jtn@potomac.ads.com (John T. Nelson) (06/02/88)
I hear rumors about a new Mac II called the Mac II plus. Anyone know anything about this? -- John T. Nelson UUCP: sun!sundc!potomac!jtn Advanced Decision Systems Internet: jtn@potomac.ads.com 1500 Wilson Blvd #512; Arlington, VA 22209-2401 (703) 243-1611 I love music that sounds like a Conrail locomotive careening headlong into a truckload of Harpsichords.
ecs165s052@deneb.ucdavis.edu (Greg DeMichillie) (06/03/88)
In article <5829@potomac.ads.com> jtn@potomac.ads.com (John T. Nelson) writes: > >I hear rumors about a new Mac II called the Mac II plus. Anyone know >anything about this? > > Most rumors seem to settle on two different models. The first is a multi-user vertical standing machine and the other is a single user machine. Both are supposed to have 68030 (or course) and 68882. By the way, for those that love code names, the vertical standing unit is "Modern Victorian" because it resembles the shape of a Victorian house. This info is based solely on a couple of article in MacWeek, I do not have any connnections into Apple R & D (don't I wish). ----- Greg DeMichillie lgdemichillie@deneb.ucdavis.edu ecs165s052@deneb.ucdavis.edu {ucbvax, lll-crg, sdcsvax}!ucdavis!lgdemichillie AppleLink: ST0178
lharris@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Leonard Harris) (06/04/88)
The rumour I heard was that the Mac III was to replace the Mac II and a board swap would be available for Mac II owners. The only differnce I know of is that the Mac III will use a 68030. /leonard
jeff@drexel.UUCP (Jeff White) (06/05/88)
In article <5829@potomac.ads.com>, jtn@potomac.ads.com (John T. Nelson) writes: > > I hear rumors about a new Mac II called the Mac II plus. Anyone know > anything about this? > > > > -- > > John T. Nelson UUCP: sun!sundc!potomac!jtn I haven't heard/read anything specific to Mac II + rumors, but I would have to think one difference would be a faster CPU (and math coprocessor). 68020's are currently being produced at speeds up to 33 MHz, with 20 and 25 Mhz ones pretty common (just look at the Sun 3/60 and 3/75's). With the Mac II running at only 16 Mhz (I think more exactly 15.78xxxx MHz), there is definitely some room for improvement. I think Apple would probably want to upgrade the memory to at least two Mbytes of RAM, but the current ram chip shortage may curtail this. I would hope that they would go right to 4 Mbytes, and not fill up all the simm sockets with 256k chips. I would have to think that the 68030 would be the base of the future Mac III machine. I wonder if it wasn't for the builtin MMU in the '030 whether a 33 Mhz might have a better price/performance ratio than an '030 (at probably 16 MHz). Jeff White Drexel University - ECE Dept. rutgers!bpa!drexel!jeff
jeff@drexel.UUCP (Jeff White) (06/05/88)
In article <2163@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, ecs165s052@deneb.ucdavis.edu (Greg DeMichillie) writes: > In article <5829@potomac.ads.com> jtn@potomac.ads.com (John T. Nelson) writes: > > > >I hear rumors about a new Mac II called the Mac II plus. Anyone know > >anything about this? > > > > > > Most rumors seem to settle on two different models. The first is a multi-user > vertical standing machine and the other is a single user machine. Both are > supposed to have 68030 (or course) and 68882. From what I have read (particularly in reference to AUX), I doubt that a multiuser Mac will be coming out soon, if at all. All of the articles I have seen say that the toolbox interface is stictly single user only, and that even on the multiuser/multiprocess AUX system, only 1 Mac program can run at once. None of the stories made it sound like conversion for multiuser access to the toolbox would be trivial (like adaption of programs to MultiFinder use might be). Plus, with a multiuser Mac, what do you use as a 'terminal'? Your VT100 won't do the job. You'd need basically another Mac screen and mouse interface (= Mac Plus, SE) for each user. Jeff White Drexel University - ECE Dept. rutgers!bpa!drexel!jeff
dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David O'Rourke) (06/05/88)
In article <1988Jun4.163648.23968@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> lharris@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Leonard Harris) writes: > >The rumour I heard was that the Mac III was to replace the Mac II and ^^^ I really doubt Apple will ever name something three ever again. Bad carma, I like II + better for rumors anyways. Three implies that it's basically a different computer, my understanding indicates it's more of a CPU upgrade. -- David M. O'Rourke Disclaimer: I don't represent the school. All opinions are mine!