tomj@pro-pac.cts.com (Tom Jenkins) (01/27/89)
Is Apple Computer listening???
I am slowly deciding to sell my Apple ][gs to purchase a
more up to date and state of the art computer system.
In response to all the flame on's concerning the supposed
death of the Apple II line, allow me to make some comments
regarding a single users point of view...
I have owned Apples since 1980, and have gone from the tape
storage to a full blown Apple IIGS. So you can see, I at
_least_ know how to load a disk in the drive! I am now
having serious thoughts about the future of the Apple line
and the ][ especially. Because there has been some talk
recently about this "Apple Future", I am going to make a
decision before the end of this year. This decision will
ultimately be my continued support of the Apple line or
migration into a more state of the art and up to date
computer system.
I bought an Apple II nine years ago primarily because of the
graphics and versatility of the line. I could accomplish
things on the Apple that I could not otherwise. I evolved
from the cassette through five 1/4, three 1/2 to my current
CMS 60Mb. I've owned the ][, ][+, ][e (standard and
enhanced), ][c and now a GS with 1MB, PC Transporter,
Digitizer and all the peripherals that go with it. I
purhcased the Apple ][gs in March, 1987. So you could say I
have devoted several thousand dollars toward the refinement
of this system. To match the hardware, I have continued to
purchase software and have quite a collection.
I am beginning to wonder though, at all the "other systems"
in computing that offer as much, if not more than the
present Apple ][ line and Apple IIgs in particular. Is it
not true that for the same amount of investment, I could
have a top of the line 80286 AT machine with EGA graphics
that rival that of the GS? Additionally, the Amiga is
gaining in user support and offers a substantial value in
computing. While it _was_ true in the past that Apple
supposedly offered more than 10,000 software programs, I
doubt this is true today. And I might add, at least here in
Honolulu, that most software stores stock more IBM type
programs than Apple be it business, education, or gaming.
Recently I have been using an 80286 with EGA, and not
amazingly, the graphics are quite good. Honestly, the lack
of speed on the Apple ][gs limits this potentially powerful
machine. Apple used to be the first for software material
that everyone would "copy" ideas from. Now it appears (at
least to me) that this is reversed. Most of the games
(adventure and the like) are written for Commodore and then
"ported over" to the Apple line!
The bottom line, and what I am saying, is there anyone at
Apple Computing that is listening? I am sure that there are
other Apple gs owners that would appreciate more interest
taken at the corporate level. I would also imagine that
these owners would like that more investment be put into the
][ line to bring it up to date with the current standards of
today. Given the present trend, I don't see the corporation
involvement required to hold (the old timers) and capture
(the new timers) Apple ][ users.
I would recommend at least (and I am sure that you have
heard this before):
=========================================================
o A _real_ Apple ][gs PLUS! (at LEAST 7Mhz)
o True SCSI port that conforms to the industry standard
o Non-chiclit keyboard (this one slipped out - I HATE the
gs's keyboard compared to a full size one)
o Mappable Slots
o An inexpensive upgrade to existing gs owners (<$300)
=========================================================
I stated above that I had a decision to make. If the Apple
][ does not change for the better, both technologically and
market wise (pricing), I will consider helping some other
poor soul out with a used Apple ][gs with all the fixin's,
and I'll use this financial backing to purchase a more state
of the art computer system. This is very true, and not
intended to be a threat. Just a mature and wise decision
from a frustrated Apple ][ user. Any comments? And yes,
I'll take on all questions and flames. After all, isn't
that what America is all about?
