krazy@claris.com (Jeff Erickson) (03/20/89)
Ok folks, I goofed.
In my last post to Jeremy, I said something like "Read next week's MacWeek.
You're nightmare may be coming true." This has been misinterpreted as
"MacWeek's gonna announce that Apple trashed the IIgs."
This is NOT the rumor I heard.
The rumor was that MacWeek is going to publish an article/editorial/story
on the obsolescence of the Apple II. This would mean, naturaly, that at
least one indicator of the Mac community thinks the II >should< be killed
off.
If this story appears, I imagine it will point to faults in the GS (hardware,
and software), the state of Apple II development (Remember now, if it doesn't
do the desktop boogie, it isn't real software), and maybe even Claris's lack
of an active development effort. In other words, "The Apple II doesn't stand
up to the Mac, and it doesn't appear to be gaining any ground. Why bother?"
AGAIN, THIS IS RUMOR!! When Tuesday rolls around, I'll post whether or not
the rumor was correct, and if so, what the article says.
I apologize for any confusion I might have caused.
--
Jeff Erickson \ Internet: krazy@claris.com AppleLink: Erickson4
Claris Corporation \ UUCP: {ames,apple,portal,sun,voder}!claris!krazy
415/960-2693 \________________________________________________________
____________________/ "I'm so heppy I'm mizzabil!" -- Krazy Katgwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) (03/20/89)
In article <9106@claris.com> krazy@claris.com (Jeff Erickson) writes:
-The rumor was that MacWeek is going to publish an article/editorial/story
-on the obsolescence of the Apple II. This would mean, naturaly, that at
-least one indicator of the Mac community thinks the II >should< be killed
-off.
And if an IBM PC mag prints a story about the obsolescence of the Mac,
we should pay attention to IT, too?
We already know that Mac enthusiasts don't think much of the Apple II.
So what's new?rkh@mtune.ATT.COM (Robert Halloran) (03/20/89)
In article <9106@claris.com> krazy@claris.com (Jeff Erickson) writes: >The rumor was that MacWeek is going to publish an article/editorial/story >on the obsolescence of the Apple II. This would mean, naturaly, that at >least one indicator of the Mac community thinks the II >should< be killed >off. The last article in MacWeek about the imminent demise of the ][ was quoting someone from an 'educational consortium', NOT anyone from Apple! I agree with the net's sentiments that the Apple ][ isn't receiving enough backing for a system with 4.5 million installed units, but quotes from people on the outside badmouthing the system aren't necessarily echoing the sentiments at Cupertino, are they? (I hope) Bob Halloran ========================================================================= UUCP: att!mtune!rkh Internet: rkh@mtune.ATT.COM USPS: 17 Lakeland Dr, Port Monmouth NJ 07758 DDD: 201-495-6621 eve ET Disclaimer: If you think AT&T would have ME as a spokesman, you're crazed. Quote: "Well, if it wasn't Buckaroo Banzai, I'd say 'commit the man.'" - where else?