clark@randvax.ARPA (John Clark) (02/01/84)
So the MacApple doesn't have expansion slots?!
Given Apple's pricing structure, if you like the Mac but want slots, you
might be better off buying a Lisa 2. For about $1K more than the Mac, you
get (among other things) a machine that supposedly will run all Mac
software, plus a bigger monitor (12 in vs 9 in), more RAM (512K vs 128K)
and more RAM expandability (to 1M vs 512K), three expansion slots, and a
keyboard with a numeric pad already built-in. Throw in some more $$$, and
you can even get the hard disk you always wanted.
Of course, the Lisa doesn't have the Mac's beer-cooler tote bag.
I wonder how much hardware expansion you can do thru a high speed serial
port (eg, the Mac's 422 port). The hype I hear about the AppleBus is that
it will pretty much eliminate the need for traditional expansion slots.
I'll have to be convinced of that. It's claimed in the latest InfoWorld
(2/13/84-Jobs and Mac on the cover) that Tecmar will have an expansion box
available...
That issue of InfoWorld conveys the unmistakeable impression of true
MacLove. Having recently gotten a hands-on dealer MacDemo (sorry--I can't
resist), I confess to similar feelings. How can you get emotional about a
micro? My more rational side tells me I don't really need all that hand-
holding, all those cute icons, etc, etc. Give me a decent
keyboard/terminal, and maybe Un*x, and I can do anything I need/want.
Typing commands doesn't bother me. But, jeeze, that Mac sure is FUN. I
long ago gave in to emotion in the purchase of cars; maybe that's my fate
in micros, too...
-- John Clark
clark@rand-unix
{decvax, vortex}!randvax!clarkguy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris) (02/05/84)
> That issue of InfoWorld conveys the unmistakeable impression of true > MacLove. Having recently gotten a hands-on dealer MacDemo (sorry--I can't > resist), I confess to similar feelings. How can you get emotional about a > micro? My more rational side tells me I don't really need all that hand- > holding, all those cute icons, etc, etc. Give me a decent > keyboard/terminal, and maybe Un*x, and I can do anything I need/want. > Typing commands doesn't bother me. But, jeeze, that Mac sure is FUN. I > long ago gave in to emotion in the purchase of cars; maybe that's my fate > in micros, too... When I first moved from a batch system to an interactive system, it was much the same; I didn't really *need* to be able to tell the computer to compile a program and see the results of the compilation immediately, with the ability to zip into the editor, correct the problem, and repeat the compilation, but it sure was *fun*. I'd be curious to see what a UNIX shell constructed around the principle of "well, we can put any kind of image that we want to on the screen, and we can point to anything on the screen quickly, so let's not assume that we have to print a prompt and read a command line" would look like, and where it would be better and where it would be worse than the current command-oriented user interface. Face it, the user interface of UNIX, VMS, MVS/TSO, VM/CMS, RSX-11M, CP/M, MS-DOS, etc. differ from one anoter *far* less than they *all* differ from the desktop-style user interface developed by Xerox and appropriated by Apple. However, the underlying OS doesn't necessarily tie closely with the user interface provided to the system; one could have a UNIX system that provided a desktop-style user interface, just as one could probably stick a conventional command interpreter onto the Mac, or Lisa, or Star, or... Guy Harris {seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy