Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

Summary: ZDNet's 20th anniversary: 1991. Thinking about those days gives me a headache. Back then, I was all Apple, all the time. It was not necessarily a good thing.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Apple, Hardware
33

Yes, boys and girls. Back in 1991, I was an Apple guy.

1991. Thinking about those days gives me a headache. Back then, I was all Apple, all the time. It was not necessarily a good thing.

I had two roles back then. I was the founder of Hyperpress, one of the first major add-on developers for Apple's HyperCard. Today, that'd be like being one of the big iPad app developers or Facebook app developers. HyperCard was essentially the first app-building environment, and Hyperpress was one of the key players.

I was also the head of Apple's Educator HomeCard project, where I had been given the somewhat unusual title of "Godfather". This was a big project with a number of teams, all working together to essentially create a suite of apps for teachers -- tools for managing grading, seating charts, various activities, and so forth.

The idea was Apple was going to distribute Educator HomeCard to schools everywhere, make it easier for teachers to teach and manage the day-to-day minutiae of teaching, and therefore make them want to use Macs to do it all.

At this point in our retrospective, it's probably a good idea for me to explain HyperCard to you. HyperCard was introduced by Apple in 1987. It shipped for free on all Macs. HyperCard was difficult to explain then, and -- to some degree -- remains so today.

At its most simple, HyperCard was an interactive MacPaint, with buttons, fields, and scripting.

Written by Bill Atkinson, the guy who wrote the original MacPaint (the forerunner of all "paint" programs including Photoshop), HyperCard was used to build "stacks" of "cards". Each card had buttons, graphics, and text on it, and you could move between cards to show different types of information.

Sound familiar?

If you substitute "page" for "card" and "site" for "stack", you get surprisingly close to the modern-day Web site concept.

Except for, well, the network.

HyperCard didn't know of networks. We didn't have much of an Internet back then, and -- of course -- we also didn't have a Web. Remember, this was the mid-1980s.

When HyperCard was released in 1987, the Mac was only three years old. It had been a tumultuous three years, with the most notable event being Steve Jobs leaving the company for his years in the NeXT wilderness.

By the time HyperCard came out in 1987, John Scully (formerly of Pepsi) was in charge of the company. The Macintosh II was the Apple color machine, and Apple was slowly losing its way. HyperCard was symptomatic of that loss of direction.

Because HyperCard was, at its core, a building environment, many managers within Apple didn't know what to make of it. Although Apple had made its name by including the BASIC language with the old Apple II machines, by the time the mid-80s rolled around, the middle managers at Apple had pretty much forgotten that end-user development could be a big business driver.

Even so, HyperCard became part of the core Mac OS offering. It was shipped free with every Macintosh, and so Mac users across the world started building stacks using it. It was highly versatile, easy to modify, easy to learn, and reasonably robust. Schools used it, businesses used it, government agencies used it, and plain ol' users used it.

The breadth of stacks was almost breathtaking. For example, while I ran the Educator HomeCard project building tools for teachers, the guys at Cyan used HyperCard to build the first version of a little program called Myst. Until The Sims unseated it, Myst was the best-selling PC game of all time -- and it started as a HyperCard stack.

HyperCard stacks, distributed both on floppy disks and on the new-fangled technology called CD-ROM, made it possible to produce deep multimedia technology including things like encyclopedias, interactive medical charts, and even stacks that helped you understand bird anatomy.

Next: Apple had changed »

« Previous: About HyperCard

Stack distribution, of course, was old-school. There was no real Internet (even online services like AOL didn't exist, although AppleLink, a precursor for Apple developers, was quite popular).

To distribute stacks, you'd sell them in boxes in brick-and-mortar stores and mail them on disks via snail mail. You had to load the stacks you wanted to use on your Mac, rather than visit them through a browser.

But, by 1991, things had changed.

Apple had decided that rather than sell its own software (programs like MacDraw, AppleWorks, HyperCard, and FileMaker), it would create a stand-alone subsidiary company called Claris.

The bizarro nature of this, to anyone familiar with Apple's current policy of centralized control, should be apparent.

It'd be as if Apple decided to spin out a company called iTunesCo, and let them run the music business, letting them set all their own prices and policies. It'd be as if Apple spun out another company, called AppsCo, and let them choose their own prices and policies. It'd be as if Apple suddenly turned its back on Final Cut, GarageBand, and the iLife software.

To today's Apple, the idea would be nuts.

But back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Jobs wasn't around to ride herd on the company, and so Pepsi-style management policies were in force. As a result, Claris found itself "owning" HyperCard.

