das@well.UUCP (David Shayer) (09/16/86)
I was fortunate enough to be at Apple today, as they announced their new Apple IIGS machine. Along with it, but with little fanfare, they announced the HD20 SCSI. I don't know the price, sorry, but I've seen it, it looks pretty much the same. I couldn't get an estimate of its speed, the place was just too crowded to get my hands on a machine. Sorry I actually have little information on the HD20 SCSI except that it does exist, but I can now talk about my hidden agenda, the Apple IIGS. Thus: What the hell does Apple think its doing? I've seen the machine, and its neat. It can run all 10,000 old Apple II programs. It also has a ROM with Mac-like routines, and it can run Mac-like programs. Note: It cannot run Mac programs, it doesn't have a 68000 or an emulator. Developers must re-code theor programs to use the new ROM calls. It has graphics that can keep up with the Atari, and I must admit, since it has half the vertical pixel count of an Atari 1040ST, I don't see how it produces color pictures that look better. But it does. But on to the main point. Price and performance. The Apple IIGS costs $995, plus monitor and disk, which is $1600-$1900 list. Okay, so maybe its $1400 at a discount. But the Atari costs $1000, complete. The Apple IIGS runs at 3 MEGAHERTZ! Thats slower than an IBM PC. My Bicycle can go faster than that. It comes with 256K, expandable to 8 meg. How can Apple sell a computer with one third the speed and one quarter the memory of an Atari 1040ST for 150% of the price? Is there some vital point I have missed? Final Comment: The new keyboard on the Apple IIGS is slated to be put on all Macs next year. It is Platinum (Apple's new colors this year, as John Dvorak says, it looks like grey to me), it is lower (thinner) than the Mac keyboard, and looks a little flimsier. It does have a control key, along with an option key, and a combined cloverleaf (command) and appple key. I didn't get a chance to type on one, so I don't know if it feels good or not. This is really the final comment: Infoworld, an always reliable source (cough cough) said that developers have prototypes of the new Macs, and they have 68020's, slots, a space for a math coprocessor chip, and some kind of memory management in hardware. Also, the display is on a card in one of the slots, thus you could put in any kind of display you want. David Shayer, WELL well!das
jimb@amdcad.UUCP (Jim Budler) (09/17/86)
In article <1791@well.UUCP> das@well.UUCP (David Shayer) writes: >But on to the main point. Price and performance. The Apple IIGS costs >$995, plus monitor and disk, which is $1600-$1900 list. Okay, so >maybe its $1400 at a discount. But the Atari costs $1000, complete. >The Apple IIGS runs at 3 MEGAHERTZ! Thats slower than an IBM PC. >My Bicycle can go faster than that. It comes with 256K, expandable >to 8 meg. How can Apple sell a computer with one third the speed and >one quarter the memory of an Atari 1040ST for 150% of the price? >Is there some vital point I have missed? One point: You are comparing apple (heh!) and oranges. The apple II benchmarked approx. 10% slower than the original IBM PC for a majority of functions ( as long as it did not require large address space). The 6502 at 1 MHz was very efficient. Clock speed alone does not determine speed!!! If the 16/32 bit 6502 ( I don't remember it's number) is as efficient, and I've heard they are, then a 3MHz clock speed should be quite respectable, perhaps as good as a 5.7 MHz effective 68000. -- Jim Budler Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (408) 749-5806 Usenet: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amdcad!jimb Compuserve: 72415,1200 I got tired of my old signature.
korn@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) (09/17/86)
In article <1791@well.UUCP> das@well.UUCP (David Shayer) writes: >... >Sorry I actually have little information on the HD20 SCSI except that >it does exist, ... I understand that it will list for $1,295. Also, a reliable source says that "apple will only provide an 'initializer' program with the disk", and will not market any spooling or backup software for their drive. Peter ----- Peter "Arrgh" Korn I know lots of honorary jews! Why, korn@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU some of my very best friends {decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!korn are honorary jews!
simoni@Shasta.STANFORD.EDU (Richard Simoni) (09/17/86)
In article <1791@well.UUCP> das@well.UUCP (David Shayer) writes: > >[apple introduces the IIGS] > >The Apple IIGS runs at 3 MEGAHERTZ! Thats slower than an IBM PC. >My Bicycle can go faster than that. It comes with 256K, expandable >to 8 meg. How can Apple sell a computer with one third the speed and >one quarter the memory of an Atari 1040ST for 150% of the price? >Is there some vital point I have missed? Well, there is one point which should be made, although it may or may not be relevant to the IIGS vs. 1040ST vs. IBM PC debate. A general statement can be made about computer systems: clock speed <> system performance. Why? Because the number of clock cycles per instruction varies widely across processors. For example (this is off the top of my head and may not be exactly right), most 6502 instructions take 2-6 cycles to complete, while many Z80 instructions take 15-20 cycles to complete. Although I'm not up on my 16- and 32-bit processors, the point is that comparing clock frequencies on machines with different processors is meaningless. (In addition, the number of instructions required to perform a particular task can also vary greatly across processors.) Just thought I'd try to clear up this common misconception. Rich Simoni Center for Integrated Systems Stanford University simoni@sonoma.stanford.edu ...!decwrl!glacier!shasta!simoni
werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) (09/17/86)
> How can Apple sell a computer with one third the speed and > one quarter the memory of an Atari 1040ST for 150% of the price? > Is there some vital point I have missed? What you have missed is that Apple figures it got the educational market (K to 12) cornered and that it does not really have to compete with the ST and Amiga and can charge a premium because all the owners of those old Apple-IIs are going to be mightily happy about the performance improvements. And they are probably right !! Buy Apple stock, I say. Will someone, please, quickly create a group for the GS, pleaassssse, before it invades this group any further ..... I want to know nothing about it as I consider it a step backwards for someone with a Mac (for sound I have a stereo, for color the real world ...(-:) GS, Gausse-Scully, Gully-Scully, Glorified Stereo, G?dd?m Sxxx .... <I distance myself from this noise above, produced by the monkeys of the British museum .....>
werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) (09/17/86)
> I understand that it will list for $1,295. Also, a reliable source says > that "apple will only provide an 'initializer' program with the disk", > and will not market any spooling or backup software for their drive. Consortium price (with cable) is ~$1,000. I was told that file-tags are supported, but that Apple will drop file-tags in the future (possibly because they have some kind of scavenging program?!)