--
UUCP: {nosc, cacilj, sdcsvax, hplabs!hp-sdd, sun.COM}
...!crash!pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-pac!tomj
ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-pac!tomj@nosc.MIL
INET: tomj@pro-pac.CTS.COM - BITNET: pro-pac.UUCP!tomj@PSUVAX1labc-3dc@e260-4g.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) (01/28/89)
In article <8901270656.AA01616@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-simasd!pro-nsfmat!pro-pac!tomj@nosc.mil writes: >Is Apple Computer listening??? Why should they? >I am slowly deciding to sell my Apple ][gs to purchase a >more up to date and state of the art computer system. Not real hard to find. [stuff about ownership, expenses removed. My situation is similar] [more stuff deleted] > And I might add, at least here in >Honolulu, that most software stores stock more IBM type >programs than Apple be it business, education, or gaming. It's in California too. 8-10 rows of IBM, two rows of //gs. [useful suggestions mercilessly deleted. Gee, if I worked at Apple I could get paid to do that. Cynicism not directed at Keith or any of the DTS or Claris bunch. Just the morons in charge.] >INET: tomj@pro-pac.CTS.COM - BITNET: pro-pac.UUCP!tomj@PSUVAX1 -- labc-3dc@widow.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) c60c-3aw@widow.berkeley.edu (expiring soon)
jm7e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("Jeremy G. Mereness") (01/30/89)
I have got to agree with this article. I have been seeking to purchase a computer for some time now, and I need a package that is fast, programmable, has a large software base, and has enough flexibility that it will grow with my needs. And my budget is limited, so don't recommend a Mac // w/a 60 meg hard drive. I have used Apple //'s for years and am most familiar with the machine. It is the most customizable machine on the market because of its ROM based BASIC and monitor... every aspect of the machine is at your disposal; you could start with one blank disk and write an OS from scratch. This is not possible on any other machine. I have used Applesoft like I use VMS or UNIX, and customized a prodos shell to respond like one. I am attracted to the // because it combines an an option to look and feel like a Macintosh while still reverting to the standard 80x24 text mode (which it handles better than an AT) and an 8-bit software library that is outstanding. But it is the slowest computer on the market. Even the //c+ is faster. The software base is deteriorating. And the promise of reading Mac disks and Appletalk compatibility (for FTP, Appleshare, etc) remain unfulfilled. Die hard enthususiasts have made the Amiga and AtariST increasingly popular and powerful computers, both reasonably priced, too. Meanwhile, the GS remains unexploited... even the Ensoniq sound chip has been wasted; that thing can sound like the best $2000 synthesizers yet I've heard better stuff on a Amiga. Before I buy a used gs, I MUST have some confirmation that the Manufacturer intends to support its product. I don't have the money to get hustled by a corporate giant that cares nothing for its public. jeremy mereness jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu
hassell@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Christopher Hassell) (01/31/89)
Just to note this question from an also-Apple-addict. I don't think Big Red is listening. It is an obese corporate ape now. There appears to be very little refinement and "vision" <I DIDN'T like all of Jobs' ideas though> left there. There is very little left anywhere, from what I can see. There would appear to be not much creativity in the market these days that isn't overblown and near-useless or very-OVERPRICED. Apple's ideas about what a computer could be and it's versitility were NOT taken up by IBM, they were slowed down. After this only some wild graphics techniques using up new processor speed made it and has left apple what it is today. I certainly beleive that we may yet see again a "newcomer" if a wild new approach to technology comes upon us once more. But until then... <sigh> ...we'll just have to use the "new industry standard" or make and furnish our own, I think. ### C>H> ###
keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin) (02/01/89)
