kirk@pro-realm.cts.com (Kirk Kamberg) (08/20/89)
I am also saddened by the fact that the new ROMs can not be put into existing
GS's. I think this shows Apple's design inadequacy from day one. Build your
machine on the notion that it *will* be upgraded at some point. Maybe it
wasn't built that way because at the time, Apple didn't know how it was going
to handle its future. Please note that I am *not* knocking System Software
5.0. I think this is a very good product, and may finally make my GS useful.
But, I think that announcing a new computer with a ROM chip change and more
memory is pretty stupid. My list of what a new GS should incorporate is listed
below. Note: All of the things listed, are *presently available* for computers
*other* than the IIgs.
o Multitasking enviroment
o Higher resolution
o Faster clock speed
o Inter-Machine transfer of data
I could probably go on, but why introduce a machine that is lacking in all of
these? How is it going to sell without it? The GS costs too much for what you
are getting. Just look at the Amiga...Or even an IBM. Or the Macintosh. -We
won't argue price about the Macintosh :-) . For example, Commodore just
anounced a new graphics chip for the Amiga. It supports some higher resolution
modes. But they *designed* the computer so that they could upgrade all of
them..(except the 1000, but a 3rd party developer is fixing that) This lack of
foresight worrys me. Every day I debate...Should I sell it..NO, Apple is going
to make it work. Well, now that the new software is out, we'll see. I'm not
holding my breath. If I was, I would be dead by now. I guess that's why I now
have an Amiga along with my IIe and IIgs. That way I have something that is
being wholeheartedly supported by its company. I don't have that gnawing
feeling that at the change of the wind, I'll be dropped by the wayside. Down
off the soapbox...
+============================================================================+
ProLine: kirk@pro-realm BITNET: kirk%pro-realm.cts.com@nosc.mil
UUCP: crash!pnet01!pro-realm!kirk ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-realm!kirk@nosc.mil
+======================> Pro-Realm BBS (914) 691-3863 <======================+rich@pro-exchange.cts.com (Rich Sims) (08/21/89)
Comment to message from: kirk@pro-realm.cts.com (Kirk Kamberg) I'm a bit confused about the logic behind your message. You state that you have a IIGS and you list several capabilities that the machine "should" have, or which you consider essential. You then mention some other computers which have those capabilities, including the Macintosh. Since there happen to be both a Macintosh and a IIGS in this room, I just checked the identification labels on both machines. It appears that both models were marketed by a company named "Apple Computer", from which I conclude that Apple, like many other companies, has more than one model in it's product line. Now, what confuses me is this... if Apple Computer markets a model with the features you want, but you chose to purchase a different Apple model which does not have those features, how does *your* purchasing decision become a "design inadequacy" on the part of Apple Computer? Then, to add insult to injury, you mention that you also own an Amiga that has the capabilities you want, but CBM (Commodore) is a highly supportive company and is not guilty of "design inadequacy", even though they, like Apple, also market a model that does not include those features. Somehow, I can't escape the nagging feeling that the "inadequacy" may be at the "consumption" end of the product chain, rather than the "production" end. Rich Sims UUCP: crash!pro-exchange!rich ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!rich@nosc.mil INET: rich@pro-exchange.cts.com
nuwilken@ndsuvax.UUCP (Scott Wilken) (08/22/89)
In article <8908201400.AA26864@trout.nosc.mil> kirk@pro-realm.cts.com (Kirk Kamberg) writes: >I am also saddened by the fact that the new ROMs can not be put into existing >GS's. I think this shows Apple's design inadequacy from day one. Build your > > o Multitasking enviroment > o Higher resolution > o Faster clock speed > o Inter-Machine transfer of data Just because a new rom wont fit directly in your GS doesnt mean it is a design inadequacy. The roms are designed to fit on a completely new board. as for multitasking: Thats is *NOT* a hardware limitation. Multitasking depends on the operating system (Example: UNIX). If you really want to see multitasking, then write a new OS, heck ill buy it.... Higher Resoltion: at the time the gs was released (around 3 yrs ago), the graphics it has were pretty darn impressive, VGA was more or less still a concept. Faster clock speed: Im not to sure on my facts on this one, but my guess is that 2.8 mhz was the fastest *READILY* available 65816 at the time. Im not to sure what you mean buy Inter-Machine transfer of data, but if you mean a utility to convert stuff from other computers to yours (EX Macintosh), look on GEnie, there are lots of them. Roger Wagner also makes a nice one (or so Jerry Kindall tells me). If you mean Null Modem transfers, *ANY* computer can do that. If you mean networking, look at your appletalk port. The bottom line is that you are comparing the gs to machines that are much newer and advanced. The Amiga 2500 is only a year old, PS/2's with micro- channeling are much newer, Mac IIcx's are much newer. If you want leading edge of technology, buy a NeXT. (Heck, even those are just rehashing old ideas in new ways.....) Scott +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ! Internet: nuwilken@Plains.NoDak.EDU AppleLink PE: Wilken ! ! UUCP: uunet!ndsuvax!nuwilken GEnie Mail: S.WILKEN1 ! ! Bitnet: NUWILKEN@NDSUVAX CompuServe: 75130,1571 ! +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
kirk@pro-realm.cts.com (Kirk Kamberg) (08/26/89)
Network Comment: to #1464 by rich@pro-exchange.cts.com
Apparently you can't read subject headers :-(
I was refering to the "new" GS that was released, not my old IIGS. If another
other company introduced a computer that ran at 2.8 MHz, with the new GS's
abilities at that price range, the machine would be laughed right out of the
market. Also, in reference to why I didn't buy a MAC if I wanted those
specific capabilities; at the time I was relying on the Apple of old to keep
my machine's abilities current with those of its competetors. :-(
Finally, CBM, as well as Apple, market machines which do not have the abilities
I think new machines should have. That's fine, as long as the consumer thinks
that his money is worth what he is getting. In terms of the GS, I feel like
I got ripped off...And no, I would not buy it if I had a chance to do it over
again.
>Somehow, I can't escape the nagging feeling that the "inadequacy" may be at
Get a life!
+============================================================================+
ProLine: kirk@pro-realm BITNET: kirk%pro-realm.cts.com@nosc.mil
UUCP: crash!pnet01!pro-realm!kirk ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-realm!kirk@nosc.mil
+======================> Pro-Realm BBS (914) 691-3863 <======================+lhaider@pro-sol.cts.com (Lawrence Haider) (08/27/89)
Network Comment: to #10282 by rich@pro-exchange.cts.com
What does Commodore's Amiga and and 64 have to do with the Apple IIgs and the
Mac? The IIgs was produced to compete with Amiga and Atari ST, according to
Apple when the gs was released. While it does so handily in the user
interface area, just about everything else falls short when compared to the
Amiga, and you end up paying more for it! Why is everyone drawing stupid
comparisons for Apple's machines? Its almost as bad as saying "computers,
like automobiles..." GEEZ! Get real!
Laer