[bananaflag]

There was also the issue that one would also need a reader. Why would I buy a zip reader if no one else has one (network effect)? (Btw I never saw in my life a zip reader or a zip disk.)

Whereas with USB sticks all one needed was a USB port. I immediately wanted a stick.

[michaelbuckbee]

Partially this was solved by the ZipDrive being designed for portability as well (I'm not even sure if there was ever a built in model). So if you needed to copy a large file and take it to a friends house you just took the drive with you.

[acranox]

Most of us were using Zip drives to backup our files and then put the disks on shelf. There was no cloud backup, and 100MB was often enough for all your personal files.

[masklinn]

It was also used by professional who needed to transfer large (for the times) amounts of data but not so much or without the technical background that high density tapes or routinely swapping hard drives was sensible (or possible): images, document scans, …

[dd82]

this. IIRC the internal drive plus two disks being significantly cheaper than an external hard drive of similar capacity

[ben_w]

Before the first iMac arrived with only USB ports and thereby forced peripheral makers to support USB, USB just wasn't all that common even in the Windows world: why would a 1997 manufacturer bother with USB when all the machines already had all the other ports we here in 2026 find subsumed into USB?

But only a few years later, as you say, USB thumb drives were making Zip drives irrelevant.

[acdha]

USB was slooooooow in comparison to SCSI or later FireWire, though, so that took a hardware generations to really catch on.

I think the network effect was more a question of who had tons of data: for example, all of the graphic design shops had Zip or Jazz drives because they needed to schlep client deliverables around so you could just assume they had the hardware. Most people weren’t generating that much data before digital cameras became common.

[sublinear]

Was it really the iMac that did it? I don't think I remember anyone saying that until recent years. Around the time of the first iMac, just about every home PC already had a pair of USB 1.1 ports because of Windows 98 and a lot more plug and play support.

What I recall being sold for Mac were FireWire peripherals back in the late 90s and most of the 2000s. By 2000, USB 2.0 was too good to ignore and addressed all the pain points manufacturers had with USB 1.1 being too slow. That's when I remember USB drives finally being practical and mainstream.

[ben_w]

IIRC, the Mac magazines I read at the time were making this claim.

The magazines may have been wrong and their claims turned into an urban legend in the meantime, but it's part of the general sense of what I recall from, ugh, nearly 30 years back now.

[swiftcoder]

The iMac certainly accelerated the adoption curve. There were USB ports on other PCs, but since they also had normal (at the time) ports, no PC users were going out and buying all-new USB peripherals.

Apple's decision to leave out all the other ports meant that a bunch of folks were forced to buy new USB peripherals (and/or adapters), and gave peripheral manufacturers a dedicated market for USB

[dtech]

I don't but this. The first 2 generations of iPod didn't even have USB connectors, only FireWire, which was a PITA as most PCs had a USB connection by that time but FireWire wasn't common as opposed to Mac.

[swiftcoder]

I don't think that runs contrary to my point in any way?

By the time the iPod came around, Apple had adopted FireWire to handle devices that USB's then-limited bandwidth couldn't really support. USB peripherals like mouse/keyboards were already pretty widespread by then.

[ben_w]

Apple is consistently weird about peripherals, yes.

Hockey Puck mouse.

[sublinear]

I'm not really convinced.

It seems that even Apple quickly caved in and put FireWire on the G3 iMac when they updated the design to a slot loader in 1999.

I don't have anything against Apple, but USB before the 2000s was pretty bad. It seems weird that people are now thinking otherwise.

[ben_w]

Sure. The point I was claiming was not Apple being first nor early USB being good, though I don't speak for swiftcoder.

When Firewire was introduced, it wasn't ever popular enough to get the self-sustaining popularity loop of "all the machines have it" <-> "all the peripheral makers support it".

Apple made that happen for USB. Not because USB was amazing in 1997, but because it was the only thing on what was then the cheapest new Mac.

[sublinear]

> Apple made that happen for USB

Yup I do think that's true for Mac users, and questioning Apple fans' just-so stories are usually worthwhile to anyone curious. They sure do keep history alive and well. I mean, hey, The Beatles made an entire career out of doing that with their fans!

I just realized this month was Apple's 50th anniversary, so that's likely part of why this is making the rounds. I guess I have my answer.

Probably also worth noting the list of founding members of the USB-IF did not include Apple (not surprising). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_Implementers_Forum

The motivations behind the "legacy-free PC" has its own Wikipedia page too which is pretty neat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy-free_PC

[swiftcoder]

> but USB before the 2000s was pretty bad

Indeed. So bad that no one apart from Apple would have tried to go all-in on it. I doubt things like USB mice and keyboards would ever have happened if Apple didn't give it a kick in the behind

Firewire was indeed a nice addition when that came along, but it always remained the domain of pricey high-bandwidth devices.

[sublinear]

I did some more digging to find out that the infamous BSOD demo with Bill Gates on stage was meant to show off plug and play on Windows 98. It was caused by a USB scanner.

This happened 4 months before the release date of the first iMac.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=IW7Rqwwth84