[comp.sys.apple] ROM 04 GS

orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) (02/01/90)

In-Reply-To: message from SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET

I don't mean to be a downer or anything, but even if there is a new ROM 4, who
cares?  Really, I mean none of the companies out there support the GS now as
it is with 1 million sold, so why in the world would they start supporting it
now, now that Apple finally did what should have been done 3 years ago?  I
know I won't support a new GS, because nobody will have it, and I'd rather
make slow programs that everyone will see, than fast programs that nobody will
see.  The sorry fact is that it's too late for the GS to be improved, the
industry has already abandoned it.  (Please, no hate mail).

-Brian
_____

UUCP: crash!pro-lep!orcus
ARPA: crash!pro-lep!orcus@nosc.mil
INET: orcus@pro-lep.cts.com

TMPLee@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL (02/01/90)

As someone noted, but it is worth repeating, if the display memory runs
full speed, then even if the resolution is twice as good you still have
something like a three times improvement on display heavy stuff.  A
question:  do the rumormongers have anything on whether there can be
more than 16 colors?  (yah, I know you can have a different pallete for
each scan line, but that's not the same thing as having 32 or 64 on each
one, nor as having more than four "real" colors on high resolution.)

fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Andy McFadden) (02/02/90)

In article <9769.net.apple@pro-lep> orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes:
>I don't mean to be a downer or anything, but even if there is a new ROM 4, who
>cares?  Really, I mean none of the companies out there support the GS now as
>it is with 1 million sold, so why in the world would they start supporting it
>now, now that Apple finally did what should have been done 3 years ago?  I
>know I won't support a new GS, because nobody will have it, and I'd rather
>make slow programs that everyone will see, than fast programs that nobody will
>see.  The sorry fact is that it's too late for the GS to be improved, the
>industry has already abandoned it.  (Please, no hate mail).

No, no hate mail.

I'm very sorry to say that I agree with you...

However: suppose Apple used the 20 MHz ASIC chip being developed.  If
developers were faced with a 4 MIPS machine (which current users could
upgrade to), maybe they'd come back...?

Had a chat with a friend the other day... according to him, the //gs had
80% "market penetration" it's first year (software produced that first
year was purchased by about 80% of the owners).  Gee, we've gone from 60
to 0 in only three short years :-(  We weren't abandoned because the market
doesn't exist, but rather because Apple was too scared to introduce something
like a ROM 04 GS three years back.  My only "wish list" is that Apple would
stop going half-a$$ed and give the GS some guts (like > 6 MHz).

>-Brian

-- 
fadden@cory.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden)
...!ucbvax!cory!fadden

orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) (02/03/90)

In-Reply-To: message from fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU

Previously I pointed out how a new and improved IIgs will make no difference
at this point, but one thing that I might add is that there still is a minute
chance that a new IIgs will do something for the market and bring back the
developers.  Just releasing a new IIgs will NOT EVER do the job, but it would
take the strong effort by Apple to promote the machine and it's software. 
Apple isnt doing sh*t right now, and that's why the IIgs is dead.  If they
actually went out and promoted their machine like Amiga does, then it is
possible that developers/companies would give the machine another shot.  The
future still looks grim because I seriously doubt that Apple has the balls to
do it.

-Brian
_____

UUCP: crash!pro-lep!orcus
ARPA: crash!pro-lep!orcus@nosc.mil
INET: orcus@pro-lep.cts.com

shatara@memit.enet.dec.com (Chris Shatara) (02/03/90)

In article <9992.net.apple@pro-lep>, orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes...
>In-Reply-To: message from fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU
> 
>developers.  Just releasing a new IIgs will NOT EVER do the job, but it would
>take the strong effort by Apple to promote the machine and it's software. 
>Apple isnt doing sh*t right now, and that's why the IIgs is dead.  If they
>actually went out and promoted their machine like Amiga does, then it is

I have to agree.  What sold the family and myself on the IIgs was the 
excellent "road show" apple put on at a local mall highlighting mostly 
Apple II's a couple of years ago.  We all found something we could use the 
machine for.  Once you see it and what it can do, you get excited!