Instead of continuing Apple's policy of distributing HyperCard free with every Mac, Claris began charging hundreds of dollars for the program.

Suddenly, this incredibly useful tool that had come free on every Mac became an expensive product you had to purchase. As we all know, once something free and universally accessible becomes expensive and you have to jump through a hoop to buy it, a lot less people get interested in it. We're all holding our breath today, as we wait to see if the New York Times' new plan to start charging will pay off for them, or fail like most other pay walls have failed over the years.

So, as you might imagine, the HyperCard market suddenly tanked. Hard. Off a cliff. With weights tied to its ankles. HyperCard sank.

Again, let's put this in modern perspective. It would be as if, once Apple developed the App store for the iPhone and iPad, the company decided it didn't like Apps anymore, so, well, let's not make them available to iPad and iPhone users.

Of course, back then Apple didn't make 30% off of every stack sold.

By 1991, HyperCard was effectively dead. The company kept it on its price list for years, but that was about all.

Next: 1991 sucked »

« Previous: Apple had changed

For me, 1991 sucked.

It was the first time I'd experienced what happens when you put all your eggs into one company's basket and then that company burns the basket.

I survived, of course. HyperCard introduced one of the first plug-in architectures and Hyperpress had taken considerable advantage of this to make and sell many different plug-ins. There was a particular development approach to making plug-ins and we were very good at that methodology.

So, when HyperCard tanked, I pivoted the company, renamed it Component Software, and began making and selling plug-ins for other multimedia environments, most notably Macromedia Director. I introduced the FileFlex database engine, which became part of Director in the mid-1990s, and at one time was the most popular multimedia database engine on PCs.

Back then, I learned a lot of my early lessons about how to create an agile, flexible company. After successfully conducting my first business model "pivot" (back before that term had entered the startup lexicon), I documented the lessons learned in my book, The Flexible Enterprise (free PDF download).

I eventually sold the plug-in business and went on to start ZATZ Publishing, the Web company that's been my "day job" since 1998.

The lost decade

For Apple, 1991 was right in the middle of its lost decade without Jobs. Apple stock climbed to a historic high, then plummeted. This is also the time when Apple moved off the original 68000-series processors for Macs, and moved to the IBM-designed PowerPC processors.

Although it was a rough time for Apple and Mac users and -- especially -- developers, this was one of the first times a platform as big as the Mac migrated underlying processors. As we all know, it was not to be the last.

Because Apple virtualized many of the old 68000-based functions to ensure compatibility on the PowerPC line, 1991 was also one of the first widespread deployments of virtualization technology -- one of the most mission-critical technologies of our modern, 2011 IT departments.

Our 1991 project seems to have made an impression on our ZDNet bloggers. Jason Perlow, for example, has spent hours (and perhaps days) digging through old copies of tech magazines archived up on Google Books. Jason found an InfoWorld article from March 25, 1991 that details Apple's decision to license its Mac OS to other OEMS. This, of course, ended badly. Just as soon as Steve Jobs retook Apple's helm, the companies who'd licensed Mac OS were summarily put out of business.

1991 was also the year Apple got into practical notebook computing, with its release of the PowerBook line of laptops. Of all that Apple did back in 1991, even without Jobs' day-to-day sense of design philosophy, the one felt most by today's Apple customers has to be the PowerBooks.

Through the PowerBook line, Apple moved into the mobile space and began to understand what consumers needed on the move -- an understanding that would lead to Apple's unquestionable dominance of mobile today.

Next: HyperCard's influence »

« Previous: 1991 sucked

HyperCard's influence

Meanwhile, HyperCard's influence has permeated almost everything we do online. Although there were some limited prototypes of GUI-based development tools, it wasn't until HyperCard that we started to build user interfaces by placing elements on screen, managing events, and scripting object-based UI elements.

This style of development has influenced all forms of rapid prototyping, agile development, and even much of the Web page development we do today.

In fact, the Web itself came about, in part due to HyperCard's influence. The scientists at CERN were heavy HyperCard users and they wanted to extend the hypertext concept they'd used with HyperCard across the network.

Scripting, too, was heavily influenced by HyperCard and its programming language, HyperTalk. If you use ActionScript in Flash, you're essentially programming in a derivation of HyperTalk. This, of course, is ironic, given Apple's current jihad against all things Flash.