In article <6258@boulder.Colorado.EDU> hassell@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Christopher Hassell) writes: >Just to note this question from an also-Apple-addict. I don't think >Big Red is listening. It is an obese corporate ape now. There appears to >be very little refinement and "vision" <I DIDN'T like all of Jobs' ideas though> >left there. > >There is very little left anywhere, from what I can see. > >There would appear to be not much creativity in the market these days that >isn't overblown and near-useless or very-OVERPRICED. > >Apple's ideas about what a computer could be and it's versitility were NOT >taken up by IBM, they were slowed down. After this only some wild graphics >techniques using up new processor speed made it and has left apple what it >is today. I certainly beleive that we may yet see again a "newcomer" >if a wild new approach to technology comes upon us once more. > >But until then... <sigh> ...we'll just have to use the "new industry standard" >or make and furnish our own, I think. Christopher, It is obvious that you are upset; that is clear. It is also obvious that a number of people on this net are upset. However, I am trying to figure out why. There are a couple of reasons that have become fairly common to most people: 1) that the Apple II isn't as powerful as some people would like, and 2) that they are too expensive. The first problem is due to the fact that the Apple II is based on the 6502 family. Trying to make this more powerful while maintaining compatibility is very difficult. True, there are faster processors for the Apple IIGS. Until Apple can get one of these built into the box, there are always third parties with upgrade boards. The second problem has to do with the fact that the Apple II never really had competition in the way that the IBM PC did with clones. Because of the ubiquitous clone market, parts and chips have come down drastically in price, making those computers simple and cheap to manufacture. Nothing like that has happened on the Apple II, so we don't have the cheap parts that other computer makers do. So much for the general analysis. Back to some of the comments I've seen lately. One of the problems with having a large installed base of computers is that it is very difficult to please *ALL* of the users. This is especially true with an audience like this one, made up mostly of CS students and computer companies, all of them high-powered users. With such diversity in the world, you get comments like: "I bought an Apple II because it was easy to program" vs. "Where is all the 3rd party software? I can't do anything without it!" "I bought an Apple IIGS because it was easy to approach. I like it's grahics interface." vs. "What happened to the good old days? The Apple IIG is getting way too complicated." The same thing happens on comp.sys.mac: "What ever happened to Apple's innovativeness?" vs. "It's amazing that Apple could come out with things like a Color QuickDraw Toolbox and MultiFinder, and maintain compatibility with 90% of the existing 3rd party software!" So, we try to do what we can: please as many people as we can. Given feedback that we recieve here, from other electronic services, from our Customer Support phone lines, and from our letters, I think that we do that very well. As always, when I try to answer the question: "Why isn't Apple as great as *I* think it should be?", I leave you with this challenge: put your talents where your mouth is. Apple is always looking for good people with good ideas. There are a lot of you out there who obviously think that you can do a better job. Thats good! The world needs people like you! And if you joined Apple, you would be able to show the world just what you can do. Already, there is someone on this net who should be broadcasting from Apple.COM very soon (Oh, please, oh,please!). When he does so, he will not only be helping out Apple, but he will also be able to see all of the new things we are working on in response to your suggestions. Just don't indulge in the saying: "Why doesn't somebody (except me) do something?" In your last sentence, you threaten to take the matter into your own hands and doing some creative stuff of your own. Well...what's stopping you? I'd love to see what you can do. Apple got famous off of the efforts of early luminaries like the authors of VisiCalc, AppleWriter, Raster Blaster, Flight Simulator, all of the graphics adventuers, DBMaster, and more! They didn't work for Apple. They did what they did because they looked around and said "What this world needs is a...". And they did it. Keith Rollin --- Apple Computer, Inc. --- Developer Technical Support INTERNET: keith@apple.com UUCP: {decwrl, hoptoad, nsc, sun, amdahl}!apple!keith "You can do what you want to me, but leave my computer alone!"
cbdougla@uokmax.UUCP (Collin Broadrick Douglas) (02/02/89)
BRAVO Keith! Very well said.
Personally, I still believe that Apple is still on the technological
edge. I say this in comparison to IBM. What kind of machine do/did
they market? First there was the PC. When it came out, Popular
Computing said "It defines the term 'user hostile.'" Then what did
IBM do? Three months after announcing a 286 based XT machine they
DROPPED the ENTIRE PC line making way for the anti-climactic announce
of the PS-2. As far as I am concerned, the PS-2 is nothing more than
a PC with a micro channel and VGA.
