tslu@oliveb.UUCP (04/05/87)
The following is a summary of two articles from local San Jose
Mercury News, concerning the newly announced IBM Personal System 2
Personal Computers:
* The Model 30 is a JOKE !!
-- Kimball Brown
Computer Industry Analyst, Dataquest Inc. San Jose
* Apple has a minimum of a one-year lead, IBM has a long way to
get where the MAC is now.
-- Eugene Glazer
Computer Stock Analyst
Dean Witter Reynolds, New York
* IBM's announcements were incomplete, IBM is probably the only
company that could do what they've done. (The software will
not be ready for months.)
It is like General Motors changing all their cars and then
having no gas to put into them.
-- John Sculley
Chairman, Apple Computer
* This year, the sales of Apple's MAC may benefit from the
relatively high price of the Model 30, some analysts say.
-- David Sylvester
Mercury News Business Writer
* They (IBM) really don't seem to have any entry-level machine.
From a strategic business sense, they (IBM) seem to to be
focus on revenues and profits rather than units and market
share.
-- Richard Matlack
President of Infocorp, Cupertino, Californiarwb@bene.UUCP (04/05/87)
In article <775@oliveb.UUCP>, tslu@oliveb.UUCP (Shang Lu) writes: > > The following is a summary of two articles from local San Jose > Mercury News, concerning the newly announced IBM Personal System 2 > Personal Computers: this series of quotes taken out of context is NOT a "summary" of the Mercury News articles; the tone of the articles was actually pretty neutral. While I am not anxious to defend IBM, I think this poster is presenting a misleading view of both the articles and the new machines.. > > * The Model 30 is a JOKE !! > > -- Kimball Brown > Computer Industry Analyst, Dataquest Inc. San Jose An 8 MHz machine with 480 x 640 16 color graphics is a joke ? It is a bit expensive though... > > * Apple has a minimum of a one-year lead, IBM has a long way to > get where the MAC is now. > > -- Eugene Glazer > Computer Stock Analyst > Dean Witter Reynolds, New York One could easily argue that the Mac has a long way to go to catch up with the new IBM machines; the new PCs have color, higher resolution graphics, faster CPUs and higher capacity disks. > It is like General Motors changing all their cars and then > having no gas to put into them. > > -- John Sculley > Chairman, Apple Computer Of course the best place to go for some objective comments is the president of the company that has the most to lose if the new IBM machines are a success...
dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU.UUCP (04/05/87)
I don't believe IBM has been listening to it's user community. There new entry level machine is using a #@$ 8086! None of their new machines are "clone smashers", especially their top-of-the-line micro, which is way overpriced. -Matt
connery@bnrmtv.UUCP (04/06/87)
> > The following is a summary of two articles from local San Jose > Mercury News, concerning the newly announced IBM Personal System 2 > Personal Computers... > As usual the analysis by supposed analysts is real shallow. While the Model 30 sells for some $1695 without monitor to you and me, it will sell for 50% to 60% of that to volume buyers. At the reduced price these buyers get the machine is very much a clone buster, it will just not kill off the clones in the retail market. I suspect this is a quite intentional trade off for IBM. The Mercury News showed its usual lack of conviction. Reporting included the comments that the OS would not be available "for months" and that applications to take advantage of the OS might not be available "for months after that." The reality is that OS/2 won't really be available for over a year, and applications could be two years away. The 1.0 release of OS/2 is only to give them something they will deliver this year--it doesn't even include the Presentation Manager (you know, the new interface to which all applications will be written). The SAA user interface guidelines IBM expects everyone to follow won't be availabe till August at best. The release date for OS/2 release 1.1, the real thing, won't even be announced until 4Q, i.e. December. Nevertheless, I'm afraid these machines are going to be real important, and over the long haul will have serious impacts. The key to whether or not this is true will probably be (a) the degree of backward compatibility of the new VGA chip set with EGA/CGA/MDA, (b) whether or not the claims of significant performance improvement due to the new Micro-Channel bus architecture are true, (c) whether IBM makes any major reliability, delivery gaffs. ...Glenn -- Glenn Connery, Bell Northern Research, Mountain View, CA {hplabs,amdahl,3comvax}!bnrmtv!connery
edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (04/06/87)
In article <1579@bnrmtv.UUCP> connery@bnrmtv.UUCP (Glenn Connery) writes: >The Mercury News showed its usual lack of conviction. Reporting included >the comments that the OS would not be available "for months" and that >applications to take advantage of the OS might not be available "for >months after that." The reality is that OS/2 won't really be available >for over a year, and applications could be two years away. The 1.0 >release of OS/2 is only to give them something they will deliver this >year--it doesn't even include the Presentation Manager (you know, the new >interface to which all applications will be written). The SAA user interface >guidelines IBM expects everyone to follow won't be availabe till August >at best. The release date for OS/2 release 1.1, the real thing, won't even >be announced until 4Q, i.e. December. Why even bother with OS/2, its going to be buggy. How many releases will it take before its usable ? Why not go directly to Xenix, its proven, and with merge you run dos programs as a process under Xenix. And won't OS/2 approach something Unix like anyways. Why wait when the real thing is available now? Besides its going to cost on the order of $365. For that price you can almost buy microport. What can we expect from OS/2 ? >Nevertheless, I'm afraid these machines are going to be real important, >and over the long haul will have serious impacts. The key to whether or >not this is true will probably be (a) the degree of backward compatibility >of the new VGA chip set with EGA/CGA/MDA, (b) whether or not the claims >of significant performance improvement due to the new Micro-Channel bus >architecture are true, (c) whether IBM makes any major reliability, >delivery gaffs. If my source is right these VGA chips are on the mother board. Now knowing the past why would you even want them to be there. I have seen what they produce, but hey, it isn't that good. The resolution can be greatly improved. But if you look at it from a distance, its impressive. What happens when a new chip set comes out? and it will. Or something like a New Hercules board? mark -- edwards@unix.macc.wisc.edu {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards UW-Madison, 1210 West Dayton St., Madison WI 53706
jwabik@umnd-cs.UUCP (04/07/87)
