userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) (08/17/89)
First off, with people referring to "ROM 3", I'm assuming that
they actually mean "Version 2", as compared to versions 0..1.
Secondly, out of curiousity (really!), unless they drastically
changed some key functions on the M.B., couldn't you simply make
a duplication of the "ver2" ROMs and stick them into the older
motherboards?
While I've gone and mentioned that, I might as well also explain
my feelings on EPROM copying. Personally, I feel that if a company
(such as Apple) comes out with a machine (like the GS) and then
later on upgrades it with new ROMs (as they just did), I should be
entitled to have that upgrade for free based on the following:
1. I paid a rather large sum for a machine that I assumed,
at the time of purchase, to be worth the thousands of
dollars that I invested into it. If they upgrade it, then I
feel that it's an admission by the said company that their
machine wasn't the best even by their standards.
2. Eventually, given enough time, a non-upgraded machine will
become less compatible as new software is produced. While I
could understand a cost for a ROM upgrade (nothing else), I
couldn't see it being as expensive as it undoubtably would be.
If they had the Ver1 owners bring in their EPROM to a dealer and
had the dealer make a copy over the older version, wouldn't it
be more of a cost SAVINGS? Look at the enhanced //e ("e//e"?).
Then again, I sold my GS just last week -- apparently just in
time -- before they (Apple) announced another upgrade that cost an
arm and a leg. I'm not against the GS, but I really wish that
they'd consult the general populus when they consider these things.
Any company that charges $7 (CDN) for a piece of injection molded
plastic reset switches that takes 20 seconds to form deserves what
they get.
+-----------------------------------+ DAN BERRY
! "Violence is the last ! University of Alberta
! refuge of an incompetent." ! Computing Systems
+-----------------------------------+ (Network and DataCom)bsherman@ibiza.cs.miami.edu (Bob Sherman) (08/17/89)
If what I am looking at in a picture of the new GS motherboard is correct, there are two ROM chips where there is currently only one. If that is true, then there is no way that a dealer or anyone else would be able to just re-burn a chip to upgrade their GS. bsherman@ibiza.cs.miami.edu or bsherman@mthvax.cs.miami.edu bsherman@pro-exchange MCI Mail: BSHERMAN
dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) (08/17/89)
In article <237@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes: >First off, with people referring to "ROM 3", I'm assuming that >they actually mean "Version 2", as compared to versions 0..1. >Secondly, out of curiousity (really!), unless they drastically >changed some key functions on the M.B., couldn't you simply make >a duplication of the "ver2" ROMs and stick them into the older >motherboards? From what I've been reading on AppleLink-Personal Edition, they are calling new ROM "ROM 3" to avoid the confusion with previous ROMs. You know...ROM 01 is actually the upgrade...or is it the first revision? It is? Well what is the new ROM then, ROM 2? No no no...now the ROMs will be in order of appearance! I guess Apple was inspired by the Star Wars numbering scheme :-) Secondly, the new ROM in the enhanced GS motherboard is a 256K ROM. We have 128K ROMs in our motherboards. While the number of pins may be the same, I'm sure that the internal organization of the ROM (in terms of rows and columns and all that great stuff) is incompatible with current motherboards. Some feature of the enhanced GS (like Sticky Shift and mouse stuff) are implemented in an expanded ADB controller ROM. I think that is a separate chip...never heard of it before. Dave Seah | O M N I D Y N E S Y S T E M S - M | Internet: dseah@wpi.wpi.edu | "User Friendly Killing Machines" | AlinkPE: AFC DaveS | A Division of SLO, International | Bitnet: dseah@wpi.bitnet
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (08/17/89)
In article <237@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes: >1. I paid a rather large sum for a machine that I assumed, >at the time of purchase, to be worth the thousands of >dollars that I invested into it. If they upgrade it, then I >feel that it's an admission by the said company that their >machine wasn't the best even by their standards. This is rationalization, not reasoning. Do you really expect to be able to take your automobile back to the dealer when a new model comes out and insist on a free upgrade of every component that the manufacturer was able to improve between models? >Any company that charges $7 (CDN) for a piece of injection molded >plastic reset switches that takes 20 seconds to form deserves what >they get. What does the time it takes to perform the modling have to do with the cost of the part? It probably costs nearly $7 just to transport the part to you, if you figure in all the overhead.
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (08/18/89)
In article <237@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes: >First off, with people referring to "ROM 3", I'm assuming that >they actually mean "Version 2", as compared to versions 0..1. Well, it Really Is called "ROM 03"...so that's what we really mean. There was too much confusion before with ROM 00 = ROM 1.0, and ROM 01 = ROM 2.0. >Secondly, out of curiousity (really!), unless they drastically >changed some key functions on the M.B., couldn't you simply make >a duplication of the "ver2" ROMs and stick them into the older >motherboards? Does doubling the number of chips count as a drastic change? :-) ROM 03 is 256K (00 and 01 were only 128K), and the ROM socket on the old motherboards is limited to 128K. >While I've gone and mentioned that, I might as well also explain >my feelings on EPROM copying. Personally, I feel that if a company >(such as Apple) comes out with a machine (like the GS) and then >later on upgrades it with new ROMs (as they just did), I should be >entitled to have that upgrade for free based on the following: It's pretty much a moot point in this case, but not everybody would agree that you have a "right" to a free ROM upgrade. A large amount of work went into the ROM's development, and Apple owns it. >1. I paid a rather large sum for a machine that I assumed, >at the time of purchase, to be worth the thousands of >dollars that I invested into it. If they upgrade it, then I >feel that it's an admission by the said company that their >machine wasn't the best even by their standards. Oh, *fine*...shall I recommend to my superiors that we never improve our products, because our customers will be annoyed that they can't have the new ones for free? :-) Nothing is every *the best*. It's only the best that could be done in the available time, for a certain cost, etc. >[...] >Then again, I sold my GS just last week -- apparently just in >time -- before they (Apple) announced another upgrade that cost an >arm and a leg. Apple didn't announce an upgrade. > I'm not against the GS, but I really wish that >they'd consult the general populus when they consider these things. Do you want a free upgrade every time a product changes? [ ] Yes [ ] No Okay...now, what do I do with the results of this survey? --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
UD161733@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Mike Aos) (08/18/89)
Sorry, I'm new here. I kinda caught this thing in the middle. I have a Woz Limited Edition Apple IIgs, and I'm not going to part with it for anything. What, exactly, is there to the new GS? I gather it's got 256K ROM, in two chips, so chip replacement is out. I also gather it's got more RAM on the motherboard. Big deal? Apple's not offering an upgrade path? Doesn't really surprise me if that's all that's new. I guess I'll just sit back and wait 'till something spectacular (like a SCSI port), or totally new circuitry that allows it to go 10+Mhz. THEN I'll do a motherboard swap. Of course, I'm making these descisions based on what I've read here today. If I'm misinformed, please fill me in. Osiris
delaneyg@wnre.aecl.CDN ("H. Grant Delaney") (08/18/89)
>Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA In article <237@ualtamts > I'm not against the GS, but I really wish that >they'd consult the general populus when they consider these things. <Do you want a free upgrade every time a product changes? < [ ] Yes [ ] No How about ? Do you want rom upgrade a price that reflects apples true cost? [ ] Yes [ ] No <>Okay...now, what do I do with the results of this survey? Send it to marketing they like to see a way to make a buck
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (08/18/89)
>How about ? > >Do you want rom upgrade a price that reflects apples true cost? > [ ] Yes [ ] No A price which reflects "true cost" would require predicting the net present value of future sales at that price. That value depends on how many upgrades are sold which in turn will be inversely related to the price. That's a problem which *can* be solved in theory (subject to some fairly unrealisitic assumptions), but is nearly impossible to calculate in practice. Cost (after the fact of development) isn't the issue in setting a price. The price should reflect what the product is worth. Profit is a consequence of figuring out how to produce something at a cost that turns out to be less than it's worth (Henry Ford often was an inept marketer, but he had one truly great inspiration when he recognized that if he could produce cars for less than $500 an awful lot of people would find them worth at least that much!). It follows from this precept that an upgrade is worth more to some than to others so the proper price should be higher today than in the future (a premium charged those who MUST have the product NOW compared to those with the patience to wait until the price declines). It strikes me as a tad peculiar that Apple would argue they aren't offering an upgrade because it wouldn't be economical. How much in dollars is that? Why not make up a modest number of kits and offer them for sale at whatever price is necessary to justify going to the trouble? Demand is not likely to be zero at any price lower than the price of one of the new production models. Does that new IIgs have an identity (if I go to my Apple dealer next month or whenever, how do I tell he has the new one and not one of the older ones that's been on the shelf for awhile -- without being a techie who can tell which chip(s) are ROM and how many there are)? Nowhere in that press release did I see reference to IIgs+, IIgse, or some such ;-) /s Murph <Sewall%UConnVM.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.Edu> I bought the latest computer; it came fully loaded. It was guaranteed for 90 days, but in 30 was outmoded! - The Wall Street Journal passed along by Big Red Computer's SCARLETT FAX it to me at: 1-203-486-5246
lhaider@pro-sol.cts.com (Lawrence Haider) (08/18/89)
Network Comment: to #10079 by haven!adm!smoke!gwyn@purdue.edu >This is rationalization, not reasoning. Do you really expect to be able to >take your automobile back to the dealer when a new model comes out and insist >on a free upgrade of every component that the manufacturer was able to >improve between models? Why does everyone want to compare Apples to Automobiles? It is NOT the same thing! Think about component costs and labor required to make an upgrade in a car and compare that with the component costs and labor required to upgrade a computer (or software for that matter) and you'll find that a computer doesn't ever come in spitting distance of the costs of car work. A car dealer dosn't make as much off of selling a car (percentage wise) as Apple makes off of their machines, and upgrading one has just about NO relation to the other. If you want to take Apples side, PLEASE make a better analogy! Laer
lhaider@pro-sol.cts.com (Lawrence Haider) (08/18/89)
Network Comment: to #10092 by dlyons@apple.com >Do you want a free upgrade every time a product changes? > [ ] Yes [ ] No >Okay...now, what do I do with the results of this survey? > --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems I think that's a little immature, and you don't want to know what I think you should do with that survey. I'm sure you understand the meaning behind what Dan Berry said was; and the basic message that I think you'll here from nearly every Apple user. In case you don't, it is "We are disappointed about the new upgrade!" (with a resounding"!"). Yes, count me in with the crowd!!!!! Laer Haider !!!!!!!!!!!