Look at Apple. They STILL support the Apple II after over 10 years
Third parties are now REALLY starting to develop for the GS and the
system software is almost perfect. I believe now as I did in 1980
when I got my first Apple II that they are THE most versitale compputer
in existance. The Apple IIe. No other 8bit that I know of can operate
as fast (5Mhz with a Rocket Chip. Enough to dust a 8-10Mhz AT) and
with Apple's wonderful MMU it can have just about as much bank-switched
memory as you want. I DO intend on putting my criticism about appple
onto my drafting board. And on my assembler. And when I get my degree
I am going to send a resume to Apple (it is going to be a couple of
years). You bought an Apple. Remember the reasons that you DID buy
an Apple. Apple goes into SO much detail with their computers. I
have a friend with an ST and there are just so many little things that
Apple threw in (like the ability to turn on and off keyboard buffering,
adjusting the RAM drive from the control panel, EASY RAM expansion).
All these little things make up all the difference in the world to me,
and I plan on sticking with my GS for as long as possible (I still
have and use my II+)
Collin Douglasmoses@m-net.UUCP (Eric Doggett) (02/04/89)
Apple is ok, but you are forgetting, IBM pulled out of the PC business
because of all the clones, they figured since they were losing money because
of those clones that they didn't need to worry about it..
Also Apple has made many many revisions on one type of computer, how many
people want to have a computer that they use for a while, then in order to
keep up with the newer stuff you need to put out a lot of money, I have an
Apple //c and wanted to find out how much I would need to trade it in to get
the //c+ (which is one thing I have said) I would have to come up with $600
which I could get a pc clone or I could buy an Atari ST system (which I have
and hasn't changed all of that much since they first came out..)
I like Apple, but I would rather see them slow down on the revisions so that
people don't have to keep spending money and more money on something that keeps
getting upgraded...
I will support Apple if someone cuts it down, but I will also support Atari
and IBM..
Later...
mosesNETOPRHM@NCSUVM.BITNET (Hal Meeks) (02/04/89)
I've philosophically "abandoned" Apple for precisely the reasons stated earlier. From revolution to evolution. But it's not all over. There will be another company down the line that will produce something as astonding as that first encounter with a 128k mac was for me. I'm placing my bets currently with Commodore's Amiga, but not too heavily. Commodore has a lot of maturing to do first, as they move from selling a hobbyist product to a machine that can be legitimately called a "serious competitor". And the stakes will be raised once again, unless lawyers get a piece of the action. --hal
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) (02/04/89)
In article <2804@m2-net.UUCP> moses@m-net.UUCP (Eric Doggett) writes: >Apple is ok, but you are forgetting, IBM pulled out of the PC business... That's sure news to me! >Also Apple has made many many revisions on one type of computer, how many >people want to have a computer that they use for a while, then in order to >keep up with the newer stuff you need to put out a lot of money, I have an >Apple //c ... The //c was another of Jobs' great ideas. One of the things that Woz did right with the Apple II was to make it expandable, not replaceable. The //c was apparently targeted at the sort of yoyos for whom Apple user manuals are now written, who would only blow up their computer if they could get the cover off. If growth was a factor you would have been better advised to have bought a //e. The IIGS is sufficiently advanced over the other Apple II family members that it couldn't be achieved as a simple plug-in expansion. (Although, //e owners could upgrade via a motherboard replacement.)