> In article <775@oliveb.UUCP>, tslu@oliveb.UUCP (Shang Lu) writes: > The following is a summary of two articles from local San Jose > Mercury News, concerning the newly announced IBM Personal System 2 > Personal Computers: They're called "IBM Personal System/2". > * The Model 30 is a JOKE !! This really doesn't have much meaning without some sort of explanation. The model 30 is approximately 2.5x an XT (as far as performance), for about $1200 less. (5160-089(PC/XT) = $2,895; 8530-002(Mod 30) = $1,695) The model 30 is IBM's effort to remain completely compatible with previous IBM PCs, which most would consider to be smart rather than a "joke". > * Apple has a minimum of a one-year lead, IBM has a long way to > get where the MAC is now. Big deal. The question is: Where IS the Mac now? "SE = Slightly Enhanced". This, as usual, is like comparing apples [no pun] to oranges. Both the Personal Systems/2 (hereafter PS/2) and Macs are designed for completely different things -- This statement implies that IBM is trying to catch up with Apple, which most likely is not the case. I'd like to see the ratio of installed IBM PCs to Apple Macs! > * IBM's announcements were incomplete, IBM is probably the only > company that could do what they've done. (The software will > not be ready for months.) > It is like General Motors changing all their cars and then > having no gas to put into them. DOS 3.3 was announced on April 2 along with the PS/2's.. OS/2 is coming at the end of the year. OS/2v2 in 1Q88. I guess it would have been nice to have OS/2 right away, but the fact that DOS 3.3 will run under OS/2 is VERY significant -- at least you wont need to completely rechange your thinking (unless you want to 8^) when the new OS' come out. There is "gas" to put in your "car", its just that the higher octane stuff is still being refined. > * This year, the sales of Apple's MAC may benefit from the > relatively high price of the Model 30, some analysts say. Again. The model 30 is $1695, with 640K, two 720K 3.5" drives, built in serial/parallel and graphics adapters. What does a similarly equipped MAC (any configuration) cost? How does the performace compare? > * They (IBM) really don't seem to have any entry-level machine. > From a strategic business sense, they (IBM) seem to to be > focus on revenues and profits rather than units and market > share. The reason IBM doesn't have an "entry level system" is because business users have been complaining about "not enough power" with their PCs and PC/XT's for YEARS AND YEARS now.. The fact is (for quite some time, now.. ) that 640K and at least two disk drives (actually, 20MB fixed disks have been in GREAT demand) IS the MINIMUM STANDARD configuration. Don't you think IBM LEARNED about ENTRY LEVEL PC's with the PCjr?! Don't forget that the B (in IBM) means "Business". Just a few idle ramblings in defense if Big Blue.... -Jeff
jwabik@umnd-cs.UUCP (04/07/87)
In article <8704052015.AA09396@cory.Berkeley.EDU>, dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes: > I don't believe IBM has been listening to it's user community. > There new entry level machine is using a #@$ 8086! None of their new > machines are "clone smashers", especially their top-of-the-line micro, which > is way overpriced. Its not really fair to refer to the Model 80 as a "micro". At 20mhz and with the potential of 1.6G of online storage you've got more of a .. a .. ?? The reason for the more powerful (which, as you know, ALWAYS relates to more expensive, at least at announcement time) machines is that the old PC's were typically too weak for business users. (Not enough disk, not enough speed, and not enough memory). As far as clone smashing.. Seems pretty silly to try to introduce new machines into a market that is already flooded beyond belief. More powerful machines are the trend of the times.. Just a few more idle ramblings ..
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (04/07/87)
In article <1339@uwmacc.UUCP>, edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) writes: >> Xenix. And won't OS/2 approach something Unix like anyways. Why wait >> when the real thing is available now? Besides its going to cost on the >> order of $365. For that price you can almost buy microport. >> >> What can we expect from OS/2 ? I think you'll probably have to settle (if that's the right phrase) for SCO or other flavor of Xenix/Unix on the new IBM machines. Microport fools around with code in the IBM BIOS chips on the AT. Microport will only assure that their port runs on a *real* IBM AT with their BIOS and their HD controller card. This comes straight from a phone conversation with Microport's gurus. They wouldn't promise when/if it'll be available for other machines. This was the status as of about 2 months ago. Bill Mayhew Division of Basic Medical Sciences Northeastern Ohio Universities' College of Mecicine Rootstown, OH 44272 USA phone: 216-325-2511 (wtm@neoucom.UUCP ...!cbatt!neoucom!wtm)
cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (04/07/87)
In article <8704052015.AA09396@cory.Berkeley.EDU>, dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes: > > I don't believe IBM has been listening to it's user community. > There new entry level machine is using a #@$ 8086! None of their new > machines are "clone smashers", especially their top-of-the-line micro, which > is way overpriced. > > -Matt Price performance wise, the model 80 is a steal!! It is 3.5 times faster than an AT for 1.5 times the INVESTMENT! I say investment because I just sold my AT for merely 400 less than what I paid for the thing in the first place (paid = 4200); Try that with a clone!
johnl@ima.UUCP (04/08/87)
In article <775@oliveb.UUCP> tslu@oliveb.UUCP (Shang Lu) writes: > ... >* The Model 30 is a JOKE !! > > -- Kimball Brown > Computer Industry Analyst, Dataquest Inc. San Jose Actually, the model 30 is not a bad little computer. It lists for $1695, including 640K, dual microfloppies, serial port, parallel port, mouse port, and MCGA screen controller, which is mono+CGA+a new mode 320 by 200 by 8 bits per pixel. The high-volume dealer price is $1017. The screen controller produces very nice if somewhat grainy pictures. You can add their new $250 grey-scale mono screen and get a perfectly usable true-blue system for under $2000, list, that's twice as fast as a PC. It should immediately be discounted to $1700 or better. More expensive than a generic Korean clone, but you don't need extra cards to get your work done. The insides of all of the PS/2 machines are light-years ahead of any previous PC machines. They all have well laid out motherboards with lots of surface mount chips. There are no switches on the motherboard or any of the IBM cards -- they configure themselves. They keyboard and the mouse port on the back are identical plugs, and if you plug them in backwards, it works anyway. The machines are all physically much smaller and quieter than their PC predecessors. You could do worse. IBM clearly has a lot of room to drop the price on these boxes. Life will be interesting. By the way, I went to the announcement in Miami (which, if nothing else, set New Standards in Hype -- they even hired the Beach Boys for a concert) and played with the machines there. -- John R. Levine, Javelin Software Corp., Cambridge MA +1 617 494 1400 { ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, Levine@YALE.something Where is Richard Nixon now that we need him?
goer@sphinx.UUCP (04/08/87)
I strongly suspect that my next computer will be a Macintosh II - unless
someone comes up with the equivalent of a Sun for about a third the price.