JavaScript -- which is much like ActionScript -- was also inspired by HyperTalk. In Danny Goodman's JavaScript Bible, Brendan Eich, the guy who created JavaScript, talks about how HyperTalk influenced his design of JavaScript. As it turns out, Danny also wrote the definitive book about HyperCard, so you can begin to see the various connections.

Wikis, too, came about because of HyperCard's influence. Ward Cunningham, the guy who pioneered the wiki concept, built his first version in HyperCard. So if you like Wikipedia, you have HyperCard to thank.

Even Apps, like those found on iPhones and iPads, owe their genesis to HyperCard. Apps are often deep applications, but they're also often pinpoint products that solve certain problems. These are almost identical in spirit to the HyperCard stacks of the late 1980s and 1990s.

Sadly, Apple has strayed from its "maker" roots. Apple today completely disallows any application on the iPad or iPhone that creates or runs other software.

Nothing like HyperCard could exist in iOS. That's a shame, because a modern HyperCard would be ideal for students, teachers, and regular users to take control of their iOS devices and create wondrous tools for themselves.

Here's the object lesson of all this.

If Apple back then had the restrictive, draconian policies that Apple today has, we wouldn't have had HyperCard. Without HyperCard, we might not have the World Wide Web, wikis, JavaScript, rich-media Web sites, or even the iPhone and iPad.

If Apple back then had the restrictive, draconian policies that Apple today has, we might not even have Apple today. Apple today owes its iSuccess to the Internet and if Apple back then had been as restrictive as it is today, the Internet as we know it might not exist.

By squelching innovation and creativity the way it does today, what wondrous, transformative future technologies are we not going to have, just because Apple has turned into the one thing it railed against back in 1984: Big Brother?

Maybe it's a good thing Steve Jobs is on medical leave. There's no question that Jobs has been good for Apple, Apple shareholders, and Apple fans. But while Apple without Jobs was somewhat rudderless, it did allow innovation to flourish without central control -- and HyperCard, flawed as it was, is the perfect case in point.

I wish Jobs a long, happy, and healthy life. At the same time, I have to wonder whether he's been squelching a broader-based level of innovation for the selfish benefit of Apple and Apple shareholders.

Obviously, a company is allowed to make decisions for whatever reasons it wishes, but with Apple's track record of actually helping to change the world, you have to wonder whether a Jobs-less Apple would be better or worse for the world at large.

Perhaps now, with Jobs letting go a little more, maybe the great innovations that Apple used to inspire will have room again to breathe free, break free, and create lasting change.

It's kind of ironic. The man who invited John Scully to stop selling sugar water to kids and change the world has been selling a different kind of shiny, consumer-electronics sugar to the masses, and, himself, squelching change and innovation.

Perhaps we really do become that which we fear (or disdain) the most.

» Return to ZDNet's 20th Anniversary Special

Topics: Apple, Hardware

About

David Gewirtz, Distinguished Lecturer at CBS Interactive, is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in the History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets and is a member of the National Press Club.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

33 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Oh please...

    "Without HyperCard, we might not have the World Wide Web..." ...um no.

    DARPA, CERN et al would have created the web, one way or the other and lets not forget that the very first webpages were created on NeXT computers run by the "draconian" Steve Jobs.
    arackal
    • RE: Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

      @arackal

      Excellent rebuttal point.
      kenosha77a
    • RE: Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

      @arackal
      Ding!
      jeff.fostermedia
    • Also to note...

      @arackal...

      What we now know as Objective-C (and other programming lanuages that follow the same type of model) originated on the NeXT platform (there is a video of Steve Jobs demonstrating it on the NeXT platform when it first rolled out - and it is frighteningly familiar!)
      daftkey
      • RE: Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

        @daftkey Well technically it was Brad Cox, but yes "made famous" by NeXT. Probably the real unsung hero of this is the NeXTSTEP framework, later called OpenStep, then Yellow Box, finally Cocoa. But Sir Tim had the idea for the Web, maybe inspired in part by NeXT's "Digital Librarian".
        jeremychappell
    • Baa-zinga!

      @arackal Nuf said.
      happyharry_z
    • The hype of HyperCard

      @arackal Without HyperCard there will be no HyperText Markup Language. Bwahahaha !!!
      Voltus
  • Take a look at phone pre 2007....

    And look at them now. Then consider your closing statement:

    <i>"maybe the great innovations that Apple used to inspire will have room again to breathe free, break free, and create lasting change."</i>
    Bruizer
    • Clickbait Article Trolling

      @Bruizer Exactly

      "...you have to wonder whether a Jobs-less Apple would be better or worse for the world at large..." Clickbait trolling at its finest.