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (02/05/89)
>Apple is ok, but you are forgetting, IBM pulled out of the PC business >because of all the clones, they figured since they were losing money because IBM will be VERY surprised to hear that the PS/2's (especially the Model 30 and 30-286) are not PC's!!! :-O >I like Apple, but I would rather see them slow down on the revisions so that >people don't have to keep spending money and more money on something that keeps >getting upgraded... I am living proof that just because Apple upgrades their system you DON'T have to keep spending ANY (much less more and more) money. For some *strange* reason, my 1983 software just keeps right on working ;-) Seriously, when the upgrades have progressed enough so that the capabilities I NEED (you have your own requirements, so naturally your choices differ) are significantly affected, then I'll spend the money (plus interest) that I've saved by not dashing out and acquiring every incremental upgrade offered since 1983 (I think there may be a Mac SE-30 in my future if SPSS Mac <with full mainframe functionality> really is released this Summer). Yes you can run all your old MeSsy DOS software on a 25 MHz PS/2 Model 70, but aside from the raw speed, you don't nearly benefit from the capability of the machine. By the time you add the memory (6 Mbytes), OS/2 Presentation Manager, and the software to make it worth having a Model 70 in the first place, you might as well have bought a Macintosh SE-30 (start from scratch either way). If Apple, IBM, or Commodore upgrade, don't begrudge others the joy of whatever benefits the new machines offer. As long as your old clunker does what you bought it to do in the first place, what difference does it make to you ("no harm, no foul")? Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited) According to the American Facsimile Association, more than half the calls from Japan to the U.S. are fax calls. FAX it to me at: 1-203-486-5246
keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin) (02/05/89)
In article <593NETOPRHM@NCSUVM> NETOPRHM@NCSUVM.BITNET (Hal Meeks) writes: >I've philosophically "abandoned" Apple for precisely the reasons stated >earlier. From revolution to evolution. > >But it's not all over. There will be another company down the line that >will produce something as astonding as that first encounter with a 128k >mac was for me. I'm placing my bets currently with Commodore's Amiga, >but not too heavily. Commodore has a lot of maturing to do first, as >they move from selling a hobbyist product to a machine that can be >legitimately called a "serious competitor". > >And the stakes will be raised once again, unless lawyers get a piece of >the action. But where is the "revolution" here? The Amiga has been out for several years now, and was created based on a lot of the same concepts that the Macintosh and IIgs are. And now you are waiting for them to "mature". This sounds more like "evolution" to me. Isn't that your reason for abandoning Apple? Keith Rollin --- Apple Computer, Inc. --- Developer Technical Support INTERNET: keith@apple.com UUCP: {decwrl, hoptoad, nsc, sun, amdahl}!apple!keith "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough...they're yours" -Bach, Illusions
MEK4_LTD@DB2.CC.ROCHESTER.EDU (02/07/89)
Yes, the Amiga has been out for years now, before the IIGS. The Amiga also costs much less than the IIGS. When the IIGS came out, everyone had high hopes that it would offer much in the way of being competative with the Amiga. For too long had our graphics and sound lagged behind other machines, even such machines as the C64! But what did we get? Nothing...Our graphics are still very poor, only on par with the Atari ST, but not even that because of the agonizingly slow speed that we have to put up with. Our sound? The Amiga still has much less noise in their samples. Diversi-Tune, a representative of the best samples achievable on the IIGS, still pales beside the Amiga. What happened Apple? Give us a machine we can be proud of again. Lets see a COU that will lay the aging Amiga to rest once and for all. Mark Kern
rupp@cod.NOSC.MIL (William L. Rupp) (02/08/89)
In article <9592@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes: > ......... The //c was apparently targeted at the sort of yoyos >for whom Apple user manuals are now written, who would only blow up >their computer if they could get the cover off. .................. One of the central realities that many sincere but shortsighted people on this group STILL fail to realize is that they represent a VERY, VERY select and sophisticated bunch of users. The "yoyos" you refer to represent the vast majority of computer users. Most of whom have at least average intelligence; many have a great deal more than average. Look at it this way: to a geologist, most people are "yoyos" when it comes to identifying rocks. To an Eskimo, most people are "yoyos" when it comes to distinguishing one of the many types and