-Richard Goerwitz
P.S. Sorry, IBM - it's your own fault.dave@sdeggo.UUCP (04/08/87)
In article <542@neoucom.UUCP>, wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: > Microport fools around with code in the IBM BIOS chips on the AT. > Microport will only assure that their port runs on a *real* IBM AT > with their BIOS and their HD controller card. This comes straight > from a phone conversation with Microport's gurus. They wouldn't > promise when/if it'll be available for other machines. This was > the status as of about 2 months ago. I've been running Microport on a no-name clone AT for four months now with no problems and I know quite a few other people who are also. If you were on the phone with Microport, odds are you weren't talking to a guru. Their tech support people are reasonably competent, but all too many times when I call with a problem, all I end up with is sympathy, not guru wisdom. The product is reasonable, it has bugs, but so does everything else. -- David L. Smith sdcsvax!sdamos!sdeggo!dave, ihnp4!jack!man!sdeggo!dave, hp-sdd!crash!sdeggo!dave sdeggo!dave@sdamos.ucsd.edu "A clean desk is the work of a sick mind"
george@mnetor.UUCP (George Hart) (04/08/87)
In article <478@bene.UUCP> rwb@bene.UUCP (Bob Beveridge) writes: >One could easily argue that the Mac has a long way to go to catch up >with the new IBM machines; the new PCs have color, higher resolution >graphics, faster CPUs and higher capacity disks. I trust you're not speaking of the Mac II which has 640x480 resolution in 256 colors (higher res cards have already been announced), a industry standard bus, 16(12)? Mhz. 68020 with an FPP and (eventually) an MMU? As for disk space, SCSI disks are available in sizes up 300mb. Granted it is a little more expensive than the Model 30 but then, why buy a Model 30 when you can get equivalent or better elsewhere for less money? Of course, what really annoys me is that I can't afford either... -- Regards, George Hart, Computer X Canada Ltd. UUCP: utzoo >!mnetor!george seismo BELL: (416)475-8980
stevel@dartvax.UUCP (Steve Ligett) (04/08/87)
Distribution:
I'm amazed. Last week I saw megabytes of garbage on the net
about all the mistakes that IBM was going to make - you know -
"the new machines will be closed, with no slots"
"there won't be any technical documentation"
"they won't come out with a 386 for fear of shooting
the xxx".
"blah blah"
This week, post-announcement, not a single apology for the
untrue and unkind remarks.
Also, I'm surprised that we haven't had any comments from people
that have used the new machines. I used a 50 last week, and I
want one for my desk. It's a reasonable size, it's speedy, the
price is about $2000 cheaper than the AT was, and competitive
with the brand-name clones. It ran the EGA mode software that I
tried - True BASIC and Tango (a printed circuit layout program).
The 16 colors is enough for me (of course, even my Mac 2 is
monochrome :-). It's quieter, has more memory, a mouse, and
supports LIM (I mean the 50, not the Mac). I'd rather have 4
slots than 3, but I guess you're supposed to buy the 60 if you
want lots of slots. The little disk drive is slow, I don't
know if fast 3.5" drives are available yet.
The biggest ripoff will be the one hour minimum your dealer
charges you for service. My two-year old could take it apart in
a minute, and my four-year old could take it apart in two,
without breaking it (the two-year old would break it :=)
Without tools.
--
Steve Ligett stevel@dartmouth.edu or
(astrovax cornell decvax harvard ihnp4 linus true)!dartvax!stevelgeorge@mnetor.UUCP (George Hart) (04/08/87)
In article <516@umnd-cs.D.UMN.EDU> jwabik@umnd-cs.D.UMN.EDU (Jeff Wabik) writes: >The reason for the more powerful (which, as you know, ALWAYS relates to >more expensive, at least at announcement time) machines is that the old >PC's were typically too weak for business users. (Not enough disk, not >enough speed, and not enough memory). One of the truths (and driving forces of this industry) that machines are never fast enough and never have enough storage. -- Regards, George Hart, Computer X Canada Ltd. UUCP: utzoo >!mnetor!george seismo BELL: (416)475-8980
geller@eli.UUCP (04/08/87)
In article <1414@sphinx.uchicago.edu>, goer@sphinx.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz III) writes: > I strongly suspect that my next computer will be a Macintosh II - unless > someone comes up with the equivalent of a Sun for about a third the price. The price of the low-end Sun diskless workstation has dropped from somewhere around $7500 to somewhere near $4800. I don't have the figures in front of me. This was from Engineers Weekly - or some similar techno rag. Anyhow - why buy a MAC II. Maybe the case is nice, and the mouse is smooth - but wouldn't you prefer a nicer OS. And also - how many MAC owners really take advantage of the graphics capabilities provided by the MAC? And how many really like the interface? Probably many - but does everyone - or are people get tired of a forced-mouse environment (in most situations). Instead of a MAC II it makes a lot more sense to buy an AT clone, Microport System V, Ventura Publisher (when in DOS mode), and a mouse (for Ventura). What do you get - a fast personal computer that is expandable, can run a REAL OS, can run a well supported OS (DOS), can do VERY VERY fine desktop publishing, and more. WHY BUY A MAC when you can buy a SUN or an AT clone? David Geller Electric Logic, Inc. Washington, D.C.
caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) (04/09/87)
In article <542@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes:
:I think you'll probably have to settle (if that's the right phrase)
:for SCO or other flavor of Xenix/Unix on the new IBM machines.
:Microport fools around with code in the IBM BIOS chips on the AT.
:Microport will only assure that their port runs on a *real* IBM AT
:with their BIOS and their HD controller card. This comes straight
:from a phone conversation with Microport's gurus. They wouldn't
:promise when/if it'll be available for other machines. This was
:the status as of about 2 months ago.
I suspect the compatibility issue Microport was talking about relates to
the "OS Merge" or whatever it's called these days (DOS Partition under Unix).
Without the protection hardware available on the 6300+ or (presumably) the
386, the merge software depends on the ROM BIOS for some of its functions.
But, Microport Unix (and SCO Xenix) run on virtually any AT or clone.
I had Microport running on a QIClabs AT clone with no compatibility
problems until the IBM/CMI hard disk drive bit off.
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX Author of Pro-YAM communications Tools for PCDOS and Unix
...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf Omen Technology Inc "The High Reliability Software"
17505-V Northwest Sauvie Island Road Portland OR 97231 Voice: 503-621-3406
TeleGodzilla BBS: 621-3746 2400/1200 CIS:70007,2304 Genie:CAF Source:TCE022
omen Any ACU 1200 1-503-621-3746 se:--se: link ord: Giznoid in:--in: uucp
omen!/usr/spool/uucppublic/FILES lists all uucp-able files, updated hourlygoer@sphinx.UUCP (04/09/87)
My main reasons for thinking that it might be worth putting up with Apple's
cute little tricks is that its vectored graphics system makes for the easy
display and manipulation of user-defined characters of almost any shape, and
allows applications programs to use these characters without much fuss. You
see, I often write documents in which I want to display, say, English, German
Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac (etc.) all at once. On an IBM-type machine
this is all but impossible, unless one goes into bit-mapped graphics - a thing
that is slow, hard to use, and even harder to get applications programs to
recognize. My assumption, from casual use of a Sun, is that it too is not
really meant for such intense multilingual applications. That leaves me with
(I cry at saying this) a MAC.
