jlc@atux01.UUCP (J. Collymore) (10/07/87)
The new HyperCard (HC) and Multifinder are great (although I have only seen articles about Multifinder). However, I have heard and read that to be able to use them concurrently (without problems), you need 2Mb of RAM! Now if this is true I see a problem since the Mac SE comes only with 1Mb RAM. Depending where you go (or KNOW where to buy hw/sw) a person who buys an SE will be forced to spend from ~$500-$800 more for a 2Mb upgrade (and installation fees at Apple dealers cost an additional $50-$65)! I submit to Apple that they may have painted themselves into a corner. Why? Because no sooner have they introduced hot new products (Mac SE & II) that people are buying up faster & faster; then they introduce two pieces of software (HC and Multifinder) that although they come with the Mac package for immediate use, they CAN'T be used easily with the system because the default 1Mb RAM is not fully sufficient. This may suddenly discourage a lot of potential Mac SE & II buyers, and thus reduce Apple's sales. Possible solutions for Apple are to prepare and release (real soon) an HC & Multifinder that will run well on 1Mb, OR begin selling Macs WITH 2 Mb! These are my opinions. What do the rest of you think? Do any of our fellow netters from Apple have any comments? Jim Collymore
straka@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Straka) (10/08/87)
In article <544@atux01.UUCP> jlc@atux01.UUCP (J. Collymore) writes: >that people are buying up faster & faster; then they introduce two pieces of >software (HC and Multifinder) that although they come with the Mac package for >immediate use, they CAN'T be used easily with the system because the default >1Mb RAM is not fully sufficient. > >This may suddenly discourage a lot of potential Mac SE & II buyers, and thus >reduce Apple's sales. > >Possible solutions for Apple are to prepare and release (real soon) an >HC & Multifinder that will run well on 1Mb, OR begin selling Macs WITH 2 Mb! Dumb question time: Why (other than their heritages) do multifinder and hypercard *REQUIRE* so much memory. I thought that much of the magic of the "old" mac was that any application would run on a little Mac, but perhaps with poor performance. Why can't these programs keep some (perhaps at the user's discretion, as in MS Wors 3.01) of the data on disk instead of in memory. That way, I can use a hard disk to its maximal advantage, and not have to invest in gobs of semiconductor memory. I'd much rather plunk down $600-$800 for a 20-30M HD than for an additional 1Meg of memory; I'd be able to use the HD for both heavy data, DA, font and application storage, PLUS the ability to use these ifancy new programs. Yes, switcher was implemented to be able to use the expanded memory when the Fat Mac came out, but before SCSI hard disks were on the market. Must multifinder follow in the same path when the environment has changed? -- Rich Straka ihnp4!ihlpf!straka Advice for the day: "MSDOS - just say no.re
dplatt@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA (Dave Platt) (10/08/87)
Sigh... the old problem... Parkinson's Law applies to computers as well as to bureaucratic organizations (the contents expands to fill the available space, plus 10%). You can't get power without paying for it, and HyperCard and MultiFinder are providing a _lot_ of new power (with more to come in the future, presumably). I'm not holding my breath waiting for a MultiFinder/HyperCard combination that will run acceptably in 1 meg with the current ROMs; I suspect that Apple would have to move a lot of the MultiFinder code into ROM (1-meg ROMs, anyone?) to make room for HyperCard. Perhaps they can do something to trim down HyperCard's current piggish behavior, though... seems like an area worth addressing. For what it's worth, Apple just cut its RAM-upgrade prices by about 40%, due to the dropping prices of DRAM chips on the market today. Current MSRPs are: Mac II 1Mb->2Mb $349 $249 Mac Plus 1Mb->2.5Mb $999 $599 Mac Plus 1Mb->4Mb, $1998 $1198 Mac II 1Mb->5Mb This is _lots_ more reasonable. Apple (and the rest of the industry) was hurt rather badly by the sharp increases in DRAM prices due to the anti-dumping "fair market value" regulations imposed by the government, and I imagine that it put a bit of a crimp into their long-standing plans to supply Mac users with very-powerful tools (which inevitably eat memory as if it were candy). Now that DRAM street-prices are coming back down, things should ease up quite a bit. [I just bought a Mac II, and ordered the 1-to-5-meg expansion; got a 25% corporate discount from a local dealer, and ended up paying $900 for 4 megs of memory. It stung a bit, but not more than I could stand]. I imagine that Apple will continue to release 1-meg machines as their "bottom of the line" systems for quite some time... if they up the size of the smallest machine to 2 megs, they'll get lots of howls from people who can't justify the expense of the larger machine. They may make a "Mac SE+" available, with 2 megs to start; this might be attractive for power users.
