barry@world.std.com (Barry L Wolman) (05/25/91)
Apple has recently introduced a 5MB IIci configuration with a 160MB internal hard drive. Who supplies the mechanism? Is this the same as the 170MB Quantum I've seen advertised by mail order houses such as Alliance Peripheral Systems? Thanks, Barry Wolman -- Barry Wolman 159 Oxbow Road Needham, MA 02192 617-449-3874
straka@cbnewsc.att.com (richard.j.straka) (06/07/91)
In article <1991May25.043909.765@world.std.com> barry@world.std.com (Barry L Wolman) writes: |Apple has recently introduced a 5MB IIci configuration with a 160MB |internal hard drive. Who supplies the mechanism? Is this the same |as the 170MB Quantum I've seen advertised by mail order houses such |as Alliance Peripheral Systems? I read in EE Times that the disk drive mentioned here is manufactured by IBM. Yes, IBM! Necessity makes for strakng bedfellows sometimes. -- Richard Straka AT&T Bell Laboratories, IH-6K311 UUCP: att!ihlpf!straka INTERNET: richard.straka@att.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MSDOS: All the wonderfully arcane syntax of UNIX(R), but without the power.
cjeff@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Carl J.M. Alexander) (06/08/91)
In article <1991Jun7.125253.10301@cbnewsc.att.com> straka@cbnewsc.att.com (richard.j.straka) writes: >In article <1991May25.043909.765@world.std.com> barry@world.std.com (Barry L Wolman) writes: >|Apple has recently introduced a 5MB IIci configuration with a 160MB >|internal hard drive. Who supplies the mechanism? > >I read in EE Times that the disk drive mentioned here is manufactured by IBM. >Yes, IBM! Necessity makes for strakng bedfellows sometimes. >-- >Richard Straka AT&T Bell Laboratories, IH-6K311 Well, nobody in net.land ever made any great claims for the collective IQ of Apple management. ;-) But I'll bet there's someone in IBM management who's clever enough to dream up a way to sell Apple a batch of drives that are ever-so-subtly defective....
philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick) (06/08/91)
In article <1991Jun7.231510.16985@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, cjeff@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Carl J.M. Alexander) writes: |> In article <1991Jun7.125253.10301@cbnewsc.att.com> straka@cbnewsc.att.com (richard.j.straka) writes: |> >I read in EE Times that the disk drive mentioned here is manufactured by IBM. |> >Yes, IBM! Necessity makes for strakng bedfellows sometimes. |> |> But I'll bet there's someone in IBM management who's clever enough to dream |> up a way to sell Apple a batch of drives that are ever-so-subtly defective.... |> Who knows? Has anyone read the story in Wall Street Journal about Apple considering IBM's RISC processor for its future machine? Any thoughts on this? Could it be that IBM is getting tired of Microsoft? I hope Apple will make a technically reasonable decision (as I believe they did in going for the Motorola for the original Mac) if they are chosing a new CPU. As with CISC, there are some dud RISC architectures. -- Philip Machanick philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) (06/08/91)
philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick) writes: >Who knows? Has anyone read the story in Wall Street Journal about >Apple considering IBM's RISC processor for its future machine? >Any thoughts on this? Could it be that IBM is getting tired of >Microsoft? I think IBM got tired of Microsoft quite a while ago. >I hope Apple will make a technically reasonable >decision (as I believe they did in going for the Motorola >for the original Mac) if they are chosing a new CPU. So do I. IBM's RS/6000 is very good, as are the MIPS R4000 and of course Motorola's 88110, all of which Apple is rumoured to be "considering". I guess there's sentimental value attached to going with Motorola, but there must be some doubts after the slow delivery of the 68040, and the technical complexity of the 88110. >As with CISC, there are some dud RISC architectures. Like the SPARC for example. I would be extremely surprised (and disappointed) if Apple went with SPARC. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu "And remember, whatever you do, DON'T MENTION THE WAR!"
breidenb@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Oliver Breidenbach) (06/10/91)
In article <1991Jun8.080103.1106@neon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes: >philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick) writes: > >>Who knows? Has anyone read the story in Wall Street Journal about >>Apple considering IBM's RISC processor for its future machine? >>I hope Apple will make a technically reasonable >>decision (as I believe they did in going for the Motorola >>for the original Mac) if they are chosing a new CPU. >> ... >>As with CISC, there are some dud RISC architectures. > > Like the SPARC for example. I would be extremely surprised (and >disappointed) if Apple went with SPARC. As fore that matter, I wouldn't be surprised at all if Apple develops a new RISC Architecture themselves for this new generation of Apple computers. That would give them the ultimate controll over clones. ;-) And BTW, it is called ARM - Apple Risc Machine ;-) (as for the rumours.) O. (the mysterious ;-) --- Sorry, I can't include my .signature, it is scrambled with a top secret algorithm which is not allowed to be distributed digitally. But if you send me a SASE, I'll probably send you a paper copy. Include as much money as you like.