nabi@vax135.UUCP (Nabi Rafie) (02/04/86)
I have been an Apple user eversince woz introduced his creation back in the late 70's. There were times when I drank,ate and slept my Apple ][ (just like some other people out there). I learned Basic, Pascal, C and Forth, all on the ][. I did practically all of my computing work on it, not to mention all those sleepness night playing games, figuring out tricks and so forth. I enjoyed it a great deal. Everybody knew what was inside the ][, it had slots so I could interface to whatever I pleased and it was a pretty reliable machine. Those were the days. I still have my ][, and will never sell it either. Next came the first big flop, the Apple III. I never had one, but used one quite regularly. I will not go into details, but to put it very mildly, it was a bad design, disaster perhaps might be a more appropriate word ! You could by now tell that the company was being run by a bunch of screwball businessmen that didn't know their head from a hole in the ground. It used to be that the company was built around a true dream. Two guys that wanted to share something exciting with the rest of the world. I don't know what happened to Apple around that time, but it was swinging towards IBM style of management; a style that is quite evident in IBM's brilliant innovative product, namely their PC, running the incredible operating system (MS-DOS). Talk about the Stone Ages ! Anyhow, Apple's new directors (eggheads !) decided to go for the business end of the market. Ok. So they go ahead and plan a five year project, spend a hefty sum of about 5 million dollars (if I'm not mistaken) and they actually come up with a micro that is far ahead of its time. We all of course know the price tag Apple put on their LISA's. With a price like $10,000, the only people who would even be able to contemplate on a LISA would be business people that had some extra cash they didn't know what to do with. The LISA idea was brilliant, the use of windows, menus, the mouse, desktop, etc. etc. etc. is all brilliant, absolutely magnificent; if one could afford it ! So now Apple had built machines, perhaps 5 to 10 years ahead of their time, that wouldn't sell. They eventually lowered the price a little bit but nowhere near affordable (for most of us). Meanwhile all the original and true Apple owners and fans were eagerly waiting for some miracle to happen before they were all forced to buy IBM's. Somehow, somewhere the microLISA was spawned and thus we have the Mac. The Mac was an attempt to make all this new wonderful technology available to the rest of humanity ! A bold and successful move not on Apple's part, but on the five guys' who still had the original Apple vision clear in their minds. None of this business market bullshit. So now everybody is using a Mac. Apple (thanks god I hope) realized the futility of the LISA and tried saving it by introducing MacXL; a terrible decision (whoever made it, if you are listening, were you smoking something that day ? or are you like that everyday ?). The Mac is a good machine besides its awfully large screen. Everything has been dandy so far until the intro of the new Mac+ with a new file system. What I want to know is that how long and how much time, money and effort will have to be spent trying to make pre-Mac+ software to work on the Mac+. There are Macs out there with 4 meg ram and very large capacity drives. Why should they bother upgrading ? and to what ? A newer and better file system ? that doesn't work with probably most of the software already out there ? I perhaps appreciate Apple for trying to revive the true Apple style, but I'm afraid there are a lot of very flaky people at Apple making some very serious mistakes. What about all the LISA owners. They will have to spend another $1500 to get a micro that is supported or else die of loneliness out there. However, the Mac is slowly growing towards a LISA type of configuration. I suspect (from the rumors) that Apple's next intro will have color, FP coprocessor, faster & more capable 68020, maybe some sort of a memory-management support. All in all, Apple seems to be swinging back into shape again, as soon as they figure out how to deal with all the complaints about the new file system headaches !
olson@harvard.UUCP (02/04/86)
Thought I'd add my two cents worth to this:
When I first saw the Mac, almost exactly two years ago, it was sitting in
a computer store, switched off. My first impression: it's so SMALL!
I got my demonstration, got totally blown away, and bought one a week later.
Since then, I've told everyone who ever laughed at the Mac my favorite
Mac buzzphrase:
It only looks small when it's off.