      Without Apple you would not have had Android - at least the one that copied the touch interface and conventions of iOS. Android was a Blackberry clone till Jobs and Apple pointed the way for everyone.

      Without Jobs, you wouldn't have had the iPad, which nearly every phone and PC maker is trying to mimic and which is clearly being adopted en masse by millions of people.

      Without Jobs we ended up with years of Microsoft "innovation" and only now with Jobs back has there been a crack in the Microsoft monopoly. Jobs has clearly forced MSFT to up its game which is why we got Windows 7 which is the first decent MS OS ever in my opinion and Windows 8 will be even better.

      Jobs is the one the popularized the modern GUI which everybody uses now in computing and it is the Apple version - not the Xerox Parc one - that started it. Steve Jobs has almost been singularly responsible for mass adoption of much of what is considered standard in computing technology.

      Without Jobs we would have been left to IBM and the Microsoft for "innovation".

      This is a stupid and ridiculous article.
      arackal
  • Wow .. HyperCard and David Gewirtz together

    Who would have thought it? Nice bit of history, David.

    Personally, I started using HyperCard on my Amiga 1000. Yup, you read that right. At the time, a Canadian company made a Mac hardware/software emulator that transformed the Amiga into a color based Mac. (The kicker was the requirement that this product needed official Apple ROM chips to work .. which were technically illegal to own outside of an Apple product .. but, well, I used them. Grin. Sort of like "jail breaking my Amiga" in a way.) The cool thing about that emulator was that it ran the Apple OS and Apple based software much faster on the Amiga than native Apple hardware at the time.

    Be that as it may, I sort of have you to thank indirectly for my HyperCard based history. So, thank you, David, twenty years later.

    BTW, we both seem to have moved on from our "first love" so to speak. I moved on from my beloved Amiga platform and you moved on from your Apple roots. Interesting world.
    kenosha77a
    • RE: Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

      @kenosha7777

      I remember that emulator. A buddy had it working. Yeah, it is an interesting world, isn't it. On one hand, back at the time, I was sure Apple missed the point essentially de-listing HyperCard. But that one product inspired so many people, that it really served its purpose for its time.

      Architecturally, I don't think it could have evolved as the foundation for a modern day Web browser, but it had almost all the critical components.

      I just wish Apple would allow end-user coding environments to live on an iPad. Can you imagine what people could build if they were allowed to?

      Honestly, part of why I'm so tough on Apple today is I know what they could inspire. Sure, they sell a lot of goods, but so did Pepsi. And sure, the App store is inspiring a lot of developers. But there's something missing when you can't code what you hold.

      I wish that for Apple and Apple users. So, yeah, I was once all Apple, all the time. Who woulda thunk it. Back then, I didn't even have a Windows PC (I think I got my first Win 3.1 machine in 92 or 93).
      David Gewirtz
      • RE: Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

        @David Gewirtz they will build it, it will just be on android
        redrosewa
  • Ironically...

    One of HC's grandchildren, a product from RunRev called LiveCode, is one of the (if not the) only third-party development tools approved for the production of iOS apps.
    m0o0o0o0o
    • Why is that ironic?

      @m0o0o0o0o

      ???
      RationalGuy
  • RE: Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

    Interesting blog! As an "aging" developer, I relate to what the author exposes in his write-up. I do agree that it would be easy for Apple to enable application design on the iPad directly. Hypercard may not be the appropriate technology today, but the idea is quite appropriate. I'm still wondering why Apple won't allow that "application development for all" approach (Android is going in that direction). But if Apple should change their mind, they have all the technology they need (in house) to do it fast.
    Eleutherios
    • I think you're in the neighborhood...

      @Eleutherios.. "I'm still wondering why Apple won't allow that "application development for all" approach (Android is going in that direction). But if Apple should change their mind, they have all the technology they need (in house) to do it fast. "

      Apple has definitely learned from Microsoft as far as the "Wait and see" business model goes. You are absolutely correct - Apple *can* allow development on their platform, and they could do so with the flip of the switch.. They just need to be convinced that they will lose market share if they don't.

      You can bet that if allowing this on Android causes their market share to spike, Apple will find a way to "gracefully" allow self-development.
      daftkey
  • Still Using Hypercard!

    Nice history lesson. ?We should have more of that.

    There are a few codgers here and there who STILL use Hypercard - I know because I'm one of them. ?As a design architect at Oracle I sometimes need to quickly convey interactive animations or diagramatic maps driven by somewhat unusual algorithms, algorithms that then have to be explained to our developers. ?I've tried many different tools and programming languages - including several Hypercard immitators - but for me nothing works as well as Hypercard itself.

    To pull this off, I keep an old iBook whose sole purpose is to run Hypercard. ?Hypertalk scripts are so clear and English-like I can almost pass them along without additional comments - not true of Applescript or Javascript, by the way. ?I then have to explain Hypercard to developers who weren't even born when it was invented.

    I understand why Jobs has resisted third-party middleware on iOS, and disageee that Apple no longer fosters innovation. ?I am writing this on an iPad and now spend most of my time developing enterprise iPad apps, a whole new paradigm shift still in its infancy. ?But I do wish that Hypercard could rise again somehow. ?It's the closest I've ever come to imagining out loud.
    jcartan
  • Imagine...

    Imagine if, back in the Apple ][ days, anyone that wrote a program had to send it into Apple for approval before they could even run it on their own machines. Or had to have Apple's approval to even give it away to others, sell or even distribute it.<br><br>Ridiculous, huh?<br><br>Welcome to the draconian world of iOS and the "new" Apple.
    thombone
    • RE: Apple's lost decade, HyperCard, and what might NOT have been if Apple then was like Apple is today

      @thombone

      That would be ridiculous but your analogy doesn't quite hold up to logic.

      Now, had you stated that a prior Apple Corporate approval was needed for mass distribution of a person's personal Apple ][ coded program over an Apple financed distribution organization, than, yup, that would have been right on.

      But I would have failed to see the ridiculous reasoning behind such a move.

      BTW, a person only needs to download the Xcode 4 software before he or she can write their own programs and then, quite easily, install them on their own iPad for personal use.
      kenosha77a
      • My logic is fine, thank you very much.

        @kenosha7777 Sure, they can do that. but they can't distribute them.<br><br>The thing is, Apple won't even ALLOW any distribution outside of their walled garden. That's disgusting.<br><br>Developers can easily be denied access to the distribution chain controlled completely by Apple, the only distribution choice that they have no less, because Apple has it completely locked up and demands the right of approval, giving developers no choice. That IS what I am saying.<br><br>If Apple doesn't like your program for ANY reason, they can (and often do) forbid you from even releasing it.<br><br>That is SCREWED UP.<br><br>And now, companies whose business is content must pay Apple a 30% tax just to release it, regardless of whether it's using Apple's "bandwidth" or not. Otherwise, they are banned from doing business with end-users on that platform. <br><br>That is even MORE screwed up.<br><br>iOS is today's version of AOL. A completely draconian walled garden controlled by one company that caters to what looks to me like the same demographic that AOL did back in the day. Except, Apple is even worse. They don't even allow a gateway to the "rest of the world" which at least AOL did. <br><br>Back then we had Steve Case to deal with. Now it's Steve Jobs. What's with these Steves, I have to wonder? ;)<br><br>I refuse to buy any hardware that I can't own outright and do with as I please. I certainly will not waste my time developing for a platform where, on a whim, my program can be locked out of distribution for any reason.<br><br>Apple got to where they were because they were the only real choice for awhile in the mobile "smartphone" and "tablet" spaces. But now, we have some competition and it's maturing and growing FAST. I say GOOD. Sure, the competition has issues, but they are being worked out at a rapid pace, and eventually (numbers don't lie), I see Apple, unless they iOpen up a little, ending up right back where it was before all of this mobile stuff: a niche player catering to fanboys.<br><br>I can also see, eventually, Apple being declared a monopoly and being forced to open their platform more. After all, their platform does rest on open source kernels, etc. It can be argued that while they may own the middleware (and even that is debatable since we can't see the source), they certainly do not own the kernel.<br><br>Apple isn't playing fair, and I cannot wait until they get called on it.

        What's next, is Apple going to block all direct installs on future versions of OSX and force people to buy their software from the iTunes store? Don't think it can't happen.<br><br>It's a shame, too, because back in the day, I, too, championed Apple. I cut my teeth on an Apple ][ and I still have it. Hacking away at that machine was an amazing experience. Apple championed freedom. Now they have gone against everything they have ever stood for back then.<br><br>I have nothing but respect for the OP for writing this article. He makes amazing points and it takes real stones nowadays to even write such an article. Props to him!<br><br>I'm actually shocked to see an editorial like this on ZDnet. It's a diamond in the rough, that's for sure.<br><br>Don't think that it can't happen? Think Apple is untouchable? Tell that to Myspace. They thought that they were untouchable, too.
        thombone