stuart@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Stu Ericson) (10/08/87)
In article <544@atux01.UUCP>, jlc@atux01.UUCP (J. Collymore) writes: [Likes the concepts of Hypercard and Multifinder...] > .... However, I have heard and read that to be able to > use them concurrently (without problems), you need 2Mb of RAM! ... ... > Possible solutions for Apple are to prepare and release (real soon) an > HC & Multifinder that will run well on 1Mb, OR begin selling Macs WITH 2 Mb! ... > Jim Collymore I keep hearing this too, but it all depends on your *APPLICATIONS*: I can run VersaTerm and Macwrite at the same time in MF with only 1 meg. Some memory-hog programs (like SuperPaint) won't even run, however. Notice that Apple has recently made DRASTIC price reductions on the memory upgrades. I hear that getting them is the battle. Stu -- Stuart Ericson USnail: AT&T Bell Laboratories USENET: ...!ihnp4!ihlpf!stuart IH 6M-313 voice: (312) 979-4152 Naperville-Wheaton Rd. Naperville, Il 60566
dplatt@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA (Dave Platt) (10/08/87)
Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.41.7 of Fri Aug 28 1987 on teknowledge-vaxc (berkeley-unix) Ahem. In my posting today in which I listed Apple's new suggested retail prices for RAM upgrades, I didn't copy in the header line from the article I was cribbing from (Joel West's posting of 4 October). The left-hand number in each row is the old price, and the right-hand number is the new/current price. Apologies for any confusion, and also apologies to Joel West for not citing him as my source for this information (Joel cited MacWeek, and I assume MacWeek cited Apple's new price-sheet or a press release).
herbw@midas.TEK.COM (Herb Weiner) (10/09/87)
-------- I agree. What are we supposed to do with all those old SIMMs anyway? (Anyone want to buy a white elephant or four 256K SIMMs?)
alan@pdn.UUCP (Alan Lovejoy) (10/10/87)
In article <2448@ihlpf.ATT.COM> straka@ihlpf.UUCP (55223-Straka,R.J.) writes: >Dumb question time: Why (other than their heritages) do multifinder and >hypercard *REQUIRE* so much memory. I thought that much of the magic of the >"old" mac was that any application would run on a little Mac, but perhaps >with poor performance. >Why can't these programs keep some (perhaps at the user's discretion, as in >MS Wors 3.01) of the data on disk instead of in memory. That way, I can use >a hard disk to its maximal advantage, and not have to invest in gobs of >semiconductor memory. I'd much rather plunk down $600-$800 for a 20-30M HD >than for an additional 1Meg of memory; I'd be able to use the HD for both >heavy data, DA, font and application storage, PLUS the ability to use these >ifancy new programs. I would guess that the next revision to System/Finder will include not only preemptive task scheduling but also true virtual memory (both require an MMU to work well). Of course, those Macs that don't have an MMU won't benefit from this. This suggests that a much cheaper MacII architecture machine is on the way real soon now. The old Macs are going to be in the same position as the i8088 and i8086 machines: unable to do true multitasking/virtual memory and thereby increasingly obsolete. The only question is how fast this will happen, and how easy (expensive) it will be to upgrade your older machine. The accelerator board (68020/68881/68851/68030) people may do landoffice business for the next few years. --alan@pdn
kurt@doodah.UUCP (Kurt VanderSluis) (10/12/87)
> The new HyperCard (HC) and Multifinder are great (although I have only seen > articles about Multifinder). However, I have heard and read that to be able to > use them concurrently (without problems), you need 2Mb of RAM! Now if this is > true I see a problem since the Mac SE comes only with 1Mb RAM. Depending where > you go (or KNOW where to buy hw/sw) a person who buys an SE will be forced to > spend from ~$500-$800 more for a 2Mb upgrade (and installation fees at Apple > dealers cost an additional $50-$65)! > I think it's inevitable that computers are going to larger memory requirements. The needs are coming from several places - sophistication and size of software, larger and deeper displays, more complex operating systems (inc. MultiFinder). To a corporate buyer, the extra expense is not prohibitive