EWING@YALEVM.BITNET (Rick Ewing) (08/05/87)
OK, people, I'll admit I lost my head when I drafted that message regarding the lack of Apple (official) on this bboard. And it true, I suppose I don't speak for Apple officially whenever I comment about something. But I do consult for Apple on our campus here, have Applelink, must file reports and get paid, so I suppose I'm the closest thing that this nets got to the "real thing". And I have tried to respond to comments, questions, and whatever criticisms that I knew about since October of last year. And if I seem upset for someone not remembering that in a letter that *I* considered unjustified, well then I am. Sorry for being so selfish and egotistical.. Nevertheless, this users group seems to be founded on the premis that most other user groups are founded all over the nation for whatever computer: self-support. Something in which this group performs admirably considering we have no real file server to distribute software, and no real "entity" from Apple to spill rumors over on this side of the network. Considering that this group could be denied access to this service tomorrow, I consider our position enviable. (I mean, doensn't CIS and BIX and Genie cost real money?) We stand at an interesting crossroads in the history of the Apple ][ family. As we slowly walk away from the 8 bit world and head for 16 bit architecture, we need this group more than ever the faace the difficult new problems ahead, and rejoice together in a new software triumph that makes our lives just a little bit easier. So I make my address to the original disgruntled user who caused me to flame so maliciously: Rome wasn't built in a day, and so wasn't Apple COmputer. We all laughed when the IBM PC first arrived sporting an OS literally copied from CP/M (look and feel lawsuits, Digital Research?), showing little promise except for three letters on the front. The roiginal Mac was an underpowered, overburdened and buggy little thing that had to earn its respect with growth and belief in the product. And so now we hear similar things about the IIgs and how Apple brought out its baby just to throw it out with the bath. What a typical reaction. All I have to say is that you're completely wrong. Given the prior success of its ancestors, and the commitment that it has now, I'd bet money on its future. And alot of other people are too. The IIgs has been selling very well since its introduction, despite hoopla over the Mac or other machines. The public know a good machine when it sees it. And as a final note, regarding the presence of Apple here. Well, if anyone want Cupertino direct, I know that Apple has access to csnet. Are these writings being heard over that way. If so, I suggest expanding their mailings to receive this digest. And I know that they would most certainly welcome it. I'll look into the right people to contact. --Richard Ewing Ewing@YALEVM.Bitnet
ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu (Ralph Hyre) (08/06/87)
In article <8708050312.aa01309@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> EWING@YALEVM.BITNET (Rick Ewing) writes: >We stand at an interesting crossroads in the history of the Apple ][ family. >As we slowly walk away from the 8 bit world and head for 16 bit architecture, >we need this group more than ever the faace the difficult new problems ahead, >and rejoice together in a new software triumph that makes our lives just a >little bit easier Well, I hope the 16->32 bit transition goes smoothly as well. If Apple is serious about 'Apple ][ forever' they should give is 32 bits. If not the WDC 65832, then perhaps some nifty hybrid chip that supports 6502/65816 and 680N0 code at the same time. Make good use of that Cray! (65832 is to the 65816 as 80386 is to the 8088.) -- - Ralph W. Hyre, Jr. Internet: ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu Phone:(412)268-{2847,3275} CMU-{BUGS,DARK} Amateur Packet Radio: N3FGW@W2XO, or c/o W3VC, CMU Radio Club, Pittsburgh, PA