lhaider@pro-sol.cts.com (Lawrence Haider) (08/18/89)
Network Comment: to #10092 by dlyons@apple.com
BTW Dave, don't get me wrong. I've been quite pleased with your presence on
this net. It's Apple I'm angry with right now :)
Laer Haiderjm7e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("Jeremy G. Mereness") (08/18/89)
I thought that the ROM on the GS was expandable some way, that you could put ROM disks and other neat things in. It is IMPOSSIBLE to update to the 256K ROM? Well, is there the possibility of future incompatibility with this or are the same tools already on the System Disk? jeremy mereness ============= "A car in every pot; a chicken in every garage" jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Arpanet) r746jm7e@CMCCVB (vax.... Bitnet)
rewing@Apple.COM (Richard Ewing) (08/18/89)
For those of you who seem disappointed in this upgrade of the GS, let me remind you that Apple never promised anything like the fabled GS+ model that has been floating around the bulletin boards for over a year. How you should review the product is the way I presented to our sales staff of Southern Operations afew days ago. Now mind you that this is a group of people that would rather sell Macs over IIgs' in most cases, but by the time I got through, they were excited about the product, and especially what it means to their existing customers. Let's look at the evolution of the Mac, shall we? It started with 128K of RAM and 64K of ROM to present the user the full Macintosh desktop experience. Not a lot, eh? Hell, you can't run most programs in that kind of space, let alone system software. It has a flat filing system and ROM that was optimized for space and functionality than speed. The Mac was later upgraded to the Fat Mac (512K) that required a substancial upgrade from the first product (new motherboard). It still had the same ROMs which made it slow, but it could run programs with more functionality than before. But still the product was *not* selling. Why? Because it simply did not have the capabilities of a business computer that you really needed in a Macintosh product. Finally, the Mac Plus was introduced. it had 1 megabyte of RAM (sameas the original Lisa), and 128K of ROM that had more speed optimizations in it. Combined with the new System 3.2 and the (apparently) fast Apple HD20, the Mac Plus was finally the product that could be useful to a wide crosssection of people. It was no faster in clock speed than the original Mac 128K, but it was considered faster to use based on available RAM, reengineered ROMs, and better access to peripherals. Then they topped it of with an Appleshare server and the workgroup concept took off. We still sell the Mac Plus and the popular Mac SE isn't any faster than the Mac Plus, but it acheives its extra speed by a logic board design tweak, and further optimized 256K ROMs. How does this compare to the Apple IIgs? Well, the IIgs was introduced as a graphic based architecture with 256K of RAM, and 128K of ROM. Like the original Mac 128K, its small RAM prevented it from running some of the more powerful software packages, but unlike the Mac 128K or 512K, RAM was easily upgraded to 1.25 megs by Apple, or up to 8 megabytes by officially sanctioned third party solutions. Anybody remember the official way to upgrade a 512K or 128K Mac with 3rd party RAM? (Sorry, Apple cannot support that solution) Even the Mac Plus and the SE are only capable of expansion to 4 megs, and until recently, even the best Mac IIs could only handle up to 8 megs of RAM. This kind of foresight is a testiment to the Apple II engineers who had a little vision in designing the product. Eventually, we did begin to sell the Apple IIgs with 512K of memory, and a betterversion of the System software. This version could support a Finder, SCSI hard drives, and early networking to Appleshare file serves. Still the same ROMs like the original Mac 512K product. Finally, we introduce a machine that mimicks the Mac Plus in many ways, and goes beyond it on others. It has 1 meg of memory on board (1 mbit RAMs) and 256K of highly optimized ROMs. Combined with the new System software 5.0, the change in performance is far more dramatic than the change from the Mac 128K to the Plus. Also thrown into the package is faster suppoert for SCSi drives, CD ROM drives, true Appleshare, and IIgs favorites like color, awesome sound, and 8 meg RAM expansion, not to forget 7 slots. Why did the Mac Plus take off? Becuase we gave our users a machine that could perform the tasks that they wanted to do without being saddled by the OS. The new IIgs is in the same mold. We give the user the capabilities to do more with the product. At the same time, old IIgs users can enjoy the majority of the new features without having to junk old hardware (ask someone who had a Mac 128 about the expense of upgrading). Most of you power junkies on the net had the extra memory anyway, and many of you have hard disks. Once you sit behind the product like I have, you really see how the new software benefits all users of the machine. The need to roll it into ROM and to provide more motherboard ROM was elementary. For all of you who complain that there's no built in SCSI, or improved CPU speed, or other things, well all these things are available third party or by us as options. And have you priced a Mac SE these days? Keeping the price of a IIgs within reason is crucial, not only for you, but our education customers. \And properly configured, I can have a low cost multimedia workstation for less than half the cost of a similarly configured mac solution (or other systems for that matter, maybe save the Amiga). When I sit down to my machine, I first think "color Mac Plus". Then I notice the Transwarp GS, Video Overlay card, and 5 megs of RAM, and then I smile. And even the Mac users in the office like my machine, which is the best complement I think it can get. 'Nuff said. __________________________________________________________________________ |Disclaimer: Segmentation Fault: Core Dumped. | | | |Internet: REWING@APPLE.COM-----------------------Rick Ewing | |ApplelinkPE & MacNet Soon!------------------Apple Computer, Inc. | |Applelink: EWING--------------------100 Ashford Center North, Suite 100 | |Compu$erve: [76474,1732]--------------------Atlanta, GA 30338 | |GENIE: R.EWING1--------------------------TalkNet: (404) 393-9358 | |USENET: {amdahl,decwrl,sun,unisoft}!apple!rewing | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
sjklafke@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Scott James Klafke) (08/18/89)
In article <8908181021.AA14047@trout> lhaider@pro-sol.cts.com (Lawrence Haider) writes: >Network Comment: to #10079 by haven!adm!smoke!gwyn@purdue.edu > >>This is rationalization, not reasoning. Do you really expect to be able to >>take your automobile back to the dealer when a new model comes out and insist >>on a free upgrade of every component that the manufacturer was able to >>improve between models? > >Why does everyone want to compare Apples to Automobiles? It is NOT the same >thing! Think about component costs and labor required to make an upgrade in >a car and compare that with the component costs and labor required to upgrade >a computer (or software for that matter) and you'll find that a computer >doesn't ever come in spitting distance of the costs of car work. A car dealer >dosn't make as much off of selling a car (percentage wise) as Apple makes off >of their machines, and upgrading one has just about NO relation to the other. >If you want to take Apples side, PLEASE make a better analogy! > > Laer There is also another problem, which I feel is the big one. SOFTWARE. Now the developers will be producing for //gs'+' (whatever), and the //gs original owners will be left out in the cold. I have a //e, and I don't mind the //e - //gs differences, they are totally different computers and are alot different from each other, but the //gs'+' is not as major of a change as was the //e - //gs change. A car doesn't get new software made for it, computers do. A car runs on gasoline , which will run on any car. Computers have all different 'gasolines', granted, but changing the 'car' slightly so it cannot run on the 'gas' that is being produced is silly. -- Scott James Klafke (sjklafke@csd4.csd.uwm.edu) Scott & Company Business Phone Home Phone 372 E. Bay St. (414) 438-1790 (414) 744-9058 Milw., WI 53207-1236 -- It isn't creative, but it's MINE! --
userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) (08/19/89)