tms@mtuxo.UUCP (t.slaight) (09/17/86)
> > But on to the main point. Price and performance. The Apple IIGS costs > $995, plus monitor and disk, which is $1600-$1900 list. Okay, so > maybe its $1400 at a discount. But the Atari costs $1000, complete. > The Apple IIGS runs at 3 MEGAHERTZ! Thats slower than an IBM PC. > My Bicycle can go faster than that. It comes with 256K, expandable > to 8 meg. How can Apple sell a computer with one third the speed and > one quarter the memory of an Atari 1040ST for 150% of the price? > Is there some vital point I have missed? > > David Shayer, WELL > well!das In response to the statement that the a 3 MHz 65816 is slower than the 4.77 MHz 8088 used in an IBM. There is always a fundamental problem when comparing processors: how many clocks are required to perform an instruction cycle. A memory access cycle on a 4.77 MHz 8088 requires 4 clock cycles - or about 840 nanoseconds. A basic memory access on a 3 Mhz 65816 requires 1 clock cycle - or about 333 nanoseconds. It is easy to conclude from this that it is not enough to judge relative performance on clock rates alone. I am pretty sure that a 65816 would blow a 4.77 MHz 8088 out of the water under most circumstances. (with the possible exception of some auto-looping string move instructions that the 8088 has) (These opinions are my own) --- Tom Slaight
mjbo@orstcs.UUCP (mjbo) (09/18/86)
in response to your note about the clock speed of the Apple //GS: You have fallen into a very common trap..equating clock speed with instruction execution speed. Like the 65c02, the 65816 executes its shortest instructions in 1 clock cycle. The 68000 takes a minimum of 4 and usually about 8 clock cycles per instruction. thus the Apple//GS, when effectively programmed, may be able to keep up with a 12-mhz 68000.
mjbo@orstcs.UUCP (mjbo) (09/18/86)
Ooops--sorry about that lack of signature--my first try at responding to a note on the net. That step from passive to active participation is stretching the limits of my Unix knowledge. Mark Borgerson OSU Computer Science Oregon State University
jimc@iscuva.UUCP (Jim Cathey) (09/19/86)
In article <1791@well.UUCP> das@well.UUCP (David Shayer) writes: >The Apple IIGS runs at 3 MEGAHERTZ! Thats slower than an IBM PC. >Is there some vital point I have missed? Of course there is. CLOCK SPEED BY ITSELF IS NEARLY IRRELEVANT. Also important is how many clocks a processor takes to get anything done. An 8088/8086/68000/32016 take 4 clock cycles to do a basic memory access. A 6502 (and, I assume, a 65816) take ONE. By this quick and dirty calculation the Apple IIGS is equivalent to a 12 MHz 8086. To get real, though, you also have to factor in the difference in power between the instruction sets, bus width, the degree of pipelining, etc... -- +----------------+ ! II CCCCCC ! Jim Cathey ! II SSSSCC ! ISC Systems Corp. ! II CC ! Spokane, WA ! IISSSS CC ! UUCP: ihnp4!tektronix!reed!iscuva!jimc ! II CCCCCC ! (509)927-5757 +----------------+ "With excitement like this, who is needing enemas?"
joel@gould9.UUCP (Joel West) (09/22/86)
In article <847@Shasta.STANFORD.EDU>, simoni@Shasta.STANFORD.EDU (Richard Simoni) writes: > Well, there is one point which should be made, although it may or may not > be relevant to the IIGS vs. 1040ST vs. IBM PC debate. A general statement > can be made about computer systems: clock speed <> system performance. > Why? Because the number of clock cycles per instruction varies widely > across processors. For example (this is off the top of my head and may > not be exactly right), most 6502 instructions take 2-6 cycles to complete, > while many Z80 instructions take 15-20 cycles to complete. Although I'm > not up on my 16- and 32-bit processors, the point is that comparing clock > frequencies on machines with different processors is meaningless. According to the Osborne/McGraw-Hill 65816 book (which I highly recommend over the Sybek book; there's a 3rd I don't own), 65816/65802 Assembly Language Programming (Fischer), ... well, I couldn't read the fine print, so I pulled my Western Digital spec sheet (which has the same information in larger print). Addressing mode "Base no. cycles" # (immediate) 2 (1 or 2 bytes) relative 2 -128 to +127 bytes away direct 3 (add a byte to the direct register absolute 4 (16 bit within bank specified by bank reg.) the terminology is identical to the 6502; I'm sorry, but I'm too lazy to pull out my 68000, 6502, Z-80 and 8086 books to provide comparisons and figure out what it means. Hope this sheds some light on the subject. -- Joel West MCI Mail: 282-8879 Western Software Technology, POB 2733, Vista, CA 92083 {cbosgd, ihnp4, pyramid, sdcsvax, ucla-cs} !gould9!joel joel%gould9.uucp@NOSC.ARPA
darren@runx.OZ (Darren Challis) (09/26/86)
Re: abbreviations for "GS". Howzabout "Granny Smith".