-Eric.jjboritz@watnot.UUCP (Jim Boritz) (02/05/86)
In his letter (1282@vax135.UUCP) Nabi Rafie seems to be unable to decide whether the businessmen that run Apple are doing the right thing, or are being "eggheads" and flakes. First he smashes Apple's "new directors" for initiating the research and development that went into the Lisa. Has he forgotten that the Lisa was Steve Jobs dream. Then he congratulates five other people, whom he does not mention, for having the vision to create the macintosh. Yet we must remember that had it not been for the Lisa, the mac would be nowhere. To sum up his letter he says "All in all, Apple seems to be swinging back into shape again ...". But in his letter he told us how much a company like Apple needed those people with a dream in order to create superior products. The Apple which is now swinging back into shape is doing so without those visionaries. Jim Boritz "Time it was and what a time it was..." - Paul Simon Bookends
nabi@vax135.UUCP (Nabi Rafie) (02/07/86)
The Apple that is swinging back into shape now, is doing so because of the Mac and its creators, not beaue of any vision of their own. Also, I didn't put down the LISA dream, I did say (more than once I think) that the LISA is many years ahead of its time. What I probably should have said is that the LISA was aimed at the wrong market perhaps. If the LISA were successful, the Mac might not have ever been born ! The need for an affordable version of the LISA gave rise to the Mac. Now that everybody has a Mac, Apple is slowly increasing Mac's power, and it seems like they are going back towards full LISA technology. Perhaps they should have done that in the first place. Maybe now we wouldn't have all this headaches associated with the new Mac+ and upgrading the Macs and LISAs. The LISA was Apple's big shot at the business end of the market. If it had been successful, they wouldn't have withdrawn the LISAs. It is obvious that people are looking for bold imagination, new ideas and exciting products from Apple, not the same old archaic MS-DOS garbage that IBM promotes. I think Apple's products are (light) years ahead of its competitors (i.e. IBM) but the business people still buy the IBM stuff because of the name, NOT the product. If Apple were consistent and held their place in the market as the creators of visionary ideas, and kept providing good service and reliability, they would eventually enter other markets, not by force, but by the market's needs. I'm an electronics engineer and I need to interface to computers in order to accomplish certain tasks. Would I be able to easily interface other electronic equipment to my Mac as easily as I could to an IBM or a clone ? The LISA does have 3 slots in the back which one could use, but Apple has dropped the LISA line. The Mac wasn't designed for lab work I guess. You are then more or less stuck with an IBM PC and the pain of MS-DOS. For those who don't care about ports and what not, the Mac is perfect. Hopefully next year Apple will introduce their more serious micro with a 68020, FP coprocessor, color, etc etc. But then that can be considered the next generation LISA technology ! Happy mousing ! nabi
mazlack@ernie.berkeley.edu.BERKELEY.EDU (Lawrence J. &) (02/12/86)
> The LISA was Apple's big shot at the business end of the market. If >it had been successful, they wouldn't have withdrawn the LISAs. It is obvious >that people are looking for bold imagination, new ideas and exciting products Probably the Lisa WAS a better business product than the Mac or Mac+. Among other things, it can be networked (Apple Talk is a rather pitful excuse for a network.) But, irregardless of the technology, Apple has serious problems as a business a point where knowledgeable support overwhelms any technical advantage. with them. Almost anyone who has dealt directly with Apple as either a large buyer (University or corporation) or a developer can probably recite a whole list of problems - mostly of a non-response nature. Apple's current sales solution of making the local vendor responsible for both sales and support is woefully inadequate. Just try getting any sort of technical support and knowledgable support from them. [Maybe it is because many of the local dealers are staffed by ex stereo and aluminum siding salesmen :-) ] These people just do not know how to do the job. And they are competing with IBM who does. There does come a point where service and knowledge overwhelms any technical advantage. And as the technical advantage shrinks, as it is with Apple, so does their chances in the business market. I don't think that color is going to make the difference. I do think that they need: (a) A multiprogramming capability (available on the Lisa), (b) A good networking capability - including the capabilty to use a file server, (c) A larger screen, (d) The often promised card to access other networks (currently, SNA is being promised). Ethernet would be nice. Such a solution should not be expensive. (e) High quality technical support. (f) Corporate accountability. I.e., someone who will make sure that your concerns are met. Right now, dealing with Apple is dealing difficult because it is almost impossible to find the responsible party. ....Larry Mazlack mazlack@ernie.berkeley.edu