In article <10768@smoke.BRL.MIL>, gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <237@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes: >>... >>dollars that I invested into it. If they upgrade it, then I >>feel that it's an admission by the said company that their >>machine wasn't the best even by their standards. > >This is rationalization, not reasoning. Do you really expect to be >able to take your automobile back to the dealer when a new model >comes out and insist on a free upgrade of every component that >the manufacturer was able to improve between models? No, but I expect them to replace the engine if it breaks down with- in the warranty period. And if it's outside of that period then they should issue a product recall. I don't expect a brand new car when replacing the engine would do just as nicely in an old body. >What does the time it takes to perform the modling have to do with >the cost of the part? It probably costs nearly $7 just to transport >the part to you, if you figure in all the overhead. I'm dunno about what tumbuktu you live in, but nearly everyplace else in North America you can send something as light as that molded part via 3rd class at under $0.50. Consider that the plastic itself (in the quantities that they'd have to buy it) would cost well under $0.50 as well, and the labor cost (anyone can be paid $6/hr. to mold 180 parts per hour, or $0.0333 per part) as well as the packaging (dumping them into a plastic bag?). And then 100% profit on top of that. That sounds remarkably like a price around $2.50 INCLUDING PROFIT. I'd like to see how you figured out $7.00 and where your company does it's business... +-----------------------------------+ DAN BERRY ! "Violence is the last ! University of Alberta ! refuge of an incompetent." ! Computing Systems +-----------------------------------+ (Network and DataCom)
userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) (08/19/89)
In article <34083@apple.Apple.COM>, dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) writes: >A large amount >of work went into the ROM's development, and Apple owns it. I agree wholeheartedly. However, even though you can't slam the new ROMs into the GS, I wish to carry on the premise of it by saying: "If I could the new ROMs, why not charge me a *MILD* cost for it?" Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the programmers pulled an MacSE trick and snuck digitized pictures of themselves into the ROMs... >Oh, *fine*...shall I recommend to my superiors that we never >improve our products, because our customers will be annoyed >that they can't have the new ones for free? :-) >>[...] >Do you want a free upgrade every time a product changes? > [ ] Yes [ ] No > >Okay...now, what do I do with the results of this survey? 10,000 starving comedians and you're trying to be funny... :-) +-----------------------------------+ DAN BERRY ! "Violence is the last ! University of Alberta ! refuge of an incompetent." ! Computing Systems +-----------------------------------+ (Network and DataCom)
shankar@pompeii.SRC.Honeywell.COM (Subash Shankar) (08/19/89)
In article <34101@apple.Apple.COM> rewing@Apple.COM (Richard Ewing) writes: >For those of you who seem disappointed in this upgrade of the GS, let me >remind you that Apple never promised anything like the fabled GS+ model >that has been floating around the bulletin boards for over a year. [lots of reasons supporting Apple's decisions on the enhanced GS] For once, I agree with Apple on this one. I don't really see the reason for an upgrade since all the benefits of the new GS (except for the lack of slot reductions) are also available for existing GS users with add-ons. As long as Apple is sure to release new system disks every time there is a ROM upgrade and vice versa, there shouldn't be compatibility problems. Which gets to the next topic, the survey question, should upgrades be free? In my opinion, every toolbox and OS update should be free, but not hardware upgrades. Hardware upgrades should always be offerred when the lack of an upgrade would obsolete the old product due to software compatibility problems. Apple considers itself a premium computer, and it sells at premium prices, so it is reasonable to expect upgrades to prevent product obsolescence. --- Subash Shankar Honeywell Systems & Research Center voice: (612) 782 7558 US Snail: 3660 Technology Dr., Minneapolis, MN 55418 shankar@src.honeywell.com srcsip!shankar
mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) (08/19/89)
In article <327*delaneyg@wnre.aecl.cdn> delaneyg@wnre.aecl.CDN ("H. Grant Delaney") writes: > >How about ? > >Do you want rom upgrade a price that reflects apples true cost? > [ ] Yes [ ] No > Grant, we met in Kansas. You seem like an intelligent guy. For the life of me, I can't understand why you're not understanding this. Maybe it's me. I should have eaten breakfast. The IIgs we all know has one ROM socket for a 128K ROM. The new IIgs has two ROM sockets for two 128K ROMs. *YOU CAN NOT FIT THE NEW ROMS INTO AN EXISTING MOTHERBOARD.* As Jeremy has pointed out, there is a facility for adding ROM through the Memory Expansion Slot. However, Apple's memory card doesn't have a ROM socket on it, so a ROM upgrade can't be offered that way, either. Although third- party cards might have ROM sockets on them, to upgrade Apple would then have to sell their highly valued intellectual property, the Apple IIgs ROM, without a computer. The word "clone" instantly pops to my mind, and we all know how Apple's legal department feels about such things. It would be nice to run the new ROMs in the old hardware, but the hardware and legal reasons probably won't allow it to happen. If there had been an upgrade, it would have had to be a motherboard swap, and those can get pretty expensive for everyone involved (the users and Apple). I'm not making any policy statements here; I'm just stating how I see the picture based on my knowledge of the system (both technically and legally). I could be wrong. It's happened before. But this is how I see it. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to: | should not be construed to imply that AppleLink PE: Matt DTS GEnie: AIIDTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its CompuServe: 76703,3030 | subsidiaries, in whole or in part, Usenet: mattd@apple.com | have any opinion on any subject." UUCP: (other stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | "So there." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (08/19/89)
In article <8908180211.aa02226@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) writes: >[...] >Does that new IIgs have an identity (if I go to my Apple dealer next month >or whenever, how do I tell he has the new one and not one of the older ones >that's been on the shelf for awhile -- without being a techie who can >tell which chip(s) are ROM and how many there are)? [...] Sure--hook up a monitor, turn it on, and look at the bottom of the screen. A ROM 3 machine says "ROM Version 3", and a ROM 1 machine says "ROM Version 01". (That's not the only way to tell the difference, but it's the most obvious. Other things you could do include hitting Apple-Ctrl-ESC and choosing the Control Panel. The ROM 03 Control Panel has Keyboard and Mouse subsections instead of the Options subsection.) --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
brianw@microsoft.UUCP (Brian Willoughby) (08/19/89)
Well, I was going to say: what's wrong with just putting a double size
ROM on the older GSs? But since I haven't looked inside a GS lately,
I'm not sure that there IS a larger ROM designed yet (there are a few
ROMs which are so big that they operate in four pages, you write the
upper address bits into the ROM data, then read from the current page
until writing a new page selection; these ROMs probably wouldn't work on
the GS without a major rework).
So instead: what's wrong with putting the extra ROM on a peripheral card?
Or on a tiny daughter board plugged into the existing ROM socket? Of
course, one would have to provide the extra address line to the ROM, but
an awkward solution is better than buying a new GS.
On the subject of ROM copying: Apple has the right to charge for the
added work that went into ROM 03. I don't think that Henry Ford would
be giving away the 1989 ThunderBirds to original purchasers of the
Model T (yes, that is an exaggeration). Apple also has the right to say
that copying said ROM is illegal and prosecutable. But they also have
the right to give permission to copy it because they own rights to it.
My example is any new ProDOS 8 System Software, which can be copied by
dealers for owners of older ProDOS 8 disks. If Apple were to choose to
allow copying (EPROM burning) of ROM 03 code for owners of the Apple II
GS, then everything would be kosher. It's in their ballpark.
I want to check if I'm right here - older GS's can achieve the same
functionality that is in the new ROM 03, but all the patches have to
be stored in RAM (any idea how much space? around 128K? or less?). On
the new GS (what DO we call it anyway?, enhanced?) more RAM is left free
until new OS patches start appearing to override the code in ROM 03.
No, I don't own a GS, just an aging Plus. But, I am interested in a
10 MHz, 16 Mbyte, 16 bit system at some point in the future. I have a
10 MHz 65C802 in my Plus, but I have no idea how to run it at full
speed (short of redesigned the GS).
