abc@BRL.MIL (Brint Cooper) (09/14/88)
Much discussion has appeared here and elsewhere about Apple's intention as expressed by Daniel Greenberg, "In fact, from what I know, if it wasn't for the fact that the Apple // line kept continuing to raise millions upon millions of dollars for them, they would have just assumed dropped it alltogether (sic)." This discussion usually centers on how much new software Apple, Inc, is willing to develop, on how long it took to develop a "low priority" Apple II product, what product dealers should push, and other pieces of "soft" information. Here is another viewpoint: 1. The Apple II is a well-established line with a large software base, some from Apple, some from other commercial sources, some from "public domain" or other non-profit sources. Apple aggressively marketed its 8-bit machines to the education market from the beginning of the IIe and perhaps earlier. 2. IBM has not been terribly successful in pushing Apple out of the elementary school market. There are several reasons for this: a. The Apple machines are there and they do the job. To reconfigure with IBM machines would cost money that local school districts and individual PTA organizations do not have. b. The teachers (many of whom are "computer anxious") have become comfortable with the Apple II environment. c. As stated above, there is a large base of software from many affordable sources. The base continues to grow. 3. Thus, Apple is "here to stay" in the elementary school systems of the country. But there are many schools with too few computers. There are some schools with no computers yet. And there are some schools that would simply like to have more machines. Who will make these machines? Franklin? No. Naive users are conscious of brand names, and there's no contest in their minds between Franklin and Apple. As the schools obtain the money to buy more computers, they will buy Apple IIe or IIgs machines -- with virtually no "push" from Apple. Further, many parents want to give their children an extra head start in school, so they buy for them a computer. And they buy the *same* computer that they will use in school -- an Apple IIe or IIgs. So, the near and mid term sales picture for this line is virtually assured to Apple without an extensive and aggressive marketing effort. The investment of an earlier year pays off again and again. 4. Meanwhile, Apple sees that the IIgs is not the machine to capture the imagination of the commercial, technical, and business marketplaces. Not even a IIgs+ can do that. Subjectively, in the mind of the buyer, it is still the computer of the elementary school. Without a product having an independent product image, Apple cannot compete with IBM, Compaq, and clones. Hence, the Mac line. There seems to be no conflict between the potential customer bases for the two lines, except for the occasional home buyer or the adult who wants to buy a computer but doesn't know why or which. The computer seller will steer such a user to a machine that will provide maximum satisfaction to the user and maximum profit to the seller. What's wrong with that? Neither Apple nor IBM are subsidiaries of Consumer's Union. There seems to be the feeling around that the Apple II line of computers should become the be all and end all of computing; that there should be no need for a more powerful or more capable machine; that everyone's "professional" needs should be met by an endlessly upward compatible line of II machines. This is not realistic. While I am quite aware of the fine work that folks like Doug Gwyn and others can do on an Apple IIe and IIgs, most ordinary mortals can do with a little more help from a faster machine with larger capacity. Hence the Mac. What's the problem? _Brint
DMG4449@RITVAX.BITNET (09/15/88)
Over the past few years, I have quietly sit and watched. I watched the
grow of the Macintosh, the introduction of the Apple //c, the long awaited,
yet still inadequate Apple //gs, then the rumors of the GS+, the "black
Mac", etc. etc. I have looked in the newspapers to see what my Apple dealer
has advertised about, what they were "pushing", etc. I do some computer
resale work out of my home, so I also subscribe to several great reseller
magazines. Apple is often in the "tidbits" areas, where many rumors, facts,
etc. are discussed. So why am I telling you this?
Ever since the invent of the Macintosh, Apple has been placing more and
more priority on it, and less and less priority on the Apple // line. In
fact, from what I know, if it wasn't for the fact that the Apple // line
kept continuing to raise millions upon millions of dollars for them, they
would have just assumed dropped it alltogether. There has been a strong
rumor circulating for a long time that someone high at Apple (supposodly
Sculley) has wanted to stop the entire Apple // line. Examples of apple's
less adequate support of the // series is the following: ProDOS was being
developed 1-2 years before it was released, and the project was killed entirely
at least several times (I had found a beta version of ProDOS about a year
before it was released, and it was about 80% complete). Supposodly, the
Apple //gs project had been stopped and started several times as well.