Should the new operating systems that are being talked about for the next
generation of IBM micros support vectored graphics systems - or at least
something that would allow for no-fuss character creation and manipulation -
I would be the first to buy one.
-Richard Goerwitz
!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!goer
goer@sphinx.uchicago.bitnetgeller@eli.UUCP (04/10/87)
In article <1422@sphinx.uchicago.edu>, goer@sphinx.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz III) writes: > > My main reasons for thinking that it might be worth putting up with Apple's > cute little tricks is that its vectored graphics system makes for the easy > display and manipulation of user-defined characters of almost any shape, and > ...On an IBM-type machine > this is all but impossible, unless one goes into bit-mapped graphics - a thing > that is slow, hard to use, and even harder to get applications programs to > recognize. The MACs graphics and characters are all memory mapped. Character may be drawn from vector "maps" or "templates" but its still bit-mapped graphics. The MAC doesn't contain any special hardware designed for explicit vectored graphics. Only a few manufacturers still make things like that (HP, Tektronix, etc.) for scopes and special displays (radar, string modeling, etc. What you are seeing on the MAC is software and software on the MAC or PC can be done better and faster. And I don't see the connection between an application program and a facility for drawing a given character set. FACTS please. David Geller Electric Logic, Inc. Washington, D.C.
connery@bnrmtv.UUCP (04/10/87)
> Also, I'm surprised that we haven't had any comments from people > that have used the new machines. I used a 50 last week, and I > want one for my desk... I had the same reaction actually, though I was thinking more for home use. Three slots would be a little limiting for some of the things we do here. The only real problem (and I think its a major one for me, though perhaps only temporary) is that the model 50 hard disk is terribly slow. The average access time is 80ms, essentially an XT class drive. If you're used to AT class performance this just won't make it. Now I realize that disk cache's are part of the new package, but then I'm already using a huge one on my machine at work and it won't perform miracles. At first I thought that there was a Model 50 without the hard disk. Made sense to me as a fast network station, but obviously IBM is trying to close out a lot of the dealer practices that cost it money. The reason for the slow hard disk is obvious--its got to fit in the half-height 3.5" form factor. I suspect that the disks IBM bought in this size (presumably up to a year ago) had to be this slow. Anyway, I am still hopeful that within a year or so, this will change. p.s. I notice that the MCGA adaptor is only CGA compatible at the BIOS level. Presumably this will break a lot of games and such on the model 30. Does anybody know any more about this? Is this true of the VGA as well? -- Glenn Connery, Bell Northern Research, Mountain View, CA {hplabs,amdahl,3comvax}!bnrmtv!connery
connery@bnrmtv.UUCP (04/10/87)
PS 60 vs. Mac II:
================
The Apple Mac II Hard Disk 40 (Mac II) and IBM Personal System II Model 60
(PS 60) have a number of similarities starting with comparable retail prices.
I thought I'd work up some kind of comparison between the two for interest's
sake. I will be quoting retail prices here.
Personal System II Model 60 Mac II
Retail Price $5295.00 $5369.00
Design Vertical Floor Standing Desktop
Processor 80286 68020
(easy upgrade to 68030)
Clock Rate 10MHz 15.7MHz
ROM 128K 256K
Memory
Wait States 1 2
Planar (std.) 1Mb 1Mb
(max) 1Mb 4Mb w 256Kb chips
8Mb w 1Mb chips
Total 15Mb today 8Mb
16Mb max
Bus Micro-Channel Nubus
Clock Rate 10MHz 10MHz (synch. req'd)
Slots (max) 8 6
(avail) 7 5
Width 16 bits 32 bits
Features Smart Config, no dip switches ditto
Any card can take bus ditto
Multiple DMAs in parallel No DMA
Standard Ports serial, parallel, pointing 2 serial, 2 ADB (mouse
device, keyboard and keyboard, but each
can support 16 devices),
SCSI, sound
Floppies
size 1.4Mb 3.25" 800Kb 3.25" (1.6Mb soon)
standard 1 1
can add 1 (internal or external) 1 (internal)
(external requires $60.00 kit)
Hard Disk
storage 44Mb 40Mb
size full height 5.25" half height 5.25"
avg. seek 40ms 65ms ?
interleave 1:1 1:1
interface ST??? SCSI
other controller supports 2 internal SCSI port supports up
to 6 external
Video Adaptor VGA built-in Video Card
Price std. $499.00 for card
Expansion none $149.00 add-on 256K
Scan Rate 70MHz 66MHz
Monitors Both Mono and Color Both Mono and Color
Color Table 262,144 16,000,000
Other CGA, EGA & MDA compatible Can use multiple
monitors simultaneously
Monitors
Monochrome 12-inch Analog 12-inch Analog
Price $250.00 $399.00
Resolution 640 x 480, 16 shades 640 x 480, 256 shades
720 x 400 text (16 without add-on)
Color 12-inch Analog 13-inch RGB
Price $595.00 $999.00
Resolution 640 x 480, 16 colors 640 x 480, 256 colors
320 x 200, 256 colors (16 without add-on)
720 x 400 text
14-inch Analog
$685.00
same as 12-inch Analog
16-inch Analog
$1550.00
1024 x 768, 256 colors
requires $1290.00 8514/A
video adaptor (16 colors) +
$270 Memory Exp.
Tilt/Swivel $35 for 12-inch Color, std. $89.00
for all others
Keyboard 101-key Standard Keyboard 105-key Saratoga or
81-key Eastwood.
Price std. $229 and $129 resp.
Mouse
Port built-in ADB built-in
Mouse 2-button opto-mechanical 1-button opto-mechanical
Price $95.00 std.
Numeric Co-processor 80287 68881 (can use 68882)
Clock Rate 10MHz 16MHz
Price $525.00 std.
Other Sensing Power Supply Sensing Power Supply
Optional 68851 MMU
Processor card not
special (easy upgrade)
4 voice stereo sound
Benchmarks
Dhrystones 2750 predicted 2801 (MacWorld)
Total System Price
(w 1Mb memory, floppy,
hard disk, 16 colors,
mouse, keyboard)
Mono $5640.00 $6485.00
Color $6010.00 $7085.00
PS 80 vs. Mac II:
================
The Apple Mac II Hard Disk 40 (Mac II) and IBM Personal System II Model 80
(PS 80) have a number of similarities starting with the same clock rate.
Personal System II Model 80/041 Mac II
Retail Price $6995.00 $5369.00
Design Vertical Floor Standing Desktop
Processor 80386 68020
(easy upgrade to 68030)
Clock Rate 16MHz 15.7MHz
ROM 128K 256K
Memory
Wait States 1 2
Planar (std.) 1Mb 1Mb
(max) 2Mb w 1Mb chips 4Mb w 256K chips
8Mb w 1Mb chips
Total 16Mb 8Mb
Bus Micro-Channel Nubus
Clock Rate 16MHz 10MHz (synch. req'd)
Slots (max) 8 6
(avail) 7 5
Width 32 bits 32 bits
Features Smart Config, no dip switches ditto
Any card can take bus ditto
Multiple DMAs in parallel No DMA
Standard Ports serial, parallel, pointing 2 serial, 2 ADB (mouse
device, keyboard and keyboard, but each
can support 16 devices),
SCSI, sound
Floppies
size 1.4Mb 3.25" 800Kb 3.25" (1.6Mb soon)
standard 1 1
can add 1 (internal or external) 1 (internal)
(external requires $60.00 kit)
Hard Disk
storage 44Mb 40Mb
size full height 5.25" half height 5.25"
avg. seek 40ms 65ms ?
interleave 1:1 1:1
interface ST??? SCSI
other controller supports 2 internal SCSI port supports up
to 6 external
Video Adaptor VGA built-in Video Card
Price std. $499.00 for card
Expansion none $149.00 add-on 256K
Scan Rate 70MHz 66MHz
Monitors Both Mono and Color Both Mono and Color
Color Table 262,144 16,000,000
Other CGA, EGA & MDA compatible Can use multiple
monitors simultaneously
Monitors
Monochrome 12-inch Analog 12-inch Analog
Price $250.00 $399.00
Resolution 640 x 480, 16 shades 640 x 480, 256 shades
720 x 400 text (16 without add-on)
Color 12-inch Analog 13-inch RGB
Price $595.00 $999.00
Resolution 640 x 480, 16 colors 640 x 480, 256 colors
320 x 200, 256 colors (16 without add-on)
720 x 400 text
14-inch Analog
$685.00
same as 12-inch Analog
16-inch Analog
$1550.00
1024 x 768, 256 colors
requires $1290.00 8514/A
video adaptor (16 colors) +
$270 Memory Exp.
Tilt/Swivel $35 for 12-inch Color, std. $89.00
for all others
Keyboard 101-key Standard Keyboard 105-key Saratoga or
81-key Eastwood.
Price std. $229 and $129 resp.
Mouse
Port built-in ADB built-in
Mouse 2-button opto-mechanical 1-button opto-mechanical
Price $95.00 std.
Numeric Co-processor 80387 68881 (can use 68882)
Clock Rate 16MHz 16MHz
Price $795.00 std.
Other Sensing Power Supply Sensing Power Supply
Optional 68851 MMU
Processor card not
special (easy upgrade)
4 voice stereo sound
Benchmarks
Dhrystones > 4400 predicted 2801 (MacWorld)
Total System Price
(w 2Mb memory, floppy,
hard disk, 16 colors,
mouse, keyboard,
numeric coprocessor)
Mono $8830.00 $6834.00
Color $9210.00 $7434.00
PS 50 vs. Mac SE:
================
The Apple Mac SE Disk 20 (Mac SE) and IBM Personal System II Model 50 (PS 50)
have a number of similarities starting with similar retail prices.
Personal System II Model 50 Mac SE
Retail Price $3595.00 $3569.00
Design Desktop Desktop
Processor 80286 68000
Clock Rate 10MHz 7.83MHz
ROM 128K 256K
Memory
Wait States 1 1
Planar (std.) 1Mb 1Mb
(max) 1Mb 4Mb w 1Mb chips
Total 7Mb today 4Mb
15Mb w 1Mb chips
Bus Micro-Channel 96-pin 68000 bus
Clock Rate 10MHz 7.83MHz
Slots (max) 3 1
(avail) 3 1
Width 16 bits 16 bits
Features Smart Config, no dip switches no
Any card can take bus no
Multiple DMAs in parallel No DMA
Standard Ports serial, parallel, pointing 2 serial, 2 ADB (mouse
device, keyboard and keyboard, but each
can support 16 devices),
SCSI, sound
Floppies
size 1.4Mb 3.25" 800Kb 3.25" (1.6Mb soon)
standard 1 1
can add 1 (external) 1 (internal)
(requires $60.00 kit)
Hard Disk
storage 20Mb 20Mb
size half height 3.5" half height 3.5"
avg. seek 80ms 80ms ?
interleave 1:1 2:1
interface ST??? SCSI
other none SCSI port supports up
to 6 external
Video Adaptor VGA built-in built-in
Price std. std.
Expansion none none
Scan Rate 70MHz 60MHz
Monitors Both Mono and Color Mono
Color Table 262,144 none
Other CGA, EGA & MDA compatible none
Monitors
Monochrome 12-inch Analog built-in 9-inch
Price $250.00 std.
Resolution 640 x 480, 16 shades 512 x 342
720 x 400 text
Color 12-inch Analog none
Price $595.00
Resolution 640 x 480, 16 colors
320 x 200, 256 colors
720 x 400 text
14-inch Analog
$685.00
same as 12-inch Analog
16-inch Analog
$1550.00
1024 x 768, 256 colors
requires $1290.00 8514/A
video adaptor (16 colors) +
$270 Memory Exp.
Tilt/Swivel $35 for 12-inch Color, std. N/A
for all others
Keyboard 101-key Standard Keyboard 105-key Saratoga or
81-key Eastwood.
Price std. $229 and $129 resp.
Mouse
Port built-in ADB built-in
Mouse 2-button opto-mechanical 1-button opto-mechanical
Price $95.00 std.