Brian Willoughby
UUCP: ...!{tikal, sun, uunet, elwood}!microsoft!brianw
InterNet: microsoft!brianw@uunet.UU.NET
or: microsoft!brianw@Sun.COM
Bitnet brianw@microsoft.UUCPdlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (08/19/89)
In article <8908181021.AA14057@trout> lhaider@pro-sol.cts.com (Lawrence Haider) writes: >[I (Dave) wrote:] > >>Do you want a free upgrade every time a product changes? >> [ ] Yes [ ] No >>Okay...now, what do I do with the results of this survey? >> --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems Lawrence writes: >I think that's a little immature, and you don't want to know what I think you >should do with that survey. I'm sure you understand the meaning behind what >Dan Berry said was; and the basic message that I think you'll here from nearly >every Apple user. In case you don't, it is "We are disappointed about the new >upgrade!" (with a resounding"!"). Yes, count me in with the crowd!!!!! (But maturity can get so Boring....whiiiiine. :-) My point was that *of course* users want free or cheap upgrade paths. But life is complicated; I wasn't involved in the decision, and I don't know all of the reasons there were for the decision that was reached. (By the way, why are you guys so sure nobody surveyed users when considering whether to provide an upgrade path? I have no idea if they did or not.) --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (08/19/89)
In article <3893@csd4.csd.uwm.edu> sjklafke@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Scott James Klafke) writes: >[...] >There is also another problem, which I feel is the big one. SOFTWARE. Now the >developers will be producing for [the ROM 03 IIgs], and the //gs original >owners will be left out in the cold. [...] Why do you think this is going to happen? Sorry to rain on your paranoia, but the machines are extremely similar from a software point of view. The biggest difference is the amount of memory available--the ROM 03 machines come with 1152K on the motherboard. If you have a ROM 01 machine with only 512K or 768K, you may have to buy more memory. I don't think software developers are going to go out of their way to make their products incompatible with the existing machines. :-) --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) (08/19/89)
In article <3893@csd4.csd.uwm.edu> sjklafke@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Scott James Klafke) writes: > >There is also another problem, which I feel is the big one. SOFTWARE. Now the >developers will be producing for //gs'+' (whatever), and the //gs original >owners will be left out in the cold. I have a //e, and I don't mind the >//e - //gs differences, they are totally different computers and are >alot different from each other, but the //gs'+' is not as major of a change >as was the //e - //gs change. >[...] >but changing the 'car' slightly so it cannot run on the 'gas' that is being >produced is silly. > >-- >Scott James Klafke (sjklafke@csd4.csd.uwm.edu) >Scott & Company Business Phone Home Phone >372 E. Bay St. (414) 438-1790 (414) 744-9058 >Milw., WI 53207-1236 -- It isn't creative, but it's MINE! -- Folks, here we have an example of possible rampant paranoia. (And Dave tells me he used the same word in his reply.) It is highly unlikely that any kind of non-utility software will require anything present in ROM 3 and not present in ROM 1. It's certainly nicer, but all the functionality (except revised firmware for slots) is pretty much present in 5.0. You should feel left behind if you can't run 5.0, not if you can't get the new ROM. It's nicer, but I *seriously* doubt it will be required for anything in the near future (for any good reason, at least). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to: | should not be construed to imply that AppleLink PE: Matt DTS GEnie: AIIDTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its CompuServe: 76703,3030 | subsidiaries, in whole or in part, Usenet: mattd@apple.com | have any opinion on any subject." UUCP: (other stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | "So there." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
bh1e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU (Brendan Gallagher Hoar) (08/19/89)
Matt said... " It is highly unlikely that any kind of non-utility software will require anything present in ROM 3 and not present in ROM 1. It's certainly nicer, but all the functionality (except revised firmware for slots) is pretty much present in 5.0. " Uh...why wasn't the new slot firmware included in 5.0? Or can the System Disk simply patch, revise, and add tools, and not do other kinds of changes? (The control panel changed in the new version...) Is there an actual HARDWARE change in the was slot usage works?
jazzman@claris.com (Sydney R. Polk) (08/19/89)
From article <3893@csd4.csd.uwm.edu>, by sjklafke@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Scott James Klafke): > There is also another problem, which I feel is the big one. SOFTWARE. Now the > developers will be producing for //gs'+' (whatever), and the //gs original > owners will be left out in the cold. I have a //e, and I don't mind the > //e - //gs differences, they are totally different computers and are > alot different from each other, but the //gs'+' is not as major of a change > as was the //e - //gs change. I really have tried to stay out of this discussion, but I couldn't resist. The way System 5/0 is written, the differences between the two machines is invisible to the application (at least a toolbox application). If it worked under system 5.0 on the old machine, it works on the new machine. The system software is about 90% identical; one has it in RAM, one has it in ROM. There are very few compatibilty issues between the two machines. As far as I can tell, all of the current owners of the GS shouldn't worry about the upgrade too much. Their current machines will continues to work with system 5.0 and existing applications. They still have the speed gains that 5.0 made. The only difference is getting that extra memory, both the chips and the stuff they put back in ROM. Think about this, however. When they come out with a new system, they will have to make RAM patches of existing tool code just like they are doing with the old ROM GS's now. So the memory gain there is gone. About the RAM on board, sure it's nice. But even with that and an existing RAM card, you can still only have a total of 8 meg of RAM on a GS, period. So an existing 8 meg card will have one meg that cannot be used at all. Think also about how expensive it would be to add an additional 1 meg to your current setup. All in all, I think that if you need the extra memory, it would be just as economical to get more RAM for your ram card as to upgrade your motherboard. I really don't think that this GS was intended as an upgrade for existing users (they still have the same functionality), I think it was designed to be an easier machine to sell to new users, esp. education. It is very difficult to sell memory to educational users, so they traditionally have missed out on the full potential of GS applications. Now that the GS has one meg on board, there are many more software packages (existing and otherwise) that they can sell to schools to supplement the GS> I'll get off of my soapbox now. -- Syd Polk | Wherever you go, there you are. jazzman@claris.com | Let the music be your light. GO 'STROS! | These opinions are mine. Any resemblence to other GO RICE! | opinions, real or fictitious, is purely coincidence.
WAXMONRW@SNYBUFVA.BITNET (08/19/89)
O.K. Here's my vote: Yes, I agree with Laer. I also feel that the new GS is poor marketing but that is Apple's problem.
delaneyg@wnre.aecl.CDN ("H. Grant Delaney") (08/19/89)
>Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA >Grant, we met in Kansas. You seem like an intelligent guy. For the life of me, >I can't understand why you're not understanding this. Maybe it's me. I should >have eaten breakfast. Thanks for the compliment The point is what is too expensive and the tools that are their are not perfect if I remember correctly. Also could more be put on the single rom or are the full 128K used? Really it would be to much to hope that perhaps one of the 2 roms in the new GS is just an upgrade of the ones we already have. >*YOU CAN NOT FIT THE NEW ROMS INTO AN EXISTING MOTHERBOARD.* I think we all can agree with this !!! >As Jeremy has pointed out, there is a facility for adding ROM through the >Memory Expansion Slot. However, Apple's memory card doesn't have a ROM socket >on it, so a ROM upgrade can't be offered that way, either. Although third- >party cards might have ROM sockets on them, to upgrade Apple would then have >to sell their highly valued intellectual property, the Apple IIgs ROM, without >a computer. The word "clone" instantly pops to my mind, and we all know how >Apple's legal department feels about such things. Now here's another chance for APPLE and third party's to get together. Let third parties sell the rom Boards with some software of their on on ROMS and let apple sell the second rom to registered owners through their Dealer network. I know Matt that's Pie in the sky thinking as it would cut into sales of the new machine from people like my self who will probably by one with in the year. I need to replace my daughter's II+ anyway. Then maybe I'll just go MAC and develop under MPW. >I could be wrong. It's happened before. But this is how I see it. And Matt I do like to hear your's and other's opinions on these topics Thanks for your's and other's personal opinions Grant
wagner@pucc.Princeton.EDU (John Wagner) (08/19/89)
In article <34114@apple.Apple.COM>, mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) writes:> > It is highly unlikely that any kind of non-utility software will require > anything present in ROM 3 and not present in ROM 1. It's certainly nicer, but > all the functionality (except revised firmware for slots) is pretty much present > in 5.0. You should feel left behind if you can't run 5.0, not if you can't > get the new ROM. It's nicer, but I *seriously* doubt it will be required for > anything in the near future (for any good reason, at least). Given that I have a ROM 1 machine, how does 5.0 recogize what routines it has to replace (i.e. the missing functionality present in 5.0)? If there is a new toolbox function I can see where that should be simple, but what about function that is simply enhanced? I think some of the heat of this argument may be masking the reason an owner should worry about enhancements like this. If the replacement function is not in ROM, then it must run in RAM. This means my older machine with 1.25 meg may not run code that a ROM3 (or later) machine with 1.25 meg can run. I may need up to 256K additional memory (assuming the absolute worst case that all ROM resident routines have to be replaced by code in the OS). Sure I can get this with 3rd party boards, but the assumption in this discussion seems to be that any program, despite the ROM differences, will continue to work. My past experience on machines that have changed architecturally less than the apple (IBM 360/370 series) is that this isn't true, no matter how much we wish it were. Developers do not restrict themselves for a period of time that seems reasonable to hardware owners. In addition, how does 5.0 recognize that the enhanced code is even needed. I'm sure that you load what you feel is needed even if the program that is being run succesfully ran with ROM 0 or 1. There is simply no way for you to know this at the OS level. But the result is lost memory in my machine on a daily use basis. Sooner or later this will turn in to additional expense to do exactly what I did before. I think Apple should seriously consider a licensing agreement with 3rd party vendors under which they would be able to resell ROM3 (or future ROMx versions). The argument that this opens Apple to any theft if falacious. If I want to steal the ROM code, I simply buy a current machine and look at it. By allowing for this option you can provide a migration path for older machines, keep current IIGS owners happy (and buying more IIGS product) and
UD161733@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Mike Aos) (08/19/89)
Granted, I'm a little inexperienced with such things, but it occurs to me that a person should be able to burn all the new ROM (both 128K chips) into 1 256K ROM. I mean, where it is physically doesn't have any bearing on it's addressing, does it? I thought when it GS was designed, there were provisions for expanding to 8 MBytes RAM, and 8 MByes ROM, all linearly. I don't even know if a 256K ROM exists, but it seems to me Sega was advertising 1 MByte ROM chips in its cartridges, as opposed to Nintendo's 256K ROM. Then again, I could be way off. I was just wondering if it was theoretically feasable. Osiris
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (08/19/89)
In article <8908181021.AA14057@trout> lhaider@pro-sol.cts.com (Lawrence Haider) writes: >... the basic message that I think you'll here from nearly every Apple user. >"We are disappointed about the new upgrade!" I'm one IIGS user who doesn't understand the complaint. It was NOT an upgrade, merely an enhancement of the basic IIGS product. Future IIGS purchasers will get a slightly nicer machine than mine. The only thing I find disappointing is that it is now conceivable that older IIGS ROMs will not be upgraded as tool bugs are fixed etc. While one can load tool patches from disk, it takes space and time.