Computer reseller magazines as well as other information sources have confirmed
the fact that Apple is pushing its dealers around - if they don't push the
Macintosh, they could get their Apple authorization taken away. This rumor
has even extended to far as to the fact that Apple reps went to talk to
members of the ASCII group, a group of computer reseleers that sell Apple
products, but had just made an agreement with Commodore to sell the Amiga.
Apple didn't want the Amiga to have any sort of prominant display in the
store, and made that perfectly clear. That tactic is definetely
immoral and unprofessional (though I'm sure anyone at Apple will deny
everything- they always do). One thing I like about IBM is that at least
they tell you when they are planning to release new machines and the specific
features they will have. Apple plays this game of no talking until the
day something happens. This makes it harder for someone to plan for the
future.
When Apple had marketted all of its software, it had much more for the Mac-
intosh than the Apple //. Until very recently, Claris didn't even care
about the Apple // enough. After every single major magazine and important
person in the // world had spoken out against the treatment of the // users
by Claris, they bought out Styleware. We shall see how well that works
out in the future....(for some reason, I'm not very optamistic). The
technology now exists to make a much more powerful GS- in fact, the technology
exists to make a machine that will run all Macintosh and // software (though
it would cut into the Mac or // sales, and they wouldn't want that to happen).
The rumored GS+ probably won't come for a long time, if ever, and I'm sure
Apple will make sure its not too powerful, that someone that was considering
a Macintosh would actually buy an Apple // instead. The release of the
system disk 3.2 - or lack of it, is something else in poor taste. Apple
has managed to confuse many people with this, and if they have developed
such a powerful upgrade, they should do anything in their power to distribute
it. I really doubt it costs much more than $200 for Apple to make the actual
GS CPU, especially in the quantity they buy things. With all the money
and the rather high margins that both Apple and the dealers make, they could
at least provide some decent tech/upgrade service. The upgrade part is
easier...but has been done even worse! The coffee analogy doesnt work here---
a bottomless cup of coffee costs about $.60 around here whereas a decent
computer system costs $3000+ these days.
In case you weren't aware of this, Apple decided to raise the price of
virtually everything they sell except the Macintosh + (which I'm sure they
will stop making soon, and leave the owners forcing to eventually go out
and get a SE or //). THey have raised their prices up to 35% on everything
including the GS cpu (this was in yesterdays newspaper- not in front of
me, and it didnt mention the raise in price of the GS specifically (how
much). The Mac // w/60 mb was raised about $1,500 or so, quite a substancial
jump. Apple has already had rather large margins...I am fully aware that
ram prices have jumped (just at about the time they offered the extra 256k
in the gs!), but the ram prices are starting to gradually go down again.
They still make lots of money. Well, I guess I've spoken what I've wanted
to say. I really am sick of getting the short end of the stick from Apple
though. Sometimes I seriously think about getting into the Macintosh before
they totally dump the // line. I welcome any opinions of anyone else on
this subject. I don't have the net address of Keith who works at Apple,
but could someone make sure that he gets a copy of this (or could he please
respond to me).
Thanks,
Daniel
Box # 1026 Daniel M. Greenberg
25 Andrews Memorial Drive Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY 14623 Computer Engineering Technology '92
BITNET : DMG4449@RITVAX
INTERNET : dmg4449%ritvax.bitnet@CORNELLC.CCS.CORNELL.EDU
UUCP : {psuvax1,mcvax}!ritvax.bitnet!dmg4449
Compuserve : 71641,1311 GEnie: D.GREENBERG2
PHONENET : [716] 475-4295 <between 9am-10pm please!>
"The answer is 42." "I hate quotations."