states of snow from the others. To a physicist, most people are "yoyos" when it comes to understanding sub-atomic particles. Face it, folks. In 1975-1980, the complaints of some of you would have been appropriate. In those days, only very knowledgeable people were buying microcompluters. Those days are gone. Today, micros are bought mostly by "yoyos". Just as the buyers of automobiles are mostly "yoyos" when it comes to understanding that a master cylinder is not part of the engine. Just as the buyers of television sets are "yoyos" when it comes to understanding how TV transmissions are turned into images and sounds. Only if you think it is reasonable to expect people to understand how television sets and automobiles function before they buy one can you expect Apple, or any other large manufacturer, to cater to the wishes of a sophisticated, but economically insignificant, segment of its market. That does not mean you shouldn't make suggestions for improvements in the most persuasive terms. It does mean that there is no free lunch in Silicon Valley any more than there is in any other segment of the economy. When you consider that many people, some in supposedly advanced, or at least semi-advanced (CCCP), nations still use the abacus to calcuate sales bills in stores, I think we should be darned happy to have such powerful computing equipment available as we have in this country. Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------- At least that's my opinion.... and just my opinion, for the record. -------------------------------------------------------------------
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) (02/08/89)
In article <1389@cod.NOSC.MIL> rupp@cod.nosc.mil.UUCP (William L. Rupp) writes: >One of the central realities that many sincere but shortsighted people >on this group STILL fail to realize is that they represent a VERY, VERY >select and sophisticated bunch of users. The "yoyos" you refer to >represent the vast majority of computer users. I don't think you understand my complaint. There are companies that cater to the mass market and there are companies that cater to specialized markets. Apple, like DEC before them, changed from the latter to the former. It seems that success becomes the goal instead of the result. I could go on about this but I'll spare you; read "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" instead.
tron@wpi.wpi.edu (Richard G Brewer) (02/08/89)
In article <9615@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes: >In article <1389@cod.NOSC.MIL> rupp@cod.nosc.mil.UUCP (William L. Rupp) writes: >>One of the central realities that many sincere but shortsighted people >>on this group STILL fail to realize is that they represent a VERY, VERY >>select and sophisticated bunch of users. The "yoyos" you refer to >>represent the vast majority of computer users. > >I don't think you understand my complaint. There are companies that >cater to the mass market and there are companies that cater to >specialized markets. Apple, like DEC before them, changed from the >latter to the former. It seems that success becomes the goal instead >of the result. I could go on about this but I'll spare you; read "Zen >and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" instead. Nope, I think that you're missing the point. If Apple didn't cater to the mass market, there wouldn't be an Apple. Whether that's good or bad is purely a subjective opinion, but remeber, Apple has been more than nice to us, the early apple// and Macintosh owners. You don't see IBM offering PS/2 boards to people who bought the PC-XT-AT systems, do you? Apple could have saved themselves some major bucks by just saying, "screw 'em," and not offering //e -> gs boards, and 128->512KE->MacPlus and SE->SE/30 board swaps (these swaps have to be DESIGNED, remember, and that takes time, and time is money). Just something for you to think about before you hastily unpack that blowtorch... -Rick +----------------------------+--------------------+--------------------+ | Richard G. Brewer (TRON) | Power through | rbrewer@wpi.bitnet | | WPI Box 149 | better design | tron@wpi.wpi.edu | | 100 Institute Rd. | and engineering. +--------------------+ | Worcester, Ma 01609-2280 +--------------------+ President: | | (508) 792-3231 | VaNDaL's SaCk | The Apple Guild | +----------------------------+--------------------+--------------------+ | . . . E N D O F L I N E . . . | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
rupp@cod.NOSC.MIL (William L. Rupp) (02/09/89)
