gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu (07/17/90)
----------- In article <1990Jul17.072437.27055@portia.Stanford.EDU>, declan@portia.Stanford.EDU (Declan McCullagh) writes... [...] >You overestimate the power of the marketplace to recognize a Good Thing. Permit >me to amend your Mac II* sales prediction and say that if an emulator was perky >enough (even IIci performance on an '040 cube would be fine), at least Mac IIfx >sales would drop dramatically. And you're probably right - Apple would >recognize that they might actually have some real competition for once and be >forced to revise their price lists accordingly. A Mac II emulator (or board drop in) would be heaven for those torn between buying a IIfx and a Next, or for those who want to buy a Next, but actually wish to use some software (:->). It would be quite irrelevant for the majority of Mac purchasers: if a IIci is expensive at $6000 (and I have it on good authority that IIci prices will drop soon), who is going to be able to afford a $8-10K Next, and then drop in maybe $1k more for the Mac emulator? Only those who really wanted Next to begin with. And what if you want color on your Mac?: color on the Next -- when it comes -- will -- from what I've heard -- be pricey in comparison to the Mac. >Remember, there IS a Macintosh emulator for the Amiga, but it requires the user >to obtain the Apple ROMs (it works with the 128K ones). As far as I know, >that's all Apple can legally copyright; everything else used is off-the-shelf >parts. So all an enterprising company must do is to clone certain parts of One other problem, though: if you look at the Macintosh's System Software, somewhere in there (or in the packaging) it says it can only legally run on a Mac. Now, this has not been tested in court, but I think you can be sure that it would be if a Next emulator came out (I think things like the Magic Sack just haven't been a big enough threat to bother). I think you Next fans are missing a big point here: true, if you have $10k+ to spend, you get much more cool stuff with the Next -- both in terms of hardware and software -- than you might get in a comparable $10k+ Mac (although you can get Macs that run considerably faster). And of course you lose: color, huge amount of software, and -- in my opinion -- a more consistent GUI. But it's bogus to compare "The Next" to "The Mac", because most people are not looking to buy a IIfx or a IIci. They don't _need_ an OD, they don't _need_ a DSP chip, and they don't want to pay $10k+ to get it. They will be more interested in, say, the coming low-end Macs. Which is more likely to be bought by the generic user, the soon-to-be-released $2500 color Mac or the soon-to-be-released >$10k color Next? It's not about mediocrity, it's about giving people technology at a reasonable price. Yeah, Apple's been charging premium bucks, but that's changing. And yeah, Next gives you cutting edge technology, but only if you have mega bucks to get in the door. As philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick) said in an earlier post: "If you are happy with Mac functionality, you can get a workable system for much less than the price of a NeXT. If you really need the features unique to a NeXT, you aren't going to buy a Mac." And that, perhaps, is the point. Robert ============================================================================ = gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu * generic disclaimer: * "It's more fun to = = * all my opinions are * compute" = = * mine * -Kraftwerk = ============================================================================
lacsap@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Pascal Chesnais) (07/18/90)
ZZZZzzzzz..... Can we stop this Mac vs NeXT vs Amiga vs IBM crud? Anything useful to be said on the subject has been said already. Look at the archives if you want to waste time, but don't rehash the same old arguments. Post only if you have something really new to tell the world. pasc -- Pascal Chesnais, Research Specialist, Electronic Publishing Group Media Laboratory, E15-348, 20 Ames Street, Cambridge, Ma, 02139 (617) 253-0311 email: lacsap@plethora.media.mit.edu (NeXT)
gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu (07/18/90)
-------- In article <2939@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>, lacsap@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Pascal Chesnais) writes... > >ZZZZzzzzz..... Can we stop this Mac vs NeXT vs Amiga vs IBM crud? >Anything useful to be said on the subject has been said already. Look >at the archives if you want to waste time, but don't rehash the same >old arguments. Post only if you have something really new to tell the >world. Well, I basically agree. But I think it's interesting how _this_ round of "bash the other computers" began: 1) I (and some others) post some interesting _rumours_ regarding Next, reprinted from MacWeek. I think this falls under the category "something really new to tell the world." (Even though it's only rumours). 2) Next fans respond: "MacWeek is crap. The Mac is crap.", and so on. 3) I (and others) respond: "The Mac is not crap." So, I think if Next fans could get over their contempt and/or inferiority complex of the Mac, we'd avoid wasting bandwidth. IMHO. Robert ============================================================================ = gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu * generic disclaimer: * "It's more fun to = = * all my opinions are * compute" = = * mine * -Kraftwerk = ============================================================================