(Deep Thought) (Ralph Waldo Emerson)c60c-3aw@web-3e.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) (09/15/88)
After that, there isn't much more to be said, except "Bravo!"
jm7e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("Jeremy G. Mereness") (09/16/88)
No sale, mister. Brint Cooper writes... > 4. Meanwhile, Apple sees that the IIgs is not the >machine to capture the imagination of the commercial, technical, and >business marketplaces. Not even a IIgs+ can do that. Subjectively, in >the mind of the buyer, it is still the computer of the elementary >school. Without a product having an independent product image, Apple >cannot compete with IBM, Compaq, and clones. Hence, the Mac line. >There seems to be no conflict between the potential customer bases for >the two lines, except for the occasional home buyer or the adult who >wants to buy a computer but doesn't know why or which. The computer >seller will steer such a user to a machine that will provide maximum >satisfaction to the user and maximum profit to the seller. What's wrong >with that? Neither Apple nor IBM are subsidiaries of Consumer's Union. As far as consumer's union is concerned, the computer industry and the auto industry are similar in that they must support the cutsomers who buy their products. How would you like it if Ford sold you a car and stopped making parts for it the following year? The Apple // has a huge amount of potential. It is not, as you seem to imply, a machine that is limited in its capabilities or has reached its last limits. Western Design Center has chips in the works that would make the // into a parallel processing machine (the 65c825) as well as a 65c832. All of these are compatible with the present gs and would continue the line and the open-architectured environment of the // series. Therefore, it becomes very frustrating to those of us who have the computers to see Apple restraining that potential because of a "Marketing Idea." As a student in engineering, I do not credit the logic of breaking a machine's legs to keep sales up. Further, how long will this "safe zone" work for Apple? True, Apple has the education market in the bag. For now. They want to do the same for the University market. But what will happen when educators want more power? When the want their machines to interface with their administrative mainframes and workstations? You say the GS+ will not excite anybody. If that is true, that is Apple's fault for deliberately downplaying the machine. But the GS+ will STAND ON ITS FEET when compared to other contemporary machines, which is what can be expected from Apple as a computer company. I think educators will begin to think about this as the // line fals farther and farther behind. And IBM is not standgin still. They are inching their way into Apple's hold of the educator's market. That hold wil surely decay, if it is not fed somehow. I'm sorry about this, but I loathe people and companies who find a safe niche and then rest on their laurels and do nothing until something inevitably kicks them out Capt. Albatross jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu ============ Apparently hoping in vain for a GS+... (*sigh*) disclaimer: These opinions are mine and will remain so until more intelligent or insightful or informed people are kind enough to show me the error of my ways because in the barbecue of life, a mind is a terrible thing to baste.
lwv@n8emr.UUCP (Larry W. Virden) (09/16/88)
In article <8809141038.aa07670@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> DMG4449@RITVAX.BITNET writes:
-->would have just assumed dropped it alltogether. There has been a strong
-->rumor circulating for a long time that someone high at Apple (supposodly
-->Sculley) has wanted to stop the entire Apple // line. Examples of apple's
While I am FAR from the fanatic Apple supporter, and am well known for
going off on emotional soapboxes myself, let me at this time play Devil's
Advocate - perhaps it will be a refreshing change ;-). For instance,
in the above reference, we have a vague rumor that someone thinks that Scully
or another high ranking Apple person wants to skuttle the II line. If
_I_ were a president of a computer corp and wanted to drop a micro line,
I doubt that at the same time I would be pumping the amount of $$ into
new research and development that Scully is spending (not just promising!)
on the apple II - I mean, after the departure of Jobs, we got a IIe SCSI,
a IIe Appletalk, a IIe CD-ROM interface card - all in 2 years! This is
MUCH more than we got in 5 yrs before! How much MORE support of the II
do you want to see? How about 3 or 4 major updates of Prodos 8 in the
last 2 years - you got it (bug fixes/updates). How about Updates to
Basic.System? System Disk 3.2 has them - first updates in about 5 or mroe
years! You DONT waste money fixing software for machines that you are
dropping completely! You sell off inventory. In fact, as you will hear
today if you are at AppleFest, Apple is ramping UP production of the IIgs
line, since they are outselling their production of the machine, and
are ramping up selling of the IIc+ or whatever they are going to call it.
