks, again for your help... I will start it at $40 with no reserve.

Terry Yager
April 21st, 2006, 07:45 AM
From what I've read, the Model 100 and NEC were based on the Kyocera, is that correct? And if the Kyocera was primarily sold in Japan, does that mean that my English language version was one of the few sold in the US, or were they all programmed in English?




Thanks, again for your help... I will start it at $40 with no reserve.

Yes...or no...it's kinda a chicken/egg thing. The laptop was designed by Kyocera under contract from Tandy. Apparently, they retained some of the rights, and shopped it around to other companies, as well as making one of thier own.
I don't know if there ever was a Japanese-speaking version, all I've ever seen were English.
FWIW, the software is said to be the last commercial program written entirely by Bill Gates.

--T

CP/M User
April 21st, 2006, 03:11 PM
Terry Yager wrote:

> Yes...or no...it's kinda a chicken/egg thing. The
> laptop was designed by Kyocera under contract from
> Tandy.

I'm guessing that's where the Microsoft BASIC comes into play
for this machine. Radio Shack Color Computers typically used
this particular BASIC & there were some legal issues in
regards to getting the BASIC. It was from there I learned that
Dragon computers were quite remarkibly simular in that
regard.

> FWIW, the software is said to be the last commercial
> program written entirely by Bill Gates.

It be interesting to compare this Microsoft BASIC between
these machines, I'd guess they'd have simular capabilities -
perhaps the Kyocera based machines might be slightly later
than the BASICs used in the COCO/Dragon machines & of course
their all quite different physically, so perhaps some
modifications to work in with the hardware.

CP/M User.

EvanK
April 24th, 2006, 01:11 PM
Hmm, I thought the Epson was from '82?

Of course, the Gavilan SC, Grid Compass, and MicroOffice Roadrunner were the first clamshell laptops, all from 82/83. I believe the Toshiba T1100 series from '85 was the first to actually be called a "laptop" although the word doesn't matter if the technology is tangible.

>>> I think of the Amstrad, etc. as larger handhelds and/or early ancestors of the laptop/tablet lineage. <<< (Note by Evan: I had a serious brain fart when I wrote that about Amstrad -- serious anachronism there! Sorry.)

The same goes for the circa 1981 generation of "Hand Held Computers" like the Sharp PC-1211 and Matsushita (Panasonic/Quasar) HHC devices.

CP/M User
April 24th, 2006, 03:03 PM
mobilemaster wrote:

> I think of the Amstrad, etc. as larger handhelds
> and/or early ancestors of the laptop/tablet lineage.

Actually, for memory I believe the Amstrad NC-100 was refered
to as a Notebook - though this machine came out much later
around 1992 from memory - it was merely an observation that
the Kyocera had a simular design to the NC-100, maybe the
designers of the NC-100 were familiar with the design of this
Kyocera laptop?

CP/M User.

EvanK
April 24th, 2006, 03:05 PM
>>> though this machine came out much later around 1992 from memory

Duh to me -- you're right -- the timeframe makes it moot to this thread.

>>>> maybe the designers of the NC-100 were familiar with the design of this Kyocera laptop?

Nah, it was a peer of the devices like the AT&T EO, etc. -- a precursor to Newton / Palm.

CP/M User
April 24th, 2006, 03:46 PM
mobilemaster wrote:

> Nah, it was a peer of the devices like the AT&T EO,
> etc. -- a precursor to Newton / Palm.

Hmmm, interesting.

CP/M User.

Terry Yager
April 24th, 2006, 04:09 PM
Hmm, I thought the Epson was from '82?


I dunno, some sources have it each way. At least one 'authority' cites both dates, and this version may be the most accurate, which could account for the double-dates.

http://oldcomputers.net/hx-20.html

(I'm not real clear on the difference between 'introduced' and 'released' dates, or which carries more (historical) weight).

--T

EvanK
April 24th, 2006, 05:38 PM
I'm not real clear on the difference between 'introduced' and 'released' dates, or which carries more (historical) weight. --T

It's very simple. "Introduced" means "announced" while "released" means "actually became available to purchase."

The issue of historical weight is entirely up for discussion. I often wonder which counts the most -- when a computer was first designed? Prototyped? Patented? Announced? Released? Any of those five categories could be used by vendors and historians to say something was the "first", but first of * what * is the key question.

As a journalist, I know the best method is to use first-person sources. "Because a popular web site says so" is not a first-person source. Many times people will quote a popular site, and if that site's owner got it wrong, then the falacy will spread. So it's best to find and interview the original designers; read through as many original news articles and product reviews and original advertisments as you can find; and search through patent records. These steps can take months or years. Only then can we begin to declare which products were truly the 'first' of anything.

Terry Yager
April 24th, 2006, 05:57 PM
I just have trouble understanding how something can be 'introduced' without being actually available...

I know, sometimes it's difficult to know just where to draw the line. Being just an amature, not a 'real' historian, I can only use my own judgement, based on the 'preponderance of the evidence' (hey, it's good enough for the judicial system, where I've done my civic (jury) duty twice now). Of course, I can't always get it right, so that's why I usually try to use such qualifiers as 'widely recognized', 'said to be', etc (I've even been known to use 'rumor hath it', for very obscure factoids).

I do try and do as much research as possible, but, as you point out, sometimes it's difficult to find authoritative (first-hand) sources, so we go with what we have available, even when confronted with conflicting information.

Arguably, the GRiD Compass could be considered the 'first' laptop, as it was designed as early as (1979?), although it was not produced until later.

Just for the hell of it, here's another source of (mis?)-information:

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bllaptop.htm Caution...here be many popups...

--T

Terry Yager
April 24th, 2006, 06:17 PM
The computer industry has a rich history of 'announced' but never actually delivered products, aka vaporware...

--T

EvanK
April 26th, 2006, 09:55 AM
as you point out, sometimes it's difficult to find authoritative (first-hand) sources, so we go with what we have available, even when confronted with conflicting information.

Yes, it's difficult, but worth the time and effort. When I can't find hard evidence of fact, then I try to present all the possible theories, and/or I write something like "It's widely believed that (blah blah blah) although there's little hard evidence supporting that." Otherwise, if you just "go with what we have available," then "facts" wind up becoming little more than just best guesses or, much worse, opinions.


http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bllaptop.htm
--T

This is a good example of what I was talking about before. If you search the web for "history of laptops" or whatever, the About.com reference is always a top result, because lots of people link to it. But suppose it contains an error (and I do see several 'facts' in there which are at least controvesial if not flat-out wrong)... then the error becomes truth through perception and that's bad.

MikeMotta
May 23rd, 2006, 10:50 PM
I had bought one of these from a close-out distributor. I used it for a few weeks, but it kept resetting, so I ended up returning it.

I had ordered the service manual for it, and I couldn't return it. So I may just have it in one of the (too many) boxes of old stuff I have here.

I'll let you know if I find it...