=============================================================================
|        Chris Shatara       |      Internet:    shatara@memit.enet.dec.com | 
|  Opinions expressed are    |      DEC Easynet: memit::shatara             |
|   mine and mine only!      |      UUCP:        ...!decwrl!memit!shatara   |
=============================================================================

rnf@shumv1.uucp (Rick Fincher) (02/04/90)

In article <9992.net.apple@pro-lep> orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes:
>In-Reply-To: message from fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU
>
>Apple isnt doing sh*t right now, and that's why the IIgs is dead.  If they
>actually went out and promoted their machine like Amiga does, then it is

Where are you people coming up with all this trash that the IIgs is dead?

I just read a market analysis in Macintosh Today that said that Apple has about
34% of the market.  Of that, about half of their unit sales are Apple II's. 
The Apple II sales produce about 25% of their revenues.  These percentages 
have held steady for a few years now.  Sales of the entire Apple product line
are improving steadily.  The Apple II family sales are keeping pace.  I don't
know what Amiga sales are but I would be willing to bet that the IIgs is out-
selling it by a margin of 2 or 3 to 1.

That is not to say Apple can't do better.  I just get sick of hearing people
say the sky is falling.


Rick Fincher
rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu

philip@pro-generic.cts.com (Philip McDunnough) (02/05/90)

In-Reply-To: message from orcus@pro-lep.cts.com

>The sorry fact is that it's too late for the GS to be improved, the
>industry has already abandoned it.

This is an odd statement given various market studies showing the GS selling
well. Might I suggest that some thought be given to what market the GS is
targeted at. If we are talking as a replacement for dedicated game machines
then clearly the platform is inadequate. However I submit that there is room
for a general purpose computer which would be useful for elementary education,
act as a family computer(and this does not mean having the family spending
hours playing arcade games), and be an intelligent terminal for linking into
more powerful systems at work. Not everyone wants to mix work with family life
to that great an extent.

As such, the GS(especially the rumoured ROM04) fits this description.A 6MHz GS
with a 640x400 mode(for work related activity) with its musical capabilities
not only is an excellent educational computer(and the networking capabilities
are impressive for this-even at a university level in conjunction with an AFP
compliant gateway), but is a family computer with which all members of a
family can participate. I know of no other computer that has these unique
qualities(and we have seen them all at our home).

It would be nice to see more positive statements from some of those in this
group. The GS is not a Nintendo machine and I,for one, do not wish to see it
head in that direction. A 640x400 video mode(so we could have a nice
tektronics' emulator for example) and better printer drivers would certainly
be welcome additions(as well as the rumoured 6MHz video and cpu speed).

 Philip McDunnough     ->E-mail: philip@utstat.toronto.edu
 University of Toronto
 [my opinions]

orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) (02/07/90)

In-Reply-To: message from rnf@shumv1.uucp

So what if the II is 25% of Apple profits or whatever.  Look at the REALITY. 
How many publishers are still doing IIgs products?  Almost none.  The only
ones doing it are small companies who learned, and are not going to do IIgs
stuff again.  Ive spoken with them all, and none of the publishers will even
return your messages if you say IIgs.  Apple doesnt care.  They're letting the
IIgs die by not supporting it.  ROM 03 was a total joke.  GS/OS is a travesty.
 The availability of software is NIL.  Need I say more?

-Brian
_____

UUCP: crash!pro-lep!orcus
ARPA: crash!pro-lep!orcus@nosc.mil
INET: orcus@pro-lep.cts.com

rnf@shumv1.uucp (Rick Fincher) (02/07/90)

In article <10073.net.apple@pro-lep> orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes:
>In-Reply-To: message from rnf@shumv1.uucp
>
>So what if the II is 25% of Apple profits or whatever.  Look at the REALITY. 
>How many publishers are still doing IIgs products?  Almost none.  The only

Claris, Roger Wagner Publishing, The Byte Works, Scholastic, MECC, Beagle, 
etc. etc.

>ones doing it are small companies who learned, and are not going to do IIgs
>stuff again.  Ive spoken with them all, and none of the publishers will even

Who have you spoken to?

>return your messages if you say IIgs.  Apple doesnt care.  They're letting the

With your attitude, I wouldn't return your calls either.

>IIgs die by not supporting it.  ROM 03 was a total joke.  GS/OS is a travesty.
> The availability of software is NIL.  Need I say more?

There are thousands of programs for the IIgs, literally.  You haven't said 
anything correct yet, so why say more.