-->less adequate support of the // series is the following: ProDOS was being
-->developed 1-2 years before it was released, and the project was killed entirely
-->at least several times (I had found a beta version of ProDOS about a year
-->before it was released, and it was about 80% complete). Supposodly, the
-->Apple //gs project had been stopped and started several times as well.
On the other hand, Look at MacBasic which was developed and I believe even
to the SHRINKWRAP stage for the MAc and was dropped! Look at the numerous
laptop versions of the Mac that have started and been dropped! EVERY
_good_ computer supplier has projects which they start and stop - LOTS of
them. I program for a living. I could not count the number of times I
have 'started' a project and been forced due to shifting priorities to
move off it, to cancel, reschedule, recancel, etc. the projct. That is
the facts of life in a fast moving environment.
-->Computer reseller magazines as well as other information sources have confirmed
-->the fact that Apple is pushing its dealers around - if they don't push the
-->Macintosh, they could get their Apple authorization taken away. This rumor
-->has even extended to far as to the fact that Apple reps went to talk to
-->members of the ASCII group, a group of computer reseleers that sell Apple
-->products, but had just made an agreement with Commodore to sell the Amiga.
-->Apple didn't want the Amiga to have any sort of prominant display in the
-->store, and made that perfectly clear. That tactic is definetely
-->immoral and unprofessional (though I'm sure anyone at Apple will deny
-->everything- they always do). One thing I like about IBM is that at least
Oh, from this we are to assume that you have talked to EVERYONE at apple
so that you have evidence in hand that they all are denying everything?
That sure makes it convienient to for a competitor to sink Apple. We just
start a rumor which has no basis in the truth at all, then refuse to accept
denial of the accused party! Sort of defeats the 'innocent until proven
guilty' theories doesnt it?
-->they tell you when they are planning to release new machines and the specific
-->features they will have. Apple plays this game of no talking until the
Yep, IBM sure does - they tell you this stuff years in advance, moving
schedules, cancelling projects after you have committed to an unseen
project, and then often deliver half what was promised - oh, I guess I
am not permitted to do to IBM what you are doing to Apple?
-->When Apple had marketted all of its software, it had much more for the Mac-
-->intosh than the Apple //. Until very recently, Claris didn't even care
Are you sure? That isnt how _I_ remember it. I remember seeing
things like Appleworks, Apple Access II, Instant Pascal, Apple Pascal 1.3,
Apple Business programs, etc Quite a bit of software - most of which
disappeared I will agree after Claris... sigh. But EVERY business is
capable of making numerous mistakes - how about promises of an OS which
just keep getting delayed, over and over - no, not the GS/os - something
called OS/2 ...
-->about the Apple // enough. After every single major magazine and important
-->person in the // world had spoken out against the treatment of the // users
-->by Claris, they bought out Styleware. We shall see how well that works
-->out in the future....(for some reason, I'm not very optamistic). The
Let's not blame Apple for the decisions made by a now separate group . Though
Apple may have SOME say in what claris does, they are legally a separate
entity, out from under the 'reins' of the Apple II supports at Apple. And
there are several in the higher ranks of Apple.
-->technology now exists to make a much more powerful GS- in fact, the technology
-->exists to make a machine that will run all Macintosh and // software (though
-->it would cut into the Mac or // sales, and they wouldn't want that to happen).
Well, gee, there is technology around which would allow the Apple II and Mac
to run IBM MVS and VAX VMS software too - should Apple run out and spend
20 billion dollars to develope that as well? Sure, I would like to be
able to run mac software. And friends who have Macs would like to run some
of the Apple II games (not many, but some). But if you already have more
work to do than you can keep up with creating new products and services
that both lines are demanding (new hard disks, cd roms, networking, etc)
then a line has to be drawn. If that technology exists, then let a
3rd party develop the board for the II and go to Apple and get licensed
for the ROMS. THEN, if Apple refuses to license it, go public and accuse
Apple with facts - or better yet, attempt to prove a monopoly in court!
I have been told 3rd hand that some chip jocks think that a Mac clone board
would take about 2-3 yrs to design for the Iigs and be relatively inexpensive
to manufacture after the initial chip designs were done. Why not,
instead of ragging Apple, we begin to phone folks like Applied Enginneering,
and as for a 68030 based Mac III (or whatever it will be called) card for
our GS's with transwarp GS speeds...
-->a Macintosh would actually buy an Apple // instead. The release of the
-->system disk 3.2 - or lack of it, is something else in poor taste. Apple
-->has managed to confuse many people with this, and if they have developed
-->such a powerful upgrade, they should do anything in their power to distribute
-->it. I really doubt it costs much more than $200 for Apple to make the actual
Why should apple flood the distribution channels with a stop gap measure of
SD 3.2 when SD 4.0 was to be announced during the 3rd week of Sept? What
kind of company would we have accused them of being then? Instead, back in
May/June, they began to give to commercial developers the beta version of
SD 3.2 so that the 8 bit software could be tested and more bugs, etc identified.
Next it was released to the development community in July via APDA - the
only official channel for such releases. It was NEVER intended for the
general populace, since 4.0 was designed to have the fancy manuals, etc and
REAL users complain if they have to buy 2 upgrades in a single year.
What I do fault Apple in is perhaps an oversight as to how important it
was to get the version onto the online services. But for some reason,
Apple Legal Evangelists seem to be much more tigher fisted in the Apple
II line than in the Mac line.
-->it. I really doubt it costs much more than $200 for Apple to make the actual
-->GS CPU, especially in the quantity they buy things. With all the money
Note that I doubt that it costs too much more than $200 for the Mac+ or maybe
even the Mac SE - ALL Apple's CPUs are 'over priced'...
-->and the rather high margins that both Apple and the dealers make, they could
-->at least provide some decent tech/upgrade service. The upgrade part is
In the cases that I have been involved in, if I get bad dealer support, I
contact Apple who contacts the dealer and works out the disagreement, after
I have made my attempts are resolving the problems. Not much more that
Apple can do than that!
-->easier...but has been done even worse! The coffee analogy doesnt work here---
-->a bottomless cup of coffee costs about $.60 around here whereas a decent
-->computer system costs $3000+ these days.
I disagree with this statement. In the $3000 range, one should get much MORE
_free coffee_ than with a $.60 cup of coffee!
-->
-->In case you weren't aware of this, Apple decided to raise the price of
-->virtually everything they sell except the Macintosh + (which I'm sure they
And except the IIe - which by the way they are STILL listing on their
price list, even though the 'smart' thing that they should have done was
drop the IIe after the IIgs sales took off the way that they did. Does
GM still produce 1975 model cars after a newer model is produced? For
THIS many years!
-->will stop making soon, and leave the owners forcing to eventually go out
-->and get a SE or //). THey have raised their prices up to 35% on everything
What IS it that you want from Apple. It sounds like you want, for free,
Apple to continue to make and sell every computer that they ever sold. Do
you expect this from EVERY manufacturer? I sure cannot go out and buy a
1935 model refrigerator - or a 1965 - or a 1985! Wow, I guess I should
really get upset that if I bought a refrigerator in 1985, and if the
manufacturer doesnt continue to sell that model along with the 86, 87 88 and
the new 89 models...
-->me, and it didnt mention the raise in price of the GS specifically (how
-->much). The Mac // w/60 mb was raised about $1,500 or so, quite a substancial
The IIgs was raised $150 - not bad for 512k of memory. That raise is
primarily due to the expense to purchase 256k rams today. All of Apple's
pre-contracted DRAMS are sold (well, as far as I have heard, most at least)
and they are contracting now for new ones. The old sets cost less than $70
for 256k - currently it costs more than $90. There are other chips which
have likewise risen in price.
-->They still make lots of money. Well, I guess I've spoken what I've wanted
Is this a problem - for apple to make lots of money? I didnt think that
Apple was a non-profit organization, oriented towards giving users something
for nothing...
-->they totally dump the // line. I welcome any opinions of anyone else on
-->this subject. I don't have the net address of Keith who works at Apple,
-->but could someone make sure that he gets a copy of this (or could he please
-->respond to me).
