SASQUATCH@ALBION.BITNET (10/27/88)
IF the golden gate project (rumor has it a Mac+ and //GS+ squashed into the same box) is real, (I don't know and I'm sure no one is going to tell me :( ) then to Keith, Rick, and any other Apple personnel on the net. Make sure it has slots! And I mean a bunch of slots (not just one or two) Slots make all the difference in what I can do with a machine. In many ways, the stuff I've installed in my old //e makes it capable of blowing my GS away. But to do those things I need slots. So if it's real guys, it'd better have 7 slots like my gs, no one like on the Mac SE (I believe one is right, but I'm not staking my life on it.) Kevin Lepard Bitnet: Sasquatch@albion.bitnet
REWING@TRINCC.BITNET (10/30/88)
Actually, the idea behind the rumored "Golden Gate" is nothing new. If anyone will think back to the articles written in A+ when the IIgs first came out, the original IIx project was to be a computer with both Mac and Apple II motherboards before the idea was scrapped. Moving onto the latest IIgs rumors, one set of people who were really surprised was our office, particularly the regional manager. And if he knows nothing, well, you get the picture. All we need are rumors of a machine that we're not even ready to produce yet to throw Christmas sales in the toilet. Oh well... (And to top it off, somebodyu out there will probably flame me again) --Rick Ewing Apple Atlanta
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (10/31/88)
>Moving onto the latest IIgs rumors, one set of people who were really >surprised was our office, particularly the regional manager. And if >he knows nothing, well, you get the picture. If he DID know something about it, he wouldn't be able to even wink, now would he? Vaporware is vaporware whether it's due to a completely unfounded story someone planted because it sounded "cute" or an "announced" product that doesn't exist yet (Lotus Release 3.0 for example). Apple has been accused in the past of protecting their actual developments by planting a host of spurious rumors so that it would be very difficult to discern the real from the fantasy (Apple is allowed to have fun too :-). Apple executives have been quoted as saying 1) there WILL be a follow-on to the IIgs (however, a IIgs+ specifically hasn't been promised so far as I know), and 2) by the end of 1989 there will be a Mac (or Mac-a-like) from Apple especially suited to the needs of the K-12 market (which, among other things NEEDS to protect their investment in an existing Apple II software base). In spite of the sight-unseen demur posted earlier objecting to the idea of a single machine running Mac and IIgs software (on the suspicion that the IIgs emulation would be too slow), it seems to me that such a computer could make a LOT of sense in the long-term. I'd just as soon see what the IIgs emulation behaves like (and the extent to which it supports expansion boards of various kinds) before concluding that Apple is embarked on a less than brilliant path. The fact that regional offices haven't heard about it doesn't necessarily mean that the project isn't humming along in some (secret) development lab in Cupertino ("Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead"). NOTE: I did NOT originate the Golden Gate rumor; I simply read InfoWorld with an eye open for the interesting paragraph here and there. I do embellish - I simply ASSUMED that either the PC Transporter or the AST MS-DOS card would work in the thing (seems plausible doesn't it?). >of a machine that we're not even ready to produce yet to throw >Christmas sales in the toilet. Oh well... I should think that most of the World has already discovered that waiting for the "great machine that will be available in only a few more months" is like "Waiting for Godot" (endless). The Golden Gate (IF it even exists) is a 1989 product; Lotus Release 3.0 was SUPPOSED to be a 1987 product (looks like it might actually arrive in 1989). The Apple IIx, which became the IIgs was first rumored in May 1983; there was ample time to wear out a //e between then and the IIgs's actual appearance. >(And to top it off, somebodyu out there will probably flame me again) Who US? Seriously, we appreciate your willingness to tread on the edge of your nondisclosure agreement to provide us with whatever hard information you can. [The Far Side shall return (I hope)] Murph Sewall Sewall@UCONNVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {rutgers psuvax1 ucbvax & in Europe - mcvax} !UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] -+- My employer isn't responsible for my mistakes AND vice-versa! (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited) "Close enough for government work" - source unknown (naturally ;-)
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (10/31/88)
>The only thing that my original comment was suppose to imply is that although >we know about lots of things we can't discuss on the net, this was one >rumor that took alot of people here by surprise, and if a product is >within a six-month introduction window, we usually know about it. NOTE: the rumor says "end of '89" that's 15 (fifteen - count 'em) months from now ("within a year" may be a tad premature, but the column is dated November). Might that make a difference in whether your office might have a clue by now? IIgs+ rumors DON'T take your office by surprise???? ;-) [The Far Side shall return (I hope)] Murph Sewall Sewall@UCONNVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {rutgers psuvax1 ucbvax & in Europe - mcvax} !UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] -+- My employer isn't responsible for my mistakes AND vice-versa! (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited) "Close enough for government work" - source unknown (naturally ;-)
jordan%lvvm6.span@SDS.SDSC.EDU (RICH) (11/01/88)
Rick,
After flaming someone once without a good reason, I reset the trigger on
my flame gun to a solid 18 lb. pull to avoid such incidents in the future. I
do have a comment on your last post concerning the Golden Gate rumors.
After AppleFest, with the announced 12-18 month timeframe for a new Apple
][ release, the expectations are that if it takes that long to produce, it is
going to have to be a machine that blows away a lot of systems (specifically
Amigas and ST's) in all major categories (and not necessarily the current
Amigas and ST's but the ones that will be out at that time). The GS has been
out longer than the Mac 2 without an upgrade, and I wouldn't be at all sur-
prised if the Macs got even further upgrades before any new GS product is
announced. Even without the rumors, the expectations are running so high right
now that your sales might suffer from that alone.
{setting flame gun to <WARM>}
Please don't blame low holiday sales (if that happens) on rumors. Instead
consider blaming it on lack of new and exciting _product_ that a lot of people
believe should have been available by now (including me). Thanks for your time.
Rich
<jordan%lvva.span@sds.sdsc.edu>
BIX: richjordan (Rarely there)
GEnie: BARRACUDAjm7e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("Jeremy G. Mereness") (11/03/88)
Daniel Church writes... >it is going to have to be a machine that blows away a lot of systems (specifically >Amigas and ST's) in all major categories (and not necessarily the current >Amigas and ST's but the ones that will be out at that time) Here, here. And I am told that the new Ataris are going to be 68030 based and have competitive sound capabilities. The thing is already running at 8 MHz. But don't flame me by saying I should buy one... just like every other computer sans the //, the thing will have no native disassembler, monitor, high-level language, open-architecture, compatibility..... >The GS has been out longer than the Mac 2 without an upgrade, What's the deal here? I remember people complaining that a GS+ now would be two soon after the original, and hurt present owners... but that didn't stop the Mac //x from comiung out! What's the deal? Capt. Albatross jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu ============ Bureuacracy takes all the fun out of computing. disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are made under duress of academic stress and is often prone to overzealous error. The author, not enjoying the prospect of remaining eternally ignorant, therefore welcomes any replies that would further that end.