Rick Fincher
rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu

cs122aw@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Alfter) (02/07/90)

In article <10073.net.apple@pro-lep> orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes:
>In-Reply-To: message from rnf@shumv1.uucp
>
>So what if the II is 25% of Apple profits or whatever.  Look at the REALITY. 
>How many publishers are still doing IIgs products?  Almost none.  The only
>ones doing it are small companies who learned, and are not going to do IIgs
>stuff again.  Ive spoken with them all, and none of the publishers will even
>return your messages if you say IIgs.  Apple doesnt care.  They're letting the
>IIgs die by not supporting it.  ROM 03 was a total joke.  GS/OS is a travesty.
> The availability of software is NIL.  Need I say more?

Why don't you give the ROM 04 a chance before you start bawling that the II is
getting left behind?  Better yet, since you're so convinced that the II's going
down in flames, why don't you bail out, get yourself another computer, and get
out of this newsgroup?  You can keep your pessimism to yourself, thank you very
much.

'Nuff said.

Scott Alfter-------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet: cs122aw@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu    _/_ Apple IIe: the power to be your best!
          alfter@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu/ v \
          saa33413@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (    (              A keyboard--how quaint!
          free0066@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu  \_^_/                     --M. Scott, STIV

jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremy G. Mereness) (02/07/90)

orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes:
> In-Reply-To: message from rnf@shumv1.uucp
> 
> So what if the II is 25% of Apple profits or whatever.  Look at the REALITY. 
> How many publishers are still doing IIgs products?  Almost none.  The only
> ones doing it are small companies who learned, and are not going to do IIgs
> stuff again.  Ive spoken with them all, and none of the publishers will even
> return your messages if you say IIgs.  Apple doesnt care.  They're letting the
> IIgs die by not supporting it.  ROM 03 was a total joke.  GS/OS is a travesty.
>  The availability of software is NIL.  Need I say more?

Criminy!!! I'm sitting here with a copy of Appleworks GS 1.1 and a
bunch of neat DA's from C.K. Haun (Ravenware, the 'It' series) and I'm
just getting started. AWGS is an INCREDIBLE package which good people
put a great deal of heart into. Are software companies dumping the GS?
Name them! I don't seem to have that much trouble finding new packages
to try out, and those that exist from Claris are very fine! Many of
the authors read this newsfeed!

Besides, I'd much rather have the support of Beagle Brothers than some
of those other companies, whose games weren't all that great anyway.

The GS is still alive because of user support. It is an under-powered
machine, but its user base has kept it alive under ridiculously hot
competition. People are making it do things that Apple said wouldn't
be possible. Now there is promise of a CPU that does it justice. So,
what are you complaining about? 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|Jeremy Mereness                  |   Support     | Ye Olde Disclaimer:    |
|jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu (internet)  |     Free      |  The above represent my|
|r746jm7e@cmccvb (Vax... bitnet)  |      Software |  opinions, alone.      |
|staff/student@Carnegie Mellon U. |               |  Ya Gotta Love It.     |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) (02/08/90)

In-Reply-To: message from rnf@shumv1.uucp

> Claris, Roger Wagner Publishing, The Byte Works, Scholastic, MECC, Beagle,
>  etc.  etc.

You call that a list?  That's not IIgs support.  A real list would have
included the obvious:  EA, Broderbund, Activision, Sierra On-Line, etc.  The
list for a Mac or IBM would be 10 pages long.  Really, no offense people, but
I think you all are living in a serious PipeDream.  I support the IIgs like
crazy - Ive written 6 games for it, and Im working on 2 new ones right now,
but I know the real stakes and the real problems.  I came to realize many
months ago that it wasnt worth my time "living a life of illusion," and
convincing myself that a new IIgs dressed in white was going to come and save
us all.

-Brian
_____

UUCP: crash!pro-lep!orcus
ARPA: crash!pro-lep!orcus@nosc.mil
INET: orcus@pro-lep.cts.com

gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (02/08/90)

In article <10073.net.apple@pro-lep> orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes:
>How many publishers are still doing IIgs products?  Almost none.  The only
>ones doing it are small companies who learned, and are not going to do IIgs
>stuff again.  Ive spoken with them all, and none of the publishers will even
>return your messages if you say IIgs.  Apple doesnt care.  They're letting the
>IIgs die by not supporting it.  ROM 03 was a total joke.  GS/OS is a travesty.
> The availability of software is NIL.  Need I say more?

I think Brian was disillusioned by his experiences in trying to market
IIGS-specific games.  Eventually, he found a small publisher (Micro
Revelations?  I forget) for Xenocide, which is a nifty game that I think
is worth the $50 or so that is charged for it.