Well, you asked for opinions. Above are some of mine. Note that on other
days, my opinions and yours sound more alike :-). What it boils down to
is that there are emotional responses to corporate entities. The
larger the entity, the less 'humane' it feels. What I would suggest is
that all of us attempt to make human, rational contact with at least one
Apple employee. Discuss our likes and dislikes in a one on one, non
confrational environment. Laugh some, cry some, spill our guts some.
Dont expect to find out what is coming down the pike, but expect to get
back into touch with the old Apple in some ways - the human side of Apple.
Don't get discouraged when the black hats occasionally show up to try to
tie our 'Nelly' to the railroad tracks. There are quite a few Apple II
supporters at Apple, and if we give these folks our support, and help,
we can perhaps make more of a difference than just belly-aching.
How about a surprising approach by this group at this time? How about
a discussion of the POSITIVE steps that Apple owners could take to achieve
their desire to see the Apple II sold as a fully functional computer, rather
than the little brother of education that many think of it?
I will start the ball rolling:
1. Buy Apple stock and attend stock holder meetings. First and foremost,
Apple has to be committed to those who 'own' the company. So, if you want
change in a company, put your $$ where your mouth is - but LOTS of stock and
then VOTE!
2. Write positive suggestions for change to Apple officers and copy the
Apple magazines. DONT do this if all you are going to do is gripe - I
dont personally want to read a lot more baseless griping in the A+s, etc.
of the world.
now it is your turns!
--
Larry W. Virden 75046,606 (CIS)
674 Falls Place, Reynoldsburg, OH 43068 (614) 864-8817
osu-cis!n8emr!lwv (UUCP) osu-cis!n8emr!lwv@TUT.CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (INTERNET)
We haven't inherited the world from our parents, but borrowed it from our children.blume@netmbx.UUCP (Heiko Blume) (09/18/88)
well said, indeed !
one of my experiences is that even if BYTE has an article in its cover
theme section about some software (Smalltalk-PC for the apple in this case)
it is f..(censored) impossible to simply buy it. BYTE also doesnt answer
letters..
i simply can't understand why, for instance, says "hey, developers !
send us a copy of your software and we'll put it on a list that we'll
send to all apple dealers (after some looking at the prgms to avoid
vaporware...)". not too bad an idea, eh ?! and it wouldn't even cost
apple much in the days of applelink etcetc...sigh...
btw: i still want to get smalltalk (at any cost!) since it does (really !)
multitasking on apples (dont tell me its slow, transwarp has it...}.
so if anyone knows/has/whatever about it PLEASE let me know.
ah yes, i'll buy a 386 clone with unix. who will ever buy this rediculous
would-be unix for the mac ?! in my opinion sun would win it all if they made
a mac emulator for their machines. you could then have smalltalk, unix and macs
(plural!) on one screen.
--
Heiko Blume # DOMAIN: blume@netmbx.UUCP { BITNET: ( mixed }
Seekorso 29 # BANG : ..!{backbone}!netmbx!blume
D-1000 Berlin 22, West-Germany # Phone : (+49 30) 365 55 71 or ... 365 75 01
Telex : 183008 intro d # Fax : (+49 30) 882 50 65 shawn@pnet51.cts.com (Shawn Stanley) (09/20/88)
blume@netmbx.UUCP (Heiko Blume) writes: >ah yes, i'll buy a 386 clone with unix. who will ever buy this rediculous >would-be unix for the mac ?! in my opinion sun would win it all if they made >a mac emulator for their machines. you could then have smalltalk, unix and macs >(plural!) on one screen. I hear the NeXT machine is supposed to run Mac software... UUCP: {rosevax, crash}!orbit!pnet51!shawn INET: shawn@pnet51.cts.com
buyse@concave.uucp (Russell C. Buyse) (09/22/88)
Every week I read at least 2 postings like this ("Apple supporting the
Apple // line") that add nothing of value, nor add any *constructive*
criticism to the policies at Apple Computer. Rather than crying out
simply to "make it better", consider your position and that of Apple,
then try to contribute something of value to better the situation.