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (08/19/89)
In article <244@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes: >No, but I expect them to replace the engine if it breaks down ... Did your IIGS break down when the newer version was announced?? >That sounds remarkably like a price around $2.50 INCLUDING PROFIT. You omitted a lot of overhead (corporate R&D, administration, etc.). It's impossible to unambiguously assign a "fair" price to one item out of context, but if a company consistently overcharges, in a free economy competitors spring up. So if you really think Apple is ripping you off, then buy a Laser or some other competitive computer.
rewing@APPLE.COM (Richard Ewing) (08/20/89)
Actually, I believe that we did get a dedicated driver for the Imagewriter LQ, both direct connect and Appletalk. At least, I have one. never used it though. The ROM upgrade will free up some RAM for those who get the new machine, but its just about negated by the RAM difference between the two machines. Your machine with an Apple memory expansion card has 1.25 megs. The new machine has only 1.125 megs. Since the difference is 128K of RAM and the ROM difference is also 128K, you can figure that it pretty much evens out. The only thing you don't have I think are sticky keys, Appletalk in either slot 1 or 2 instead of 7, and a jumper that prevents access to the text control panel (so that kids can't screw with the machine in schools). Other than that, just get System 5.0, and you should be home free. The Ethernet project is again on hold until DTS can get me Appletalk and SCSI docs for System 5.0 (Matt, are you listening?), but you may find it interesting that this came up as a desired feature in a recent meeting of system engineers at Apple. So when I get the programming docs, I'll start immediately, first with drivers for the Kinetics EtherSC, and later for Dove and Adaptec's hardware. TCP is a little out of my league right now, although with the proper docs (maybe from Kinetics), this could be done over Localtalk now. --Rick Ewing Apple Atlanta
userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) (08/20/89)
In article <10787@smoke.BRL.MIL>, gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <244@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes: >>No, but I expect them to replace the engine if it breaks down ... > >Did your IIGS break down when the newer version was announced?? > No, because I sold my computer over a week ago - just before this big press release. But as for breaking down, I should note that I have gone through 3 motherboards, one mouse, an RGB power supply, and various "fine tunings". And that was in one year. >>That sounds remarkably like a price around $2.50 INCLUDING PROFIT. > >You omitted a lot of overhead (corporate R&D, administration, etc.). >[...] >So if you think that Apple is >ripping you off, then buy a Laser or some other competitive computer. > From your comment I assume you don't even know what plastic part I'm talking about. I'm talking about the plastic reset switches on a MACINTOSH. When did Laser start making Mac clones? As for all that overhead you mentioned, there's just one tidbit of information YOU didn't include: For every Mac they make, they also make one of these parts to go with it. It's not as if it's a scarce item. In fact, when I went to a dealer to get the part, they said that they've had lots of requests for them so they kept a surplus on hand. The dealer I went to also claimed that it was the cheapest part that Apple makes. +-----------------------------------+ DAN BERRY ! "Violence is the last ! University of Alberta ! refuge of an incompetent." ! Computing Systems +-----------------------------------+ (Network and DataCom)
tsouth@pro-pac.cts.com (System Administrator) (08/20/89)
Re: > From: Doug Gwyn <haven!adm!smoke!gwyn@purdue.edu> > Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. > Subject: Re: New GS ROMs > Message-Id: <10768@smoke.BRL.MIL> > In article <237@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes: >>1. I paid a rather large sum for a machine that I assumed, >>at the time of purchase, to be worth the thousands of >>dollars that I invested into it. If they upgrade it, then I >>feel that it's an admission by the said company that their >>machine wasn't the best even by their standards. > This is rationalization, not reasoning. Do you really expect to be > able to take your automobile back to the dealer when a new model > comes out and insist on a free upgrade of every component that > the manufacturer was able to improve between models? If the company comes out with a new computer controller for the car that improves its SLUGGISH speed and operation you're damn right that I'm going to expect some kind of update available for the system! It may cost something, but if it's worth it I'll pay the money. I do not expect to by another car to improve upon one part! >>Any company that charges $7 (CDN) for a piece of injection molded >>plastic reset switches that takes 20 seconds to form deserves what >>they get. > What does the time it takes to perform the modling have to do with > the cost of the part? It probably costs nearly $7 just to transport > the part to you, if you figure in all the overhead. Really, Doug, I wish you'd reconsider this. I know for a fact that it cost a company I'm affiliated with a total of $30 for a box of 1,000 IBM replacement keys (wholesale). I can't believe markup for anything has this kind of point spotting. Todd South -- UUCP: {nosc, uunet!cacilj, sdcsvax, hplabs!hp-sdd, sun.COM} ...!crash!pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-pac!tsouth ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-pac!tsouth@nosc.MIL INET: tsouth@pro-pac.CTS.COM - BITNET: pro-pac.UUCP!tsouth@PSUVAX1
tsouth@pro-pac.cts.com (System Administrator) (08/20/89)
Re: > From: David Lyons <dlyons@apple.com> > Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA > Subject: Re: New GS ROMs > Message-Id: <34083@apple.Apple.COM> > Do you want a free upgrade every time a product changes? > [ ] Yes [ ] No No, I do not want a free upgrade. But any upgrade at all without having to purchase another whole computer would be appreciated. > Okay...now, what do I do with the results of this survey? Who the hell knows anymore, Dave. > --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems Todd South -- UUCP: {nosc, uunet!cacilj, sdcsvax, hplabs!hp-sdd, sun.COM} ...!crash!pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-pac!tsouth ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-pac!tsouth@nosc.MIL INET: tsouth@pro-pac.CTS.COM - BITNET: pro-pac.UUCP!tsouth@PSUVAX1
benatar@bucc2.UUCP (08/20/89)
>For those of you who seem disappointed in this upgrade of the GS, let me >remind you that Apple never promised anything like the fabled GS+ model >that has been floating around the bulletin boards for over a year. Maybe Apple never promised a GS+, but with the //c+ announced a while back that runs at 4Mhz I think we can expect at least a FASTER GS with a clock speed of AT LEAST the same speed as the //c+. Also, with faster machines out like Atari ST's and Amiga's, I believe that the GS should have come with an initial clock speed of about 8Mhz or faster. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ken Kohler UUCP: {cepu,att,uiucdcs,noao}!bradley!bucc2!benatar Bradley University ARPA: cepu!bradley!bucc2!benatar@seas.ucla.edu University Hall room 218 ATTMAIL: attmail!bradley!bucc2!benatar 1307 West Bradley Ave. PHONE: (309) 677-1664 Peoria, IL 61606 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
lbotez@pro-sol.cts.com (Lynda Botez) (08/21/89)
I also have a Woz Limited Edition Apple IIgs. Big deal.
If you swap out the motherboard, you get to keep the case. No one will ever
know... :-)
I think what most of us are saying here is that Apple came out with a new
motherboard, with some interesting improvements. Most of the current GS users
are made up of old Apple II supporters (you know, that fantatically dedicated
group of people that "made" Apple Computer what it is today). No matter what
improvements have been made, nor how significant, these hardcore Apple users
don't like being told that they can't have a motherboard swap. Believe it or
not, there are a few of us who would be willing to shell out the $399 (or
whatever) to swap out the board for the extra RAM and built-in ROM. It's just
that we don't like being told we have no choice.
So new Apple GS users get the new technology; us old guys get stuck.
>From rumors I've heard there is NO GS+... at least for another year...
Lyndawombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey) (08/21/89)
In article <34101@apple.Apple.COM> rewing@Apple.COM (Richard Ewing) writes:
[all kinds of stuff comparing the GS and the Mac and their histories]
The GS is all fine and dandy, but when are we gonna get a decent vertical
resolution for the screen? :-)
Scott Lindsey |"Cold and misty morning. I heard a warning borne in the air
Claris Corp. | About an age of power when no one had an hour to spare"
ames!claris!wombat| DISCLAIMER: These are not the opinions of Claris, Apple,
wombat@claris.com | StyleWare, the author, or anyone else living or Dead.wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey) (08/21/89)
In article <246@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes:
Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the programmers pulled an MacSE
trick and snuck digitized pictures of themselves into the ROMs...