In article <9615@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes: > >I don't think you understand my complaint. There are companies that >cater to the mass market and there are companies that cater to >specialized markets. Apple, like DEC before them, changed from the >latter to the former. It seems that success becomes the goal instead >of the result. I could go on about this but I'll spare you; read "Zen >and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" instead. With respect, I really think you are not seeing this siutation entirely clearly. The fact is that virtually the *entire* microcomputer industry has stopped catering to the hobbyist market. You say "specialized markets" vs mass markets, but even specialized markets these days are quite large compared to the hobbyist market of ten years ago. Digital is a good case in point. You say they once served a specialized market. Without trying to sort out the semantics of what a specialized market is, I feel confident in saying that DEC never targeted the kind of hobbyists that once were Apple's mainstay. Anyway, as I have said before, let's encourage, cajole, wheedle, plead, or do anything else we can to influence Apple Computer, Inc. to be more forthcoming, but let's not kid ourselves by not realizing that cries of "Apple is forgetting its roots" will fall, deservedly, on deaf ears in Cupertino. Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This is the Gary Sloane Memorial disclaimer... it's all my doing, every bit of it !!!!!!!!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) (02/09/89)
In article <1392@cod.NOSC.MIL> rupp@cod.nosc.mil.UUCP (William L. Rupp) writes: >The fact is that virtually the *entire* microcomputer industry >has stopped catering to the hobbyist market. That's exactly what I'm complaining about! They all ran after the mass market bucks instead of "honest" money (exaggerating to make the point). I'm sure there is adequate profit to be made in catering to more specialized markets; in fact I help support quite a few companies that do just that. Such companies are typically "small", and that is fine; sheer corporate size is not a value (often quite the contrary). Unfortunately there aren't as many such companies as the market would bear, while there are too many all competing for the mass market. I think that's because this culture has evolved the notion that the proper purpose of an organization is to "make money", as opposed to being productive. These are NOT the same thing. The stock-market system reinforces that notion; of course we're starting to see some of the problems it causes, with hostile takeover specialists etc. >I feel confident in saying that DEC never targeted the kind of >hobbyists that once were Apple's mainstay. No, they used to provide useful stuff for laboratory instrumentation. That was downgraded to just their Marlboro LDP division, which I haven't heard anything of lately (it may not even exist now). The laboratory instrumentation people are much worse served by DEC's "IBM is our competition" mindset than they were by its former "lab applications are our main customers" attitude. I mention Digital because I got to watch that transformation happen at first hand. P.S. Most of the Apple newsgroup readership probably isn't interested in the philosophy of business, alas.
cbdougla@uokmax.UUCP (Collin Broadrick Douglas) (02/10/89)
>of the best samples achievable on the IIGS, still pales beside the Amiga. What >happened Apple? Give us a machine we can be proud of again. Lets see a COU that >will lay the aging Amiga to rest once and for all. > Mark Kern I'd just like to point out a few things about GS sound. First, there are a few programs that have excellent sound quality. (Like Skate or Die and Winter Games). but there is a hardware limit to the samples a GS can have (correct me if I am wrong). The Ensoniq has 64K of RAM to itself but I think that this is the ONLY RAM that you can put instrument samples. I have 1.25 Megs of RAM, and therefore plenty of room for samples larger than 64K. If we could find a way around this, we could start porting samples off of the actual Mirage disks. That would improve clarity (I've found that just the interference from the GS adds a lot of noise). If there is a program that I think will do this, it is Diversi Tune. Bill Basham has not finished his instrument definition module yet. I hope (I don't know what it will be like when it is done) that it will solve these memory problems (if they can be evaded by software means). All of the samples that Diversi Tune has (Piano, Organ, "String", and a pretty complete Drum Kit) all fit in about 32K. when/if the instrument definition module is complete, I plan on dedicating as much memory as I can to on one sample. Anyway, don't count GS sound out yet. There is still much more comming out. Collin Douglas
NETOPRHM@NCSUVM.BITNET (Hal Meeks) (02/12/89)
There is a program available that will read Mirage disks on an Amiga. It's called Sound Oasis, and it works as advertised. I know this may not help much immediately, but contacting the company, New Wave Software, may encourage them to think of implementing it on other machines. They also may a pretty good drum machine program, Dynamic Drums, which is great for coming up with patterns in a hurry. Comments about "Aging Amigas" will be ignored. Hell, it hasn't even broken into stride yet........ --hal hgm@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu