AWCTTYPA@UIAMVS.BITNET ("David A. Lyons") (02/08/89)
>Date: Tue, 24 Jan 89 05:33:06 EST >From: Ed Berlot <pnet01!pro-generic!edber@NOSC.MIL> >Subject: The death of the Apple // >What seems to be the big fuss about the death of the Apple // line? Have you stopped beating your spouse yet (yes or no)? Same sort of question. In other words, WHAT "death of the Apple II line"? >Consider the efforts that Apple has gone through to make the entire >line of accessories identical to both the Apple // and the Mac line >of computers. Right, like the Apple 5.25 drives (can't be used with a Mac?), the AppleColor RGB monitor (for the GS only), the Mac monitors (for Macs only), the incompatible memory expansion kits, video cards, network cards, Mac SE PC Drive card, Mac II PC Drive card, and the Apple PC 5.25 Drive. But there _are_ a lot of peripherals that work on both the Apple II and Mac lines. This seems to be an intelligent thing to do _whether or not_ Apple intents to drop the Apple II line or the Mac line. It saves them money by reducing the number of products they need to design, build, document, publicize, and educate people about. >GSOS? OH you mean ProDOS 8 v1.7 and ProDOS 16 v2.0 don't you? GS >owners had to obtain GS OS through illict means since there was no >Canadian release, until just before Christmas. Well, System Disk 4.0 contains GS/OS 2.0 and ProDOS 8 v1.7, among other things, yes. It should have been available to you through GEnie and by buying any commercial product that comes with GS/OS (although I don't know whether commercial publishers typically include the SYSTEM.TOOLS disk with their software, or whether they just supply a minimally-configured startup disk). >What does it boil down to? Apple US is seriously weighing te market, >seeing what would happen if the Apple // was dropped? Notice that >there has been little action on the // line since the GS was >introduced? We've had a flurry of ProDOS releases, a new ROM, GS OS, >a sped up //c (maybe a sped up //e?), but think that we've had 3 new >Macs, a flurry of periphials, and promises of bigger and better >Macs. What is "little action"? What do you _want_ them to do, release a new GS every month? "GS/OS" only takes 5 characters to write off as something insignificant, but it's NIFTY, as will become more and more apparent as more software is released that takes advantage of GS/OS better. I'm fairly _happy_ with the current GS hardware, and I'm looking forward to more improvements in _software_: especially improvements that will let developers create GS software faster and easier. >I say TOUGH. The market dictates what sells and what doesn't. A batch >of die hards will not change corporate policy. If Apple means for the >// line to die I can assure you, it will no matter what kind of >howling, and protesting you can create. That seems a bit contradictory to me. The market dictates what sells, except that corporate policy dictates what is for sale, and nothing we can do will convince Apple to take our money? The Apple II _does_ sell, by the way. > Edber@Pro-Generic BIX: Edber Genie :Edber --David A. Lyons bitnet: awcttypa@uiamvs DAL Systems CompuServe: 72177,3233 P.O. Box 287 GEnie mail: D.LYONS2 North Liberty, IA 52317 AppleLinkPE: Dave Lyons
mcgurrin@MITRE.MITRE.ORG (02/09/89)
I second the views of Dave, although the GS IS too slow for the graphics interface in many cases. A Transwarp GS would help, but that adds another $400.00 to the price tag. More to the point, however, given the work that appears to have gone into GS/OS, it does not appear like Apple is about to discontinue the II line. I agree that the II and Mac lines may eventually merge, which is fine. No one should expect any personal computer to continue for 10 years or more (a line might, but not a model). A Mac, introduced in 3-5 years, which ran II software would be the death of new II software, but who cares? By then I will have gotten years of use out of my GS. This is much like my old II, now used by my father. Very little new software will run on it, but that's to be expected in an 8 year old machine. It still runs the older programs fine, and the GS let me run most old software while opening up whole new areas. If Apple introduces a II compatible Mac this year, and at the same time stops the Apple II (e, c+ and GS) lines at the same time, then I would be upset, but eventually something will replace the GS. How different is a Mac that will run II software than a GS that runs older II software? You can't run a GS specific program on an old II. One last ramble: I think another reason for poor software support for the GS is the fact that there is still a large //e, //c base out there. A vanilla II version will run on any II, including a GS, whereas a GS version only runs on the GS. A company has to ask if it's worth it. The same applies to Mac II software. The product must offer something really spectacular to make it worthwhile to come out with a Mac II only version or product (although it's easier to write Mac software that takes advantage of the Mac II features when available than to write II software that takes advantage of the GS features when available (there is no toolbox in a plain II)). In conclusion: Enough of this imminent death stuff. I don't want a new version of the GS every year, I couldn't afford to keep up (which is not to say that we aren't about due for one around now, since it's been a few years!).
RXBROWN@UALR.BITNET ("MR.FANTASTIC") (02/13/89)
On the subject of the death of the Apple //. Maybe the Apple is planning on letting the //c and //e eventually fall and go with the Macs and the GS and (hopefully) the GS+. Which is a logical move older technology will fall to the newer things comming out. I don't think there is any immediate(sp?) danger. There are still too many older Apple //s out there. Robert bitnet: RXBROWN@UALR AppleLink: ROBPHD