I agree completely that the support the Apple II line in the past and the
present is not up to the standards that it should be, though it is
improving; as a professional computer scientist and software writer, I
find this abhorrent. As a consumer and as an Apple II owner, I find the
marketing of the Apple IIe and particularly the Apple IIGS to be
questionably aimed and dubiously pursued. It is in our interest to amend
those policies which are faulty, and to build support where it is
currently lacking.
From readers' polls conducted by the major Apple II-specific magazines,
it is clear that the IIGS is not an educational-only machine. It is used
by well-educated professional people, hobbyists, students, and others.
This portion of the marketplace has been myopically regarded as too
difficult to define and less worthwhile to pursue in marketing strategy.
I contend that it is this very segment of the marketplace that is the
anchor for present and future Apple II's. These people are the lifeblood
and fertile ground from which spring new applications, innovative
approaches, and continuing revenue to enhance and augment their machines'
(and their own) capabilities.
It is my goal to have an Apple II that can fulfill the needs that it
can best serve while still retaining the inestimable quality of being an
Apple II. In order to accomplish this, *enabling* technology must be
brought into the foreground of attention to developers and developer
support for the Apple II line of computers. Provide the essential tools
to the seed of software authors and watch the flower of Apple II
prosperity spring forth eternal.
We have simple requirements for future IIGS's as machines: Greater speed
(2x the IIGS or better), Greater vertical resolution (twice, if
feasible), a faster Operating System, and a faster C compiler. Give us
these, and you will pave the Appian Way for the Apple II world of the future.
-Russell Buyse, Apple II afficianado and devotee, speaking for myself.
UUCP: {uiucdcs,sun,uunet,harvard,killer,usenix}!convex!buyseSEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (09/23/88)
>I hear the NeXT machine is supposed to run Mac software... > >UUCP: {rosevax, crash}!orbit!pnet51!shawn >INET: shawn@pnet51.cts.com Not very likely. The NeXt operating system is Mach (a Unix variate). The Windowing protocol is X-Window's and the display graphics will be Display Postscript. It'll look very "Mac-like." Probably A/Ux applications can be ported fairly readily. To the extent that future Macware will be designed to run under EITHER A/Ux or the native Mac Operating system, you might expect to find the many Mac programs available in NeXt versions (or NeXt programs in A/Ux versions, I suppose). 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) "We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo (Walt Kelly)
blume@netmbx.UUCP (Heiko Blume) (09/24/88)
In article <114@orbit.UUCP> shawn@pnet51.cts.com (Shawn Stanley) writes: >blume@netmbx.UUCP (Heiko Blume) writes: >>ah yes, i'll buy a 386 clone with unix. who will ever buy this rediculous >>would-be unix for the mac ?! in my opinion sun would win it all if they made >>a mac emulator for their machines. you could then have smalltalk, unix and macs >>(plural!) on one screen. > >I hear the NeXT machine is supposed to run Mac software... i'd sure prefer to buy a motorola based machine since i sort of hate the intel stuff. {btw: do you know why they called themselves 'intel' ?! answer: it didnt suffice for 'intelligent' , hehehehe...} but, the problem is, that the availabilty, price and extendability (sp?) of those intel things are better. of course i'd love the NeXT machine, but when will it even be available, not to speak of the price... it's a shame. -- Heiko Blume | smart : blume@netbmx.UUCP Seekorso 29 | dumb : ...!{pyramid,unido,altger}!tmpmbx!netmbx!blume 1 Berlin 22 | voice : (+49 30) 365 55 71 | bbs : (+49 30) 365 75 01 WestGermany | telex : 183008 intro d | fax : (+49 30) 882 50 65
kean@mist.cs.orst.edu (Kean Stump) (09/29/88)
The NeXT machine runs mach (from CMU). If you can make mach emulate/run
mac software without major hassles more power to you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oregon State University Kean Stump
College of Oceanography "Cruise Support" kean@cs.orst.edu
"alt.next - coming soon to a site near you" {tektronix,hp-pcd}!orstcs!kean
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------