New Apple Immersive MLS Video Dropping Today →

Apple has announced that new immersive video is coming to Apple Vision Pro users today at 6 p.m. Pacific. Jason Snell has more:

I’m excited to see the finished product — all of Apple’s immersive videos have been pretty amazing — but I have to point out that this five-minute highlight packages is being released 110 days after last year’s MLS Cup Final. That’s not great turnaround time. If immersive video for sports is going to be a thing, turnaround is going to need to be a lot faster.

I couldn’t agree with John Gruber more:

Perhaps the single most surprising aspect of Apple’s launch plan for Vision Pro is the relative dearth of original immersive content. It’s the most compelling experience with the product but there’s hardly any of it. I would have thought Apple would drop new immersive content at least a few times per month, if not weekly, but this MLS Cup highlight film is the first new one since launch.

The Apple Jonathan: A Very 1980s Concept Computer That Never Shipped

In the middle of the 1980s, Apple found itself with several options regarding the future of its computing platforms. The Apple II was the company’s bread and butter. The Apple III was pitched as an evolution of that platform, but was clearly doomed due to hardware and software issues. The Lisa was expensive and not selling well, and while the Macintosh aimed to bring Lisa technology to the masses, sales were slow after its initial release.

Those four machines are well known, but there was a fifth possibility in the mix, named the Jonathan. In his book Inventing the Future, John Buck writes about the concept, which was led by Apple engineer Jonathan Fitch starting in the fall of 1984. Buck quotes George Cossey, talking about the idea:

I’d known Jonathan (Fitch) from my diagnostic days on the Lisa. He was one of the main board designers and I think that after Lisa was sidelined for the Mac, Fitch was looking for what to do, what was the “next generation” Apple computer but not a Mac. A lot of the people working on the Mac wanted to stick with it, just go onto the next iteration of the Mac, because they saw it as “growing,” and they didn’t want to go do something that might never see the light of day.

This concept envisioned a computer that would expand with the needs of the user, through the use of modular components:

Buck also writes:

It was a consumer model computer that came with pre-installed operations as well as a base-level I/O, and it could be upgraded during/or after purchase to business-centric specifications using a unique set of plug- and-play modules. Customers would be able to add a series of book-sized modules (for software and hardware options) that clicked into a slender docking station sitting under the monitor, that itself looked like a bookshelf. The individual software modules, for the prototype, contained the O/Ss for Apple II, Mac, UNIX, or DOS, while the hardware options were DSP, Ethernet, GenLock (for video), extra RAM, mass storage, or a power supply (for different regions). There were no cables.

Fitch believed that the machine’s literal backbone design could become the backbone of Apple’s future sales strategy. An ever-expandable computer that could cover multiple markets without Apple needing to make multiple devices.

A small team worked on the concept for about eight months before engaging Frog Design — yes, that Frog Design — to work on a prototype design to show the idea to Apple brass. Buck also writes about this in his book:

When Fitch eventually took Jonathan before the executive group it appeared as a sleek slate-grey computer, that looked like nothing Apple had done before. It had a reverse-hinged 13″ CRT monitor that squatted over a line of changeable modules, with a modern-style keyboard and mouse tethered to the side. The team had added more options to the bookshelf for the demonstration including the modules labeled “Floppy disk” and “3rd Party.”

The hardware also pops up in Paul Kunkel’s book AppleDesign, which you can still get on Amazon. In it, Kunkel describes the hardware:

Fitch wanted to design a computer around a new microprocessor, the Motorola 68030, which would be powerful enough for business and high-end applications, but could also be packaged in a form that would work in the home. With the Macintosh division developing its own high-end concepts — Big Mac1 and a modular CPU that would eventually become the Mac II — Fitch’s concept would need a totally different architecture to distinguish it from the Mac. As an Apple II product, it would have an “open” architecture. But rather than design another circuitboard-and-slots system, Fitch proposed a more radical approach.

[…]

Fitch’s design called for the backplane and track to support book-shaped modules, each containing circuitboards and chips for running the Mac OS, Apple II software, DOS, Windows, or Unix operating systems, plus other modules for connecting disk drives, modems and networking hardware, all plugged into the same track. Since the backplane was horizontal, and the modules were small and slender, Fitch imagined the system as a book on a shelf. “A basic system would have a short shelf with one or two books. A business setup would have three or four books. And a power system would have seven or eight books on a wider shelf.”

Pleased with his concept, Fitch named it Jonathan (after himself)…

There are very few images of this thing on the Internet. This set of photos is from Nicola D’Agostino’s excellent blog post on the subject:

Apple Jonathan Prototype

The Kunkel book contains several images (taken by Rick English) of the mockup as well, including one with a CRT that looks a lot like a CRT NeXT would eventually ship:

English images

NeXT Display

In more recent years, Dana Sibera has created several amazing renders of the Jonathan, and was kind enough to share them with me for this post. If you don’t follow Dana on Mastodon or Bluesky, you should fix that today.

I particularly love the Platinum version she created, which has some grounding in reality, as at least one mockup was built using the lighter color.

Platinum Jonathan

Here are a few of her renders in the slate color:

Slate Jonathan

Jonathan Modules

The general idea was simple, but in practice, this machine would have been a nightmare.

The backbone of the system would need to accept modules from Apple and other companies, letting users build what they needed in terms of functionality, as D’Agostino writes:

(Fitch) designed a simple hardware “backbone” carrying basic operations and I/O on which the user could add a series of “book” modules, carrying hardware for running Apple II, Mac, UNIX and DOS software, plus other modules with disk drives or networking capabilities.

This meant that every user could have their own unique Jonathan setup, pulling together various software platforms, storage devices, and hardware capabilities into their own personalized system. Imagining what would have been required for all this to work together gives me a headache. In addition to the shared backbone interface, there would need to be software written to make an almost-endless number of configurations work smoothly for the most demanding of users. It was all very ambitions, but perhaps a little too far-fetched.

Buck’s book reports on how Apple executives responded to the concept:

While the design and functionality of the prototype drew praise, the overall concept raised larger concerns. Fitch expected IBM users to buy a Jonathan with individual DOS and Apple software modules, then grow tired of Microsoft’s UI, and eventually opt for Apple’s OS full-time.

Kunkel expands on those concerns:

Jean-Louis Gassée delivered the first hit by observing that Apple would have to sell two or three Jonathans to equal the profit of a single Mac II. Others complained that Jonathan would compete with the Mac II. Then Sculley delivered the coup de grâce — voicing the fear that once the Mac and DOS were offered on the same platform, more Mac users might move to DOS then DOS users would move to the Mac. “That reasoning floored us,” says Fitch. “Apparently, Sculley had less faith in the Mac than we did.”

Sculley was probably right to be concerned, and coupled with the sheer complexity of such a project, the Jonathan was scrapped in the summer of 1985.

Apple Jonathan

Ironically, Apple would offer DOS support via add-on cards years later. The team’s plans for using the 68030 would also come in handy when that CPU landed in the Mac IIx and IIfx.

The phrase “ahead of its time” is often thrown around when talking about computers from the 1980s and 1990s, and in the case of the Jonathan, I think it totally fits. Modern Macs can run software from the command line, all the way up through apps written for the Mac, iPad, iPhone, and the web. Windows and Linux apps can also be run if the user is willing to jump through the right hoops.

Of course, all of this is done in software, not hardware. The Jonathan tried solving a software problem with hardware expandability, which made sense in the 1980s. Just ask TI-99 fans. Even here in 2024, there are folks trying to make this sort of thing work.

My understanding is that the project never made it past the “conversations and mockups” stage. I get why the Jonathan never made it beyond the concept phase, but part of me wishes I could round up a bunch of modules meant for this platform. At least we have some fun photos and renders to enjoy.

Apple Jonathan Render


  1. Read more about the Big Mac project here

WWDC 2024 Announced →

Apple Newsroom:

Apple today announced it will host its annual Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) online from June 10 through 14, 2024. Developers and students will have the opportunity to celebrate in person at a special event at Apple Park on opening day.

Free for all developers, WWDC24 will spotlight the latest iOS, iPadOS, macOS, watchOS, tvOS, and visionOS advancements. As part of Apple’s ongoing commitment to helping developers elevate their apps and games, the event will also provide them with unique access to Apple experts, as well as insight into new tools, frameworks, and features.

“We’re so excited to connect with developers from around the world for an extraordinary week of technology and community at WWDC24,” said Susan Prescott, Apple’s vice president of Worldwide Developer Relations. “WWDC is all about sharing new ideas and providing our amazing developers with innovative tools and resources to help them make something even more wonderful.”

I’ll be in San Jose for a few days and am looking forward to it.

It’s About People, Not Companies →

With Threads starting to federate, there has been push back in corners of Mastodon, with some server admins blocking users from @threads.net entirely. I think just about everyone has complicated feelings about Meta, but I think this kind of move only harms users of the Fediverse.

Adam Newbold has written about this, and I agree with their conclusions:

The entire point of the Fediverse and the ActivityPub standard is to make it easy for people to connect with one another, openly, across different platforms. The Fediverse wants to be open, and it is open by design. When you block another instance on the Fediverse, you’re making a deliberate choice to fracture a part of the network. There are legitimate reasons to do that, but it’s a serious move that should always be a last resort. And when you preemptively block what might wind up being the largest instance ever, well, there might as well not even be a network at all. People who want to connect with one another on either side of that fissure will need to pick one side or the other and connect there. If you’re wondering which side that will be in the context of Threads, you can look to WhatsApp’s two billion monthly active users for your answer.

There’s no doubt in my mind that Threads will be the largest instance on the network in very little time, and once migration is fully up and running, I think many folks may opt to use it as their primary account, leaving Mastodon behind. Cutting Threads off at the server level doesn’t accomplish anything useful.

That said, many people have seen posts on Threads that have been offensive, including a rash of transphobic and other garbage-level content. There’s no doubt that Threads has had many moderation issues — just like every other social media platform, including Mastodon.

However, if someone uses Mastodon as their home base in the Fediverse, choosing to follow a select number of Threads accounts from nice people and useful websites means the whatever algorithmic choices are made at Meta will not wash ashore on their timelines.

That’s the whole point of federated social media, and why this new world is much more interesting than the old.

via Robb Knight

macOS Sonoma 14.4.1 Released

The newest version of macOS includes fixes for:

  • USB hubs connected to external displays may not be recognized
  • Copy protected Audio Unit plug-ins designed for professional music apps may not open or pass validation
  • Apps that include Java may quit unexpectedly

As of this writing, Apple’s “What’s new in updates for macOS Sonoma” page isn’t updated yet, but you can grab the update via System Settings.

Sponsor: Magic Lasso Adblock: Download the Safari Ad Blocker Built for You →

Do you want to try an ad blocker that’s easy to set up, easy to keep up to date, and with pro features available when you need them?

Then download Magic Lasso Adblock – the ad blocker designed for you.

Magic Lasso Adblock is an efficient and high performance ad blocker for your iPhone, iPad and Mac. It simply and easily blocks all intrusive ads, trackers and annoyances in Safari. Just enable it to browse in bliss.

Magic Lasso Adblock

Unlike some other ad blockers, Magic Lasso Adblock respects your privacy, doesn’t accept payment from advertisers and is 100% supported by its community of users.

Download Magic Lasso Adblock from the App Store, Mac App Store or via the Magic Lasso website.

Breaking Down the DOJ’s Case Against Apple →

Unlike most of us Apple Bloggers, John Voorhees actually went to law school. Like David Sparks, he left the law to become a writer and podcaster, so his article on the DOJ’s suit against Apple is the one I’ve been waiting for. Over on MacStories, he has broken down the complaint filed last week.

I learned a ton in reading through this, and I think you will too. I’m not going to blockquote any of it, just to make you click through to MacStories.

United States DOJ Sues Apple →

Lauren Feiner, writing at The Verge:

The US Department of Justice and 16 state and district attorneys general accused Apple of operating an illegal monopoly in the smartphone market in a new antitrust lawsuit.

The DOJ and states are accusing Apple of driving up prices for consumers and developers at the expense of making users more reliant on its iPhones. It alleges that Apple “selectively” imposes contractual restrictions on developers and withholds critical ways of accessing the phone, according to a release.

The initial filing can be read as a PDF here.

Apple has issued a statement on the lawsuit:

At Apple, we innovate every day to make technology people love—designing products that work seamlessly together, protect people’s privacy and security, and create a magical experience for our users. This lawsuit threatens who we are and the principles that set Apple products apart in fiercely competitive markets. If successful, it would hinder our ability to create the kind of technology people expect from Apple—where hardware, software, and services intersect. It would also set a dangerous precedent, empowering government to take a heavy hand in designing people’s technology. We believe this lawsuit is wrong on the facts and the law, and we will vigorously defend against it.