Numeric Co-processor 80287 none
Clock Rate 10MHz
Price $525.00
Other Sensing Power Supply Sensing Power Supply
Benchmarks
Dhrystones 2750 predicted 934 (MacWorld)
Total System Price
(w 1Mb memory, floppy,
hard disk, mono,
mouse, keyboard)
Mono $3940.00 $3698.00
--
Glenn Connery, Bell Northern Research, Mountain View, CA
{hplabs,amdahl,3comvax}!bnrmtv!connerydoug@edge.UUCP (04/10/87)
> ... None of their new > machines are "clone smashers", especially their top-of-the-line micro, which > is way overpriced. After reading through almost a dozen different news reports on the System/2, it's clear that "clone smashing" was *not* IBM's intent. A lot of people think that IBM is somehow all-powerful in the computer biz, but it ain't so. In the mid-60's, CDC drove IBM almost completely out of the scientific-computer market and followed it up with a lawsuit that IBM settled out-of-court very expensively. DEC virtually created the "engineering" computer market, and IBM has failed to make a noticeable dent despite numerous efforts (Apollo and Sun have done much better than IBM). IBM made two assaults on the "home" computer market (the original PC was a 16K, no-disk, cassette-based machine with BASIC in ROM, and then the PC-jr). Commodore came out the clear winner both times. Now IBM has lost again, and is involved in a "strategic retrenchment". They have, with System/2, abandoned the small-business and personal-productivity computer markets. The new machines are unquestionably aimed at IBM's most loyal customers: the Fortune 500. The big attraction is that IBM claims that these new computers will be able to communicate with IBM mainframes "without seams" (no upload/download steps). These "PCs" won't be sold as stand-alone computers; they're actually a new breed of super-intelligent terminals. (They do have a compatibility mode which allows them to run PC-DOS programs.) Personally, I think IBM's right. They can't compete in the small-business market. And they can virtually dominate the Fortune 500 market if their PCs can communicate easily with IBM mainframes, because the Fortune 500 has a *lot* of IBM mainframes installed. -- Doug Pardee -- Edge Computer Corp. -- Scottsdale, Arizona
brown@nicmad.UUCP (04/11/87)
In article <1607@bnrmtv.UUCP> connery@bnrmtv.UUCP (Glenn Connery) writes:
<> Also, I'm surprised that we haven't had any comments from people
<> that have used the new machines. I used a 50 last week, and I
<> want one for my desk...
<
<I had the same reaction actually, though I was thinking more for home use.
<Three slots would be a little limiting for some of the things we do here.
<The only real problem (and I think its a major one for me, though perhaps
<only temporary) is that the model 50 hard disk is terribly slow. The
<average access time is 80ms, essentially an XT class drive. If you're
<used to AT class performance this just won't make it. Now I realize that
<disk cache's are part of the new package, but then I'm already using a
<huge one on my machine at work and it won't perform miracles.
You can't just look at the access time for the drive. Even though it is
only 80ms, the interleave factor is now 1:3, instead of the usual 1:6.
A real performance increase.
<At first I thought that there was a Model 50 without the hard disk. Made
<sense to me as a fast network station, but obviously IBM is trying to close
<out a lot of the dealer practices that cost it money. The reason for the
<slow hard disk is obvious--its got to fit in the half-height 3.5" form
<factor. I suspect that the disks IBM bought in this size (presumably up
<to a year ago) had to be this slow. Anyway, I am still hopeful that within
<a year or so, this will change.
If you were to look inside of the PS/2 Model 50, you would see that a larger
drive could fit in there. The 3.5" form factor has nothing to do with it.
I'm not sure that a 5-1/4" would though, but it would be close.
I saw and took apart the Model 50. Comes apart in a snap. Even goes
together in a snap. The hard drive is a SCSI type drive.
BTW, when the unit is taken apart, you WILL get errors 161 and 163.
They are: battery disconnected and clock reset.
--
harvard-\ ihnp4--\
Mr. Video seismo!uwvax.......!nicmad!brown (How I hate 4 line .sigs!)
rutgers-/ decvax--/
terminus-/roper@chinet.UUCP (04/11/87)
> <860@oakhill.UUCP> <197@eli.UUCP> Sender: Reply-To: roper@chinet.UUCP (Bill Roper-) Followup-To: Distribution: Organization: Chinet - Public Access Unix Keywords: In article <197@eli.UUCP> geller@eli.UUCP (David Geller) writes: >Ventura Publisher is distributed solely by Xerox and you can reach >them at 800-832-6979, ext. 170B. If you already have the product and >need to reach Tech support dial Ventura at 214-436-2616. Small correction. I've seen Ventura Publisher advertised (at large discounts) in the classifieds in PC Week. Also, our office manager found a local source (I think Elek-tek, but am not sure) that also offers substantial discounts off the Xerox list price. -- Bill Roper, ihnp4!chinet!roper
jons@islenet.UUCP (04/11/87)
In article <655@unccvax.UUCP> cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (carl m benda) writes: >In article <8704052015.AA09396@cory.Berkeley.EDU>, dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes: >> >> I don't believe IBM has been listening to it's user community. >> There new entry level machine is using a #@$ 8086! None of their new >> machines are "clone smashers", especially their top-of-the-line micro, which >> is way overpriced. >> >> -Matt > >Price performance wise, the model 80 is a steal!! It is 3.5 times faster than >an AT for 1.5 times the INVESTMENT! I say investment because I just sold >my AT for merely 400 less than what I paid for the thing in the first place >(paid = 4200); Try that with a clone! You know, it would be really nice if people quite DEFENDING IBM. Matt is right. IBM is more interested in *profit* than in *user feedback*. This is an article that appeared in March 30 InfoWorld: "PC Managers Reluctant to buy new PC's on Faith (Wait-and-see Position Prevails) On the eve of IBM's long-awaited announcement of its new PC lin, corporate PC managers are telling InfoWorld that the time has passed when they bought IBM microcomputers "on faith." Most say they intend to put the new machines through rigorous testing and price/performance evaluation before purchasing." To this I say, BRAVO! I remember about a year ago, InfoWorld had the results of a study that mentioned that the main reason people buy IBM was because of reputation. I would guess that the same study done today would reveal different results. FINALLY, people are *looking* beyond the facade of the three letters. Aloha, Jonathan Spangler {ihnp4,vortex,dual}!islenet!jons OR jons@islenet.hawaii.edu
geller@eli.UUCP (04/12/87)
In article <841@chinet.UUCP>, roper@chinet.UUCP (roper) writes: > In article <197@eli.UUCP> geller@eli.UUCP (David Geller) writes: > >Ventura Publisher is distributed solely by Xerox and you can reach > >them at 800-832-6979, ext. 170B. If you already have the product and > >need to reach Tech support dial Ventura at 214-436-2616. > > Small correction. I've seen Ventura Publisher advertised (at large > discounts) in the classifieds in PC Week. Also, our office manager found > a local source (I think Elek-tek, but am not sure) that also offers > substantial discounts off the Xerox list price. Close - XEROX still soley distributes the product and markets it. Unless I am very mistaken - which is possible - everyone buys the product from XEROX. As a reseller I can buy the product in large quantities and discount just as others have - you probably saw an ad from a resller or Ventura. More than likely, however, that distributor purchased the product from Xerox or another distributor. But it should have all started in one place: Xerox. That's why the INFO window in Ventura says "XEROX VENTURA PUBLISHER." There's a diff(1) between distributor and reseller. David Geller Electric Logic, Inc. Washingmachine, D.C.
goer@sphinx.UUCP (04/13/87)
In article <196@eli.UUCP> geller@eli.UUCP (David Geller) writes: >In article <1422@sphinx.uchicago.edu>, goer@sphinx.uchicago.edu (me, Richard L. Goerwitz III) writes: >> >> My main reasons for thinking that it might be worth putting up with Apple's >> cute little tricks is that its vectored graphics system makes for the easy >> display and manipulation of user-defined characters of almost any shape, and >> ...On an IBM-type machine >> this is all but impossible, unless one goes into bit-mapped graphics - a thing >> that is slow, hard to use, and even harder to get applications programs to >> recognize. > >The MACs graphics and characters are all memory mapped. Character may be >drawn from vector "maps" or "templates" but its still bit-mapped >graphics. The MAC doesn't contain any special hardware designed for explicit >vectored graphics. Only a few manufacturers still make things like that >(HP, Tektronix, etc.) for scopes and special displays (radar, string >modeling, etc. What you are seeing on the MAC is software and software >on the MAC or PC can be done better and faster. And I don't see the >connection between an application program and a facility for drawing a >given character set. FACTS please. Apologies for failing to grapple with the facts. I never tried to give the impression that the MAC video display has facilities in the hardware itself for vectored graphics. My point, which was not well-expressed, was that the machine is designed in such a way that the word-processing programs I have seen used on it all have easy access to user-defined characters. It's more natural, apparently, for a MAC user to create these characters, then send them off to his applications programs, than it is for users of IBM- compatible machines. Let me emphasize the word SEEMS, since my knowledge of the MAC is not as full as my knowledge of IBM-type machines. With my IBM, I can find no full-fledged academic word-processor which handles user-defined characters as easily as the MAC. None that I know of allow essentially un- limited user-defined characters except, say, Gamma Productions' Multilingual Scribe (this, however, is not really what I have been calling a "full-fledged academic word-processor"). Most at best let you load 512 characters into an EGA (or more into a Herc Plus) and then access them. Those who have tried writing in Arabic, Hebrew, Syriac, etc., though, will realize at once that fully-pointed text is impossible within these limitations. While I recognize that these limitations with IBM-type machines are not in- herent in the hardware, it does seem to me that the way the operating systems of the respective systems were designed, as well as the approach independent software developers have taken with the two machines, make the IBM a less apt choice for someone in my position. I had hoped that the new genreration of IBM micros would remedy some of these deficiencies, but so far this does not appear to have happened. As for "facts" - if someone can provide me with information that would show what I have said to be totally wrong, I would be delighted. Believe me, it would be welcome news to hear that I have fundamentally misconstrued my machine's capabilities. - Richard
rhsu@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Robert Hsu) (04/13/87)
> From: geller@eli.UUCP (David Geller) > > In article <1414@sphinx.uchicago.edu> (Richard L. Goerwitz III) writes: > > I strongly suspect that my next computer will be a Macintosh II ... > > ... Anyhow - why buy a MAC II. Maybe the case is nice, and the mouse > is smooth - but wouldn't you prefer a nicer OS. A nicer OS? I take it you mean Unix, and not Messy-DOS. Anyway, what's wrong with the Mac's OS? It's flexible, it's powerful, and it's certainly easy to use. > And also - how many MAC owners really take advantage of the graphics > capabilities provided by the MAC? And how many really like the interface? > Probably many - but does everyone - or are people get tired of a > forced-mouse environment (in most situations). In other words, what you are trying to say is: ``Most Mac users really take advantage of the graphics capabilities and like the interface, but some people get tired of the forced-mouse environment in most situations.'' The graphics capability of the Mac is what makes it such a unique machine, and is what most people like about it. The high resolution of the images makes them really realistic. Now you can argue that a PC with a graphics card can achieve better resolution than the Mac, which is true. But, the appearance is not as sharp, and, what's more important, pictures on the PC cannot be manipulated as easily as on the Mac. The Mac environment forces all applications to use the same format for graphics, so they can be easily transported between applications. Can you do that on a PC? Do you have an equivalent of the Mac Scrapbook? As for the forced mouse situation, that depends on the application. Microsoft Word, for example, can function without the mouse at all. > Instead of a MAC II it makes a lot more sense to buy an AT clone, > Microport System V, Ventura Publisher (when in DOS mode), and a mouse (for > Ventura). Really? The Mac II runs Unix also, and, as you probably know, the whole Macintosh line was designed for easy desktop publishing. How much does Ventura cost? Probably a whole lot. You can do a better job on a Mac with an inexpensive program such as Macdraw, and with more ease. Besides, you don't pay extra for the mouse. (And, if you really are sadistic enough to want to run DOS, you can plug in a card to do it.) > What do you get - a fast personal computer that is expandable, > can run a REAL OS, can run a well supported OS (DOS), can do VERY VERY fine > desktop publishing, and more. WHY BUY A MAC when you can buy a SUN or an > AT clone? If you were given a choice between a Sun and an AT clone, which would you buy? I will assume that you will want the Sun. Now, suppose you can't afford it, and have to settle for an AT clone or a Mac II, which would you buy? I assume you will want the AT clone. But wait a minute, let's compare the two to a Sun (which is your first choice). The Sun shares more similarities with the Mac II than with an AT clone. You can tell that just by looking at the screens. They are both bit-mapped and the graphics on both look a whole lot alike: crisp and sharp. They share the 68020; they both have a mouse. They both have easy to use window systems. In fact, the Mac windows are even nicer than Suntools. What do you have on the AT clones? The best you can do is MS-Windows, which is a joke compared to the Mac. Remember what all the PC fans said when the Mac first came out? Then they started to copy the interface (GEM and Windows). Shame! How can you lower yourselves to such a degree as to copy the childish interface of a toy computer? If you were real men/women, you would renounce it all and go back to your good old DOS. But that means you won't be able to run PageMaker... Well, I guess you'll just have to do without desktop publishing... > David Geller > Electric Logic, Inc. > Washington, D.C. -Rob ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Hsu DISCLAIMER: I disclaim any responsibility for rhsu@topaz.rutgers.edu inaccuracies, misinformation, and fabrications ...!rutgers!topaz!rhsu that appeared in the preceding article. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Vidi, Vici, Veni" "Coito ergo sum"
jons@islenet.UUCP (04/14/87)
>I can't seem to find any information on Ventura Publisher. Anyone have >an address/phone? Also any other favorite desktop publishing packages >for the PC out there (we use ATs here)? Thanks! >-- >Tom Cunningham "Good, fast, cheap -- select two." >USPS: Motorola Inc. 6501 William Cannon Dr. W. Austin, TX 78735-8598 >UUCP: {ihnp4,seismo,ctvax,gatech}!ut-sally!oakhill!tomc >Phone: 512-440-2953 Xerox Corporation 101 Continental Boulevard El Segundo, CA 90245 Software is actually written by Ventura Software, Inc. but marketed by Xerox. Look for the new release coming May 15. Aloha, Jonathan Spangler {ihnp4,vortex,dual}!islenet!jons OR jons@islenet.hawaii.edu
campbell@maynard.UUCP (04/14/87)
In article <10987@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> rhsu@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Robert Hsu) writes: >Really? The Mac II runs Unix also, and, ... Slow down there, big fella. Last I heard, UNIX for the Mac II was complete vaporware. The hardware required to run it (the MMU) isn't even shipping yet!! Let's be real... -- Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc. Internet: campbell@maynard.BSW.COM 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109 uucp: {alliant,think,wjh12}!maynard!campbell +1 617 367 6846
tomk@intsc.UUCP (Tom Kohrs @fae) (04/14/87)
> sdeggo!dave@sdamos.ucsd.edu In article <28@sdeggo.UUCP>, dave@sdamos.ucsd.ed (David Smith) writes: > Yeah, but switching from Unix to DOS is a pain and so is DOS. DosMerge is > a very nice kludge to work around this, but I'm not sure if anyone has > released it yet, or just which programs it will run. I've heard a second-hand > report from MicroPort that they have their's running Flight Simulator. > Besides, a 16Mhz 68020 will run rings around any AT on the market, I'm sure > unless Apple did something stupid (which I'm sure they did :-) like make the > the processor step the head in the hard drive and decode the GCR formatting > they put on it. > > I'm real happy with my AT clone, considering that I could only buy half a > Hyundai with what I've dropped into it, but it's just too bloody slow. > I'm hoping the Mac II will give me more zip for the buck. > Maybe you should look at upgrading your box to a 386 machine. There are several companies now selling 386 upgrade boards for AT's that replace your AT motherboard. You then can get UNIX with DOS running under it (switching between DOS and UNIX is just a command). You also get about 1.5x-2x the performance of the MAC. The other nice thing is you get to keep you Hyundai and are just dropping big engine into it :-). > -- > David L. Smith -- ------ "Ever notice how your mental image of someone you've known only by phone turns out to be wrong? And on a computer net you don't even have a voice..." tomk@intsc.UUCP Tom Kohrs Regional Architecture Specialist Intel - Santa Clara
ritzenth@bgsuvax.UUCP (04/15/87)
In article <535@ima.UUCP>, johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine) writes: > In article <775@oliveb.UUCP> tslu@oliveb.UUCP (Shang Lu) writes: > > ... > >* The Model 30 is a JOKE !! > > > > Actually, the model 30 is not a bad little computer. It lists for $1695, . . . > system for under $2000, list, that's twice as fast as a PC. It should > immediately be discounted to $1700 or better. More expensive than a generic > Korean clone, but you don't need extra cards to get your work done. Above price is with a monitor . . . yes, you're old monitor will not work now. And, oh yes, don't forget you need an operating system . . . again old one will not work . . . New operating system? . . . $395.00 manual? another $200.00 (rumor!) This is just getting too expensive (a little here, a little there) again! Now, about the 3 1/2" disks . . . they do have a program for you to transfer your 5 1/4" floppies to the new medium via the printer port(?), but if you have as many floppies as I do, WHAT A JOB!!! Oh, if you want to use your 5 1/4" floppies, they'll sell you another external drive (more BUCKO's) and take up one of the measly 3 slots they give you . . . For me, no thanks! Phil Ritzenthaler |USnail:University Computer Services Computer Graphics Specialist | Academic User Services | 241 Math-Science Bldg. UUCP :..!cbatt!osu-eddie!bgsuvax!ritzenth| Bowling Green State University CSNET:ritzenth@research1.bgsu.edu | Bowling Green, OH 43403-0125 ARPA :ritzenth%bgsu.csnet@csnet-relay |Phone: (419) 372-2102
farren@hoptoad.UUCP (04/15/87)
In article <10987@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> rhsu@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Robert Hsu) writes: >A nicer OS? I take it you mean Unix, and not Messy-DOS. Anyway, >what's wrong with the Mac's OS? It's flexible, it's powerful, and >it's certainly easy to use. Powerful? You must be kidding. Seems just a little more powerful than MS-DOS to me, and that ain't powerful! >Really? The Mac II runs Unix also, and, as you probably know, the >whole Macintosh line was designed for easy desktop publishing. The Mac II *MAY* run Unix at some unspecified time in the future. It doesn't do so NOW. Also, desktop publishing was an application developed long after the Mac was, not the other way around. Please note that current activity in desktop publishing is concentrating on the IBM-compatible line, NOT the Apple machines. -- ---------------- "... if the church put in half the time on covetousness Mike Farren that it does on lust, this would be a better world ..." hoptoad!farren Garrison Keillor, "Lake Wobegon Days"
north@apple.UUCP (04/17/87)
In article <1990@hoptoad.uucp> farren@hoptoad.UUCP (Mike Farren) writes: > >>Really? The Mac II runs Unix also, and, as you probably know, the >>whole Macintosh line was designed for easy desktop publishing. > >The Mac II *MAY* run Unix at some unspecified time in the future. It doesn't >do so NOW. Also, desktop publishing was an application developed long after >the Mac was, not the other way around. Please note that current activity >in desktop publishing is concentrating on the IBM-compatible line, NOT the >Apple machines. You are wrong about the MacII not running UNIX right now; it does. All that is required is the addition of a PMMU, at least 2MB of memory, and a 40MB hard disk. It was demoed at the Appleworld conference March 2nd in LA. Please get your facts right before you flame on the net. The fact that the desktop publishing *market* was established after the availability of the Mac, with its multi-font text and graphics capability, and the LaserWriter printer is certainly true. However, these can be considered the *enabling technologies* that synergized such a market. Of course the PC world has a lot of activity right now; it has a long way to go to catch up. > "... if the church put in half the time on covetousness >Mike Farren that it does on lust, this would be a better world ..." >hoptoad!farren Garrison Keillor, "Lake Wobegon Days" -- Don North Apple Computer, Inc. Advanced Technology Group UUCP: {voder,nsc,dual,sun,ucbvax!mtxinu}!apple!north CSNET: north@apple.CSNET {{ Facts are facts, but any opinions expressed are my own, and do not }} {{ represent any viewpoint, official or otherwise, of Apple Computer, Inc.}}
yuan@uhccux.UUCP (Yuan Chang) (04/19/87)
> >in desktop publishing is concentrating on the IBM-compatible line, NOT the > >Apple machines. > ^^^^ Just how "available" is this MMU? As I understand it, the 68851 (which I presume Apple is going to be using) is still in short supply, and costs over $800 a piece in "sufficient" quantities. It maybe easy for a person like yourself to obtain (i.e. working in a company that develops the computer), but mortals like us just can't get them that easily _RIGHT NOW_! --- Yuan Chang ...!nosc!humu!uhccux!yuan \ !uhmanoa!uranus!ych