While the IIGS software picture isn't rosy, I think Brian's comments are
exaggerated.  I still see software for the IIGS that is either adapted
from other computers' versions, or was written to be readily portable
to a wide range of 16-bit personal computers (typically in C).  It does
seem to be true that major software publishers have almost no interest
in products that run ONLY on the IIGS.  Sierra (On-Line) claims that
their current top-of-the-line game system ported to the IIGS runs too
slowly and requires more memory than they can count on; consequently
only a few of their recent products have been available in IIGS versions.
Note that it was not due to lack of interest, since after all they tried
to produce a IIGS port, but rather was a decision based on the relative
inadequacy of the installed IIGS hardware base.  Sierra has been looking
into offering TWGS discounts etc. to expand the performance of their IIGS
customers' hardware sufficiently to justify releasing IIGS versions.

ROM 03 was a reasonable evolutionary step for the IIGS, but not a major
breakthrough.  The slot mapping feature was sorely needed, as were more
tools in ROM and an expanded base amount of RAM.  The only lossage was
that ROM 01 IIGS owners are not likely to upgrade to ROM 03, unlike the
case with ROM 00->01, so software houses cannot reasonably make it a
requirement for their IIGS products.  The good news is that so long as
System Disk 5.0 or later is used, older IIGS toolkits will function like
ROM 03 versions.

GS/OS seems okay to me (not great, but okay).  It basically provides
file management services, and it supports mutiple kinds of file system.
What problem do you have with it?

nicholaA@batman.moravian.EDU (Andy Nicholas) (02/10/90)

In article <10073.net.apple@pro-lep>, orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes:

> So what if the II is 25% of Apple profits or whatever.  Look at the REALITY. 
> How many publishers are still doing IIgs products?  Almost none.

This is debatable but probably more true than most realize.

> The only
> ones doing it are small companies who learned, and are not going to do IIgs
> stuff again.  Ive spoken with them all, and none of the publishers will even
> return your messages if you say IIgs.

This is also very true, but then again maybe you weren't talking to the right
companies or...

> Apple doesnt care.  They're letting the IIgs die by not supporting it.

As far as software and hardware goes, they >are< supporting it.  If they
weren't supporting it, we wouldn't get technotes every other month, and wouldn't
be able to at least send questions to a group of people that care to answer.

> ROM 03 was a total joke.

No it wasn't.  ROM 03 was designed to make the IIGS an up-to-date machine. It
accomplishes that very well.  We needed more memory and we got it.  We needed
a lot of the system code put into rom.  we got that, too.  They fixed the GS
so that it was the machine that should have originally shipped.  They finally,
after 2-3 years showed a renewed committment to the IIGS.

> GS/OS is a travesty.

How so?  The design of GS/OS is one of the better easy-to-program OS's I've
used.  It can't compare with stuff like unix, but it wasn't MEANT to be
compared with unix. 

Please elaborate a little more.

> Need I say more?

Yes, please do.  Your ravings are somewhat amusing.

> -Brian

andy

-- 

Yeah!

nicholaA@batman.moravian.EDU (Andy Nicholas) (02/11/90)

In article <10208.net.apple@pro-lep>, orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) writes:

>> Claris, Roger Wagner Publishing, The Byte Works, Scholastic, MECC, Beagle,
>> etc.  etc.
> 
> You call that a list?  That's not IIgs support.  A real list would have
> included the obvious:  EA, Broderbund, Activision, Sierra On-Line, etc.

I don't believe that Activision markets games for any machine any more.  A
while ago (this past summer?) they announced that they were going to put
all their emphasis on what they originally did: made games for home gaming
systems like the nintendo.

Someone said that mediaGenic was going to sell off their TenPoint-Oh division,
along with their Activision division, but I'm not sure what happened to them...

> The
> list for a Mac or IBM would be 10 pages long.  Really, no offense people, but
> I think you all are living in a serious PipeDream.  I support the IIgs like
> crazy - Ive written 6 games for it, and Im working on 2 new ones right now,

That's nice.

> but I know the real stakes and the real problems.  I came to realize many
> months ago that it wasnt worth my time "living a life of illusion," and
> convincing myself that a new IIgs dressed in white was going to come and save
> us all.

Many of us don't believe that also...

> -Brian

andy

-- 

Yeah!