if he feels that he is buing " a machine for the future". And Apple has said both verbally and non-verbally that they are going in the direction of the business user. This may mean less support for the home "hobbyist". The home market is not as strong as people once thought it would be. When we ordered our Mac II's last summer, we anticipated the need for large memory and ordered them all with 5 MB. This seems adequate so far. I hope that I'll outgrow it. What I mean is that I hope to consider someday that 5MB, which seems like monster memory to me today, is just a trifle. Progress costs money, and I guess I'm willing to pay for it. I bought my home Amiga and for a long time 512K was adequate. With the software I use now, I had to buy more. It's worth it. -- Kurt VanderSluis ********************************* Boeing Computer Services * These opinions are mine, * M/S 6R-37 P.O. 24346 * not the Boeing Company's. * Seattle, WA 98124 *********************************
joej@oakhill.UUCP (Joe Jelemensky) (10/14/87)
>1Mb RAM is not fully sufficient. > >This may suddenly discourage a lot of potential Mac SE & II buyers, and thus >reduce Apple's sales. > >Possible solutions for Apple are to prepare and release (real soon) an >HC & Multifinder that will run well on 1Mb, OR begin selling Macs WITH 2 Mb! > >These are my opinions. What do the rest of you think? Do any of our fellow >netters from Apple have any comments? I agree. I recently had my MAC enhanced and am now very much dismayed that the minimum usable MAC is now a 2 Meg SE with a 40 Meg hard disk. Even before Hypercard & Multifinder, System 4.1 is useless on a floppy based MAC because of its size, (150K bigger because, I am led to believe, of the MAC II color support which is useless baggage on a regular MAC).
steele@unc.cs.unc.edu (Oliver Steele) (10/15/87)
joej@oakhill.UUCP (Joe Jelemensky) writes: >>1Mb RAM is not fully sufficient. >I agree. I recently had my MAC enhanced and am now very much dismayed that >the minimum usable MAC is now a 2 Meg SE with a 40 Meg hard disk. This isn't yet true. 1 Meg memory and 20 Meg hard disk are closer -- you can run any software from this, and I believe you can run almost anything (anything except HyperCard, I believe) under Multifinder on 1 Meg, and a 20 Meg HD is enough for quite a few large file-heavy applications as long as you don't expect to archive your public domain software library on it (but that's what sumex is for, isn't it). Now if you use HyperCard with all its stacks, and Smalltalk with source, and MPW with, say, C and Pascal, you're cutting it close, but most combinations of applications leave you substantially more leeway. A year from now, I think you'll be right. >Even >before Hypercard & Multifinder, System 4.1 is useless on a floppy based MAC >because of its size, (150K bigger because, I am led to believe, of the MAC II >color support which is useless baggage on a regular MAC). Mac II support under System 4.1 comes to: 20K Color tables, Picker, etc. 12K Patches 29K Sound stuff 10K because I've probably missed something 55K +/- 5K So about a third of that extra stuff is Mac II, and can be deleted on a regular Mac. Some more can be deleted on a non-ADB Mac, and your total Control Panel setup is smaller if you go back to the System 3.2 Control Panel and delete all those cdevs from the System Folder (although I don't think these figured into your 150K bigger caculation, anyway). And you can always delete those extra patches, and a couple of DRVRs, and a few PACKs, and FONT 0, etc, but you can do that to 3.2 too so yes, 4.1 is huge, but no, not all of it is Mac II. You're still close to right about the "useless on a floppy" statement. It's tolerable on a two-floppy system, (and a lot of future software will probably make use of the Script Manager, so it will probably soon be necessary too), but I think Apple is on the verge of disowning 1-floppy computers and is probably about a year away from disowning 0-HD computers (and this will parallel the rest of the computer world). Fortunately, you don't yet need a CD-ROM to be with it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Oliver Steele ...!{decvax,ihnp4}!mcnc!unc!steele steele%unc@mcnc.org "'As it were' means 'I think that I sound very erudite.' 'Per se' is Latin for 'as it were.' As it were."