I would. I talked with some of those programmers during the development
phase and they had problems squeezing everything that needed to go into 256K.
Scott Lindsey |"Cold and misty morning. I heard a warning borne in the air
Claris Corp. | About an age of power when no one had an hour to spare"
ames!claris!wombat| DISCLAIMER: These are not the opinions of Claris, Apple,
wombat@claris.com | StyleWare, the author, or anyone else living or Dead.fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Andy McFadden) (08/21/89)
Okay, time for a show of hands (or maybe an Official dlyons survey): How many of you *actually* believed that Apple would release an improved Apple II? In article <WOMBAT.89Aug20152913@claris.com> wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey) writes: >The GS is all fine and dandy, but when are we gonna get a decent vertical >resolution for the screen? :-) When it becomes very cold in an otherwise very warm place. Or somebody with intelligence is added to the marketing department at Macintosh, Inc. >Scott Lindsey |"Cold and misty morning. I heard a warning borne in the air -- fadden@cory.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) ...!ucbvax!cory!fadden My opinions are not my own; the arise from several years of bitter neglect. Apple Computer, Inc. R.I.P. 1976-1984.
mmunz@pro-beagle.cts.com (Mark Munz) (08/22/89)
Network Comment: to #9529 by dlyons@apple.com
> FREE Upgrade
While I agree that there need not be a free upgrade to the new GS ROMS,
it is too bad (from a policy point of view) that Apple has not offered
an upgrade period.
Myself, I don't think the new GS is too much to worry about. All it got
was a few extra bytes of memory, some more ROM (which already has to
be patched :-), and a couple other minor features.
Oh well, new owners should be a "little" bit happier..
--Mark Munzbh1e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU (Brendan Gallagher Hoar) (08/22/89)
" From: Scott Lindsey <claris!wombat@apple.com> Subject: Re: New GS ROMs I would. I talked with some of those programmers during the development phase and they had problems squeezing everything that needed to go into 256K. " Ho hum...just remembering when the old apple ][+ (even the //e) had only 16k of ROM... Another useless message from me... :) Brendan
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (08/22/89)
In article <10786@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes: >[...] >The only thing I find disappointing is that it is now conceivable that >older IIGS ROMs will not be upgraded as tool bugs are fixed etc. While >one can load tool patches from disk, it takes space and time. Not likely (in my opinion). We don't support ROM 0 any more, but the upgrade to ROM 1 was free. In the absence of a free (or even cheap) way to upgrade past ROM 1, I don't expect to see ROM 1 left in the dust. --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (08/22/89)
>In article <34114@apple.Apple.COM>, mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) writes:> >> It is highly unlikely that any kind of non-utility software will require >> anything present in ROM 3 and not present in ROM 1. It's certainly nicer, >I think some of the heat of this argument may be masking the reason an owner > should worry about enhancements like this. If the replacement function is not > in ROM, then it must run in RAM. This means my older machine with 1.25 meg >may > not run code that a ROM3 (or later) machine with 1.25 meg can run. I may need UNLESS (to improve performance) applications routinely copy the Rev 3 ROM into the RAM space it would occupy in a Rev 1 machine. That (if I grasp the concept I only read about last week) is the "shadow RAM" technique some PC clone vendors are using to improve performance. In the MS-DOS World RAM is faster memory than ROM; is that true of the IIgs? If the "shadow RAM" technique makes sense in a IIgs, would an application be able to tell the difference between a Rev 1 and Rev 3 machine? I gather our friends at DTS are making that argument (perhaps for different reasons, I get lost in the technospeak). I'm waiting for Mac SPSS-X (apparently, SPSS will give the program the SAME name as the mainframe version to indicate it does all the mainframe code will do -- due October or November) and the 25 MHz Mac IIci (scheduled for announcement along with the LapMac on 21 September <-- who says Apple doesn't "preannounce" products??? ;-) Along with similar *amazing* revelations in the next Vaporware column (coming soon), you may note that last MAY's column described the Rev 3 IIgs right on the button (I don't create the rumors, I only "borrow" them :-) Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM] The opposite of artificial intelligence is genuine stupidity! -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (08/22/89)
Long message Rick, it took nearly a week to wend its way through all the system glitches and accompanying mail backlogs. >remind you that Apple never promised anything like the fabled GS+ model Seems to me both John Sculley and Jean Louis Gassey have been promising SOMETHING a tad more substantial than more RAM and more efficient ROM (perhaps at AppleFest? Surely Apple has *something* to showoff at Applefest?) >Let's look at the evolution of the Mac, shall we? It started with 128K OK, the gist of all that is Rev 3 is the IIgs equivalent of the FatMac? Gee, maybe the IIgs+ isn't going to be good enough; perhaps if I wait for the IIgs-SE or the <*gasp*> IIgsII <-- doncha love it? >Why did the Mac Plus take off? Because we gave our users a machine that >could perform the tasks that they wanted to do without being saddled >by the OS... And the IIgs+ <--NOTE PLUS! will take off for the same reason. I think I buy your whole pitch. The IIgs Rev 3 is about as exciting as the Mac 512E compared to the 128K version (nicer but not nice enough), and the NeXT (couldn't resist :-) model will be the "breakthrough" one (if you guys don't let Video Technologies beat you to it -- Laser-gs coming this Winter to a toy store near you :-O Really, I appreciate the problem (not enough fast 65816 chips available to support the volume needed to meet the demand a IIgs+ would generate). So, what you holding back for AppleFest -- the MacBoard for the IIgs? /s Murph <Sewall%UConnVM.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.Edu> I bought the latest computer; it came fully loaded. It was guaranteed for 90 days, but in 30 was outmoded! - The Wall Street Journal passed along by Big Red Computer's SCARLETT
UD161733@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Mike Aos) (08/22/89)
I've got 1792K RAM, System Disk 5.0, and more software than I can ever use. I'm content. I don't see what the big deal is all about. It seems to me you are all being a bunch of crybabies! Osiris BTW-Sure, it would be nice to get something for nothing, but that's not the way it works!
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (08/23/89)
In article <3561@wpi.wpi.edu> dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) writes: >[...] Some feature of the [1 Meg] GS (like >Sticky Shift and mouse stuff) are implemented in an expanded ADB controller >ROM. I think that is a separate chip...never heard of it before. Yes, the Keyboard Microcontroller is a separate chip. The GS has always had one of those (not socketed), and the new one has support for sticky keys and keyboard mouse. --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
john@l5comp.wa.com (John Turner) (08/23/89)
Someone wanted to know if a 256 kbyte ROM chip were possible. In a word, yes. In fact, that isn't even the limit these days. The Intel 28C040-12 is a four megabit, 256k x 16 UV-EPROM, currently available for $100 in lots of a thousand. Perfect for GS ROM applications, due to its 16 bit wide data bus and generous memory capacity, the 28C040 nonetheless occupies little over a square inch of board space in a 44-lead PLCC package. Heck, one of those for a system ROM and you almost don't need a boot disk :-). John Turner, john@l5comp.wa.com, way up in Edmonds WA
prl3546@tahoma.UUCP (Philip R. Lindberg) (08/23/89)
From article <34083@apple.Apple.COM>, by dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons): > In article <237@ualtamts.BITNET> userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) writes: > > Does doubling the number of chips count as a drastic change? :-) Sounds good! to me! > It's pretty much a moot point in this case, but not everybody would > agree that you have a "right" to a free ROM upgrade. A large amount > of work went into the ROM's development, and Apple owns it. Okay Dave, I for one, don't feel the efforts you and your co-developers aren't worth paying for. I would be happy to pay for an upgrade. 8-) Getting a increase in memory and a new mother-board would be worth some thing. The question here is: Why isn't one offered? >>1. I paid a rather large sum for a machine that I assumed, > > Oh, *fine*...shall I recommend to my superiors that we never > improve our products, because our customers will be annoyed > that they can't have the new ones for free? :-) (see last answer.) This net has been moaning for some time about a perceived lack of support, improvements, etc. for the Apple II line. Now that it's here, do we shoot the messenger since it isn't free? >>Then again, I sold my GS just last week -- apparently just in >>time [...] I haven't sold mine, and I'm not going to either!! (Just pointing out, Dave, for every one "bailing out", there's thousands who aren't.) > >> I'm not against the GS, but I really wish that >>they'd consult the general populus when they consider these things. > > Do you want a free upgrade every time a product changes? > [ ] Yes [ ] No If it was wrong, unusable, etc. when it came out, yes. If it's being improved, generally no. > Okay...now, what do I do with the results of this survey? Come on Dave, don't let a few folks get you bitter. You, Matt, and a few others, are the only ones actively listening at Apple. I would sure hate to loose that over some thoughtless comments. (Note: I said "actively" listening.) > --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. > My opinions are my own, not Apple's. <<-- keep giving your opinions!! +---------------------------------------------------------+ | The Apple //'s will live forever!! | | Phil Lindberg snail mail: 13845 S.E. 131 ST | | INET: prl3546@tahoma.UUCP Renton, WA 98056 | | UUCP: ..!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!shuksan!tahoma!prl3546 | | Disclaimer: I don't speak for my employer (and I not | | sure they even know I exist....) | +---------------------------------------------------------+
