apple?
 

wots in a name?

I wonder if Philco ever trademarked the term "Apple"....they might have a case against both Apple Records (of Beatle fame) and Apple Computer ...who are currently in court over the iPod which Apple records claims breaches an 1990 agreement on the use of the name Apple.

As for the Apple tube ....it is an interesting concept ...pity it never got into production!

In all the documents to scan I have read through, no where is there any comment about a trademark. I'm pretty sure the term "Apple" was the in-house project name, and was used in the early press releases for a lack of a better name.

Here's another model set from mid 1956.

ChuckA

Re: apple?
 

It sorta kinda did get into production..........Sony Trinitron.

Anthony

Actually the Trinitron is a very very very distant cousin to the "Apple". The closest was the Sony Indextron, which was similar to the perpendicular scanned "Apple" that Philco abandoned very early in the project.

ChuckA

Would that make it a Apple Dumpling? LOL

Anthony

According to this article, "Apple" was a code name used by Philco while the tube was under development.

http://www.earlytelevision.org/apple_crt.html

Here is a color picture of a set with the Apple tube:

http://www.earlytelevision.org/apple_crt2.html

I know this is an older post but I have a 1964 Magnavox with a rectangular tube. I think It was manufactured in May or June of 1964.

Hi Steve. Thanks for the link. Great picture, is this a photo as the person looks photographic but the TV screen looks sort of like artwork?

Also I noticed a lot of the scans on your site (including that Apple pic) and tons of other sites have moiring in them especially when they are dot prints. Just thought I'd let you know this can be fixed by scanning them in at about 300dpi or higher and resample the size down to a suitable size for the site and also antialias it too so the results are nice and smooth. You probably already know this but thought I'd mention it anyway.

Cheers
Troy

Hi Troy,

I've had mixed results doing that. It seems to depend on the dots/inch in the original. On some pictures I've scanned at 1200 and still can't get rid of the moiring. Others are fine scanned at 300.

wasnt the chromatron the closest apple clone?

Hi Steve. Yeah that can be true. I think I've had the problem when resampling some 300dpi scans to 150dpi. I normally resample 300dpi down to 100dpi which usually yields great results even with 1950s colour scans from National Geographic mags. Only downer is the picture isn't as big as you like it.

Cheers
Troy

---

That magazine(Jan of 1957) has a great article on the Apple
 

I got that issue(along with the rest of the issues for '57) at the last Estes auction, in Dec. It IS a real shame, there are none of the sets still around(or... who knows.. that Philco prototype survived, maybe, 1 or more of the old Apple sets, is in a long-forgotten warehouse, too, waiting for its chance to be discovered, and brought to life again. )

BTW-- the Sony indextron is a LOT closer to the Apple, than the Trinitron(I have a vidimagic projector, with an indextron, and it is neat to watch. it has a green glow, from the index phospor, at the rear of the phospor screen, and a normal color picture, up front.)

The picture is an off-screen shot shown in an early color TV book by Morton and Zworykin. Don't know if it was lifted for this mag cover, or if Philco had a copy of the slide and a flying spot scanner. If the picture was cut in, it appears to have been distorted for the correct perspective. I would rather suspect it was actually taken off the screen, but perhaps a second exposure with the lights out that was then cut in. This was a trick used to get "actual off screen pictures" without glare from lights reflecting off the tube.