by AndrewMc | 8/28/2009 07:00:00 AM

Look, my first computer—a Terak 8510/a. I got it right before the Apple II/e that I had for years. That was followed by a Mac SE, then a Mac 7200, then an iMac. But that Terak was a workhorse, and I learned to program in Pascal on it. That was a great beginner language--easy to learn, easy to use.

What was your first computer?

Labels: ,



Anonymous Anonymous on 8/28/2009 11:09 AM:

Commodore VIC-20, followed by a Commodore 64, followed by a Commodore Amiga (notice the theme???)

My brother was into Atari computers so it was a friendly rivalry.

My first PC was donated because I was running an Amiga bulletin board.


Blogger Ahistoricality on 8/28/2009 12:27 PM:

I suppose the first computer I used was a TRS-80 that my parents helped a friend put together, but the first computer I used regularly was the Osborne, and I took an Osborne Executive to college and graduate school -- I switched to a hand-me-down IBM AT after my first year.


Blogger AndrewMc on 8/29/2009 10:10 AM:

The Osborne--nice.


Blogger Unknown on 8/30/2009 11:43 AM:

My dad got us a Tandy 1600 back in 1987. It's still running and he still uses it to program microchips in assembly language.

We didn't get another computer until 1996 because the Tandy did such a great job.


Blogger idiosynchronic on 9/01/2009 10:01 AM:

Out of this bunch, am I the only 'computer professional'? (I do support, not programming, and I have a BFA, so I always laugh at being a pro . .)

First had a Vic20 in upper elem. Then a Commie 64 in Jr. High & high School. Still had the computer, but started composing papers on Dad's IBM XT. He then sent me to college with retrofitted XT with AT parts (don't ask). I bought my first Windows computer in college - a crappy Packard Bell that game me fits when I tinkered with it. Flirted with the new Macs ~1993, but I had all this IBM software already . .

Now that I'm back at a school, I'm on my 3rd Intel-Mac, the latest being a MacBook Pro Aluminum. I'm rapidly becoming a OS X convert.


Blogger Ahistoricality on 9/01/2009 2:51 PM:

He then sent me to college with retrofitted XT with AT parts (don't ask).

I buy that: Aside from the 186/286 chips, I don't remember them being that different. I worked in an office that had one of each, though: the difference in processing power was pretty extreme.


Blogger idiosynchronic on 9/01/2009 11:27 PM:

The 286 was sort of brain-damaged, you may remember using DOS commands to shift them from Real mode to Protected mode before starting Lotus 1-2-3 to make it fly.

80186's were even more busted - bugs galore. The XT was 8086, and AT's were 80286 and flew rings around 8086's.