prl3546@tahoma.UUCP (Philip R. Lindberg) (08/23/89)
From article <34101@apple.Apple.COM>, by rewing@Apple.COM (Richard Ewing): > For those of you who seem disappointed in this upgrade of the GS, let me > remind you [...] > [...], but by > the time I got through, they were excited about the product, and > especially what it means to their existing customers. > > [...], I can have a low cost multimedia workstation > for less than half the cost of a similarly configured mac solution > (or other systems for that matter, maybe save the Amiga). When I sit > down to my machine, I first think "color Mac Plus". Then I notice the > Transwarp GS, Video Overlay card, and 5 megs of RAM, and then I smile. > And even the Mac users in the office like my machine, which is the best > complement I think it can get. 'Nuff said. > > Rick Ewing !!!!!! / \ / O O \ ( "" ) \ \ / / \ ~~ / ------ Thanks Rick. You put it all back in prospective. Thanks. B-) Phil +---------------------------------------------------------+ | The Apple //'s will live forever!! | | Phil Lindberg snail mail: 13845 S.E. 131 ST | | INET: prl3546@tahoma.UUCP Renton, WA 98056 | | UUCP: ..!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!shuksan!tahoma!prl3546 | | Disclaimer: I don't speak for my employer (and I not | | sure they even know I exist....) | +---------------------------------------------------------+
bsherman@ibiza.cs.miami.edu (Bob Sherman) (08/23/89)
You complain that the GS should be at least twice the speed of the //c+. OK, lets see now. Let's see how we can make YOU a rich person overnight. You locate a supply of 816 chips that can deliver the faster speed you want in the GS, a reliable and ample supply of these chips, and I will put you in touch with someone at Apple that may just be willing to put lots of $$$$$ in your pocket for info on the supply. If AE is having problems getting a supply of 7 mhz chips, where oh where do you expect Apple to get a much larger supply of even faster (you mention 8 mhz) chips?? How pray tell to you expect a faster GS cpu from Apple, when there does not seem to be an available supply of chips??? Perhaps before you point a finger at Apple, you should check out the overall picture and be sure it is really their fault. You folks screamed for a new GS, Apple delivered on it's promise of an updated machine within the limits of what they had to work with. And if you really, really want an upgrade, I'm almost sure your friendly Apple service center will be glad to order you a new motherboard on a non exchange basis that you can snap into your existing case. If yoou want the upgrade badly, then you should not object to the price of doing it. I meaan, you didn't expect it for free did you???? bsherman@ibiza.cs.miami.edu or bsherman@mthvax.cs.miami.edu bsherman@pro-exchange MCI Mail: BSHERMAN
steven@.ucalgary.ca (Steven Leikeim) (08/24/89)
In article <kYw5QJG00XoIE0f2JW@andrew.cmu.edu> bh1e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU (Brendan Gallagher Hoar) writes: > >Ho hum...just remembering when the old apple ][+ (even the //e) had only 16k >of ROM... > Does anyone remember apple ]['s (no + here :-) ) with 4k of RAM. If you had 16k of RAM you had a really hot machine. Nowadays, if you don't have at least 1.25 Meg in your machine many programs won't work. >Another useless message from me... :) >Brendan More reminiscing about the good (?!?) old days. Steven Leikeim | University of Calgary | There are lies, damned lies, Department of Electrical Engineering | and statistics. .uunet!{ubc-cs,utai,alberta}!calgary!enel!steven
shankar@haarlem.SRC.Honeywell.COM (Subash Shankar) (08/25/89)
In article <1989Aug22.195350.17082@l5comp.wa.com> john@l5comp.UUCP (John Turner) writes:
#Someone wanted to know if a 256 kbyte ROM chip were possible. In a word, yes.
#
#In fact, that isn't even the limit these days.
#
#The Intel 28C040-12 is a four megabit, 256k x 16 UV-EPROM, currently available
#for $100 in lots of a thousand. Perfect for GS ROM applications, due to its
#16 bit wide data bus and generous memory capacity
The GS, like many other "16-bit" computers, has a 8-bit data bus.
And many "32-bit" computers have 16-bit data busses.
---
Subash Shankar Honeywell Systems & Research Center
voice: (612) 782 7558 US Snail: 3660 Technology Dr., Minneapolis, MN 55418
shankar@src.honeywell.com srcsip!shankarUD161733@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Mike Aos) (08/25/89)
Is the new ADB keyboard controller chip on the keyboard, or inside the computer ? If it's on the keyboard, is it on Mac SE keyboards also? I've always thought it would be nice to have one of those keyboards instead. Osiris BTW-They DO work on the GS, don't they?
buzz@tippy.uucp (08/25/89)
/* Written 10:51 pm Aug 21, 1989 by SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET in tippy:apple */
I think I buy your whole pitch. The IIgs Rev 3 is about as exciting as
the Mac 512E compared to the 128K version (nicer but not nice enough), and
the NeXT (couldn't resist :-) model will be the "breakthrough" one (if
you guys don't let Video Technologies beat you to it -- Laser-gs coming
this Winter to a toy store near you :-O
/* End of text from tippy:apple */
Ah, the once-much-rumored LaserGS. Hadn't heard much about it recently.
Hey, picture this, Apple continues to "delay" the GS+ (this assumes the thi
thing exists in the first place) and Laser beats Apple to the punch by
releasing their machine with most of the features everyone's been
clamoring for...including their own version of an exceedingly-ultra-high
res graphics mode, eventually causing developers to try to support TWO
ultra-hi-res modes...
(Assuming of course that Apple ever releases one.)
What a mess. Oh well, could be worse. Could be in the wonderous world
of MeSs-DOS, eg. This product supports Hercules Graphics, CGA, Tandy
16-Color, EGA, VGA, and OGA <==(stands for: Oh God, Another one!).
Oops! Forgot Monochrome...
DISFLAMER: Though not written tongue-in-cheek, my tongue WAS in close
proximity.
MORE than enough for now,
Buzzpaul@pro-europa.cts.com (Paul Hutmacher) (08/25/89)
Comment to message from: SEWALL%UCONNVM.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Murph Sewall) > OK, the gist of all that is Rev 3 is the IIgs equivalent of > the FatMac? Gee, maybe the IIgs+ isn't going to be good enough; perhaps > if I wait for the IIgs-SE or the <*gasp*> IIgsII <-- doncha love it? Ha! I'm holding out for the IIgsIIcx Murph! _______________________________________________________________________________ |UUCP: [ucsd, nosc] ..!crash!pro-europa!paul | Texas SysOps Unite! | |INET: paul@pro-europa.cts.com | Join COSUARD! Let's Fight! | |ARPA: crash!pro-europa!paul@nosc.mil | See you on the 16th Kirk! | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lbotez@pro-sol.cts.com (Lynda Botez) (08/25/89)
I was extremely surprised to learn that Apple released the "new and improved"
GS before Applefest (hummm...). I would have thought they would have brought
it out for the "Fest". Perhaps they figured all the old Apple users would
have revolted or picketed the place (as most of us were expecting something a
little more exciting and at least "upgradeable"...).
>So, what are you holding back for AppleFest -- the MacBoard for the IIgs?
Hahaha! I doubt we'll ever see that. More than likely, we'll see a
IIgs board for a Mac! I've been told that it would be an extraordinary feat
of engineering to squeeze the entire Macintosh computer components on one card
in a rather cramped CPU as small as an Apple IIgs, so I've given up on that
one.
I was rather hoping that we might see Hypercard GS show up at the Fest... but
it doesn't look good for anything right now. As a matter of fact, two of the
keynote speakers are "to be announced" (with any luck... just before their
keynote speeches). It seems like Apple isn't too interested in Applefest
anymore.
To top it off, there will be some kind of major Macintosh announcement on
September 20th (rumored to be the new Mac Laptop computer)... so I suspect
we'll be seeing a few of them at the 'Fest as well.
Oh well, maybe next year we'll see something interesting for the Apple II
line. A lot of people have given up on the GS, have (or are in the process)
of dumping them for other computers. As far as I can see, the "new" II; the
Macgs computer, will be an entirely new machine, and will most likely require
the purchase of entirely new hardware. There will be such major changes that
nothing we have now as far as hardware will be compatible, and as far as I can
imagine, will be a major expense for all of us. So, I'm really not that
anxious for the new machine to show up...
Hopefully it will be cheaper than a Mac II! -:)
Lyndachines@pro-europa.cts.com (Clifford Hines) (08/25/89)
Comment to message from: dlyons@apple.com (David Lyons) I am quite new to this forum for Apple II and I have a question. Do your bosses at Apple read this newsgroup? I allways wondered about that. Thanks Cliff UUCP: crash!pro-europa!chines ARPA: crash!pro-europa!chines@nosc.mil INET: chines@pro-europa.cts.com
fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Andy McFadden) (08/27/89)
In article <8908250820.AA01009@trout.nosc.mil> lbotez@pro-sol.cts.com (Lynda Botez) writes: [somebody else writes:] >>So, what are you holding back for AppleFest -- the MacBoard for the IIgs? [snip] > I've been told that it would be an extraordinary feat >of engineering to squeeze the entire Macintosh computer components on one card >in a rather cramped CPU as small as an Apple IIgs, so I've given up on that >one. [snipity snip] >To top it off, there will be some kind of major Macintosh announcement on >September 20th (rumored to be the new Mac Laptop computer)... so I suspect >we'll be seeing a few of them at the 'Fest as well. So they can fit the entire thing into a laptop computer, but not into a //gs. Hmm... As I recall, the Mac 128 fit on a single logic board that would probably fit inside the //gs. At worst, you could put it in a box under the monitor and just run a flat cable inside to a card or two... [comments about new computers (the "MacGS")] >Hopefully it will be cheaper than a Mac II! -:) Volkswagens are cheaper than a Mac II... >Lynda -- fadden@cory.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) ...!ucbvax!cory!fadden
lexter@pro-abilink.UUCP (Sam Robertson) (08/28/89)
Network Comment: to #6866 by obsolete!ubc-cs!alberta!uqv-mts!Dan_Berry%beaver.cs.washington.edu
YOu were mentioning your problems with 3 motherboards an RGB power supply and
various other things. Well, I have had little to no problems with mine. I
blew up one motherboard (lava lamp exploaded on it!) Had some problems with my
3.5 ejecting disks and the number 9 key on the GS keyboard is broken. Now
comparing my machine to a friends Clone I am having no problems. He's had 2
HD's crash. Many problems with disk drives and one motherboard burn up!!!
He's also had to replace the entire keyboard once! Nasty!!!!
I think the new GS is a great idea. It is still basically the same machine
and has a few more additions that were desperately needed like more memory.
Since my Woz edition has a memory expansion board and is just about as fast as
the new one, I have no need for the new one, except the possibility of having
another GS that will only be upgradeable if you have the new motherboard? :)
Sam
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applelink: Lexter || Sam Robertson Pro-Abilink 300/1200/2400
GENIE: SL.Robertson || 1357 Santos Sysop (Saw)
Proline: Lexter@Pro-Abilink || Abilene Texas 79605 (915)673-6856
INET: Lexter@Pro-Abilink.cts.com || UUCP: Crash!pnet01!pro-abilink!lexter
ARPA: Crash!pnet01!pro-abilink!lexter@nosc.mil
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Tuesday Morning, please go away, I'm tired of you.
What have I got to lose. " -- CSN&YSEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (08/28/89)
>>>So, what are you holding back for AppleFest -- the MacBoard for the IIgs? >> I've been told that it would be an extraordinary feat >>of engineering to squeeze the entire Macintosh computer components on one card >>in a rather cramped CPU as small as an Apple IIgs, so I've given up on that >>one. > >So they can fit the entire thing into a laptop computer, but not into a //gs. >Hmm... NOTE! The LapMac will require a LARGE lap :-) The thing is 17 pounds, and if the "artist's rendition" in MacWeek is even remotely accurate, it's bigger than your briefcase (but not as deep as a breadbox :-) A Macboard wouldn't require keyboard or monitor and with a memory cache, wait states, and other such chicanery probably could use IIgs memory. Maybe an SE compatible board is beyond today's technology; if so, that would explain why the rumors say Mac+ (remember we're talking K-12 Mac for "under $1000" here ;-) Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM] The opposite of artificial intelligence is genuine stupidity! -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (08/28/89)
In article <8908242109.aa00922@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> UD161733@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Mike Aos) writes: >Is the new ADB keyboard controller chip on the keyboard, or inside the computer The ADB controller is inside the IIGS box. It's what controls the bus that appears externally via the funny round connector. >? If it's on the keyboard, is it on Mac SE keyboards also? I've always >thought it would be nice to have one of those keyboards instead. I'm pretty sure Mac ADB keyboards work on the IIGS, although there won't be any support for keys beyond what the IIGS normally comes with. I think the IIGS keyboard is one of the few decent keyboard designs I've seen in recent years. I really hate those keyboards that take up most of the desktop.
userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET (Dan Berry) (08/28/89)
In article <8908242109.aa00922@SMOKE.BRL.MIL>, UD161733@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Mike Aos) writes: >Is the new ADB keyboard controller chip on the keyboard, or inside the computer >? If it's on the keyboard, is it on Mac SE keyboards also? I've always >thought it would be nice to have one of those keyboards instead. > >Osiris > >BTW-They DO work on the GS, don't they? Yes, the Extended keyboards work just as fine on the GS as the regular ones. In fact, if you happen to know the right soft-toggle registers to examine (I'm not sure whether on not DiversiKeys supports this), you can make use of the function (F1-F12, page down, etc.) keys as well. I took the keyboard from an SE and tinkered with it a bit, thought it was interesting, but reverted back to my standard GS keyboard anyhow. Unless you have the deskspace, the extended keyboard is HUGE by comparison. +---------------------------------+ Dan Berry (userDBUG@ualtamts.BITNET) | "A truly wise man never plays | | leapfrog with a unicorn." | University of Alberta Computing Systems +---------------------------------+ (Network and Datacomm)
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (08/29/89)
In article <10843@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes: >[...] >I'm pretty sure Mac ADB keyboards work on the IIGS, although there won't >be any support for keys beyond what the IIGS normally comes with. Yes, all the ADB keyboards Apple sells work with the GS (3rd-party ADB keyboards generally work with the GS too, but I recall vaguely there is an exception...so try before you buy). The extra keys on the Apple Extended Keyboard show up as lowercase letters on the "keypad", as far as Apple IIgs software is concerned. Most software doesn't do anything special with those keys, but Macro programs may be able to remap them into useful things for you. Does anybody know of macro utilities with support for the extra keys on an Apple Extended Keyboard? --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (08/29/89)
In article <8908281811.AA18639@trout.nosc.mil> chines@pro-europa.cts.com (Clifford Hines) writes: >Comment to message from: dlyons@apple.com (David Lyons) > >I am quite new to this forum for Apple II and I have a question. >Do your bosses at Apple read this newsgroup? >I allways wondered about that. >Thanks >Cliff Hmmm...big question! "Bosses" covers a lot of people, and I'm sure at least a few of them read this newsgroup, or at least the "highlights" (from an engineering point of view), which get circulated on paper periodically. --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
dcw@athena.mit.edu (David C. Whitney) (09/01/89)
In article <10843@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <8908242109.aa00922@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> UD161733@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Mike Aos) writes: >>? If it's on the keyboard, is it on Mac SE keyboards also? I've always >>thought it would be nice to have one of those keyboards instead. > >I'm pretty sure Mac ADB keyboards work on the IIGS, although there won't >be any support for keys beyond what the IIGS normally comes with. Mac keyboards work on the GS. I've tried the Apple Extended Keyboard on my GS and it works fine. All the keys return specific codes for those programs that watch for them. For example, Z-Link can be programmed to do something if the F7 key is pressed. Presumably, there are other programs that allow this. Any program that ignores codes that could only be generated by the Extended Keyboard (or other keyboards) is doing itself a disservice. For those who are curious: pressing function keys or whatnot returns the keycode with the keypad bit set. Thus F1 is for example (but not really, since I don't know the code) Keypad-a. Dave Whitney A junior (well, a senior) in Computer Science at MIT dcw@athena.mit.edu ...!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!dcw dcw@goldilocks.mit.edu I wrote Z-Link & BinSCII. Send me bug reports. I use a //GS. Send me Tech Info. "This is MIT. Collect and 3rd party calls will not be accepted at this number."
wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey) (09/04/89)
In article <34386@apple.Apple.COM> dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) writes: In article <10843@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes: >[...] >I'm pretty sure Mac ADB keyboards work on the IIGS, although there won't >be any support for keys beyond what the IIGS normally comes with. Yes, all the ADB keyboards Apple sells work with the GS (3rd-party ADB keyboards generally work with the GS too, but I recall vaguely there is an exception...so try before you buy). I know at one point I saw an ADB keyboard without a reset switch (the Mac-SE doesn't have any need for it, unless you're doing stuff with TMON or other non-mainstream software). I think that particular company fixed it by adding a cheesy pushbutton on the back of the keyboard (StyleWare had beta hardware for review purposes), but I wouldn't be surprised if there were other incompatible keyboards. Scott Lindsey |"Cold and misty morning. I heard a warning borne in the air Claris Corp. | About an age of power when no one had an hour to spare" ames!claris!wombat| DISCLAIMER: These are not the opinions of Claris, Apple, wombat@claris.com | StyleWare, the author, or anyone else living or Dead.