jbasara@ssdc (jim basara) (02/10/91)
My SO & I are about to purchase a Mac and are deciding between an IIsi and an LC. Actually we want to go with the LC because of $$$$ but wont if there is a significant limitation. I would like to hear some answers and opinions to the following questions from those of you who have knowledge of these systems. I also have some questions about other mac issues. 1. What is the upgrade potential of the LC. Does it have an expansion slot? If it does is it the same as the si? How many SIMM slots does it have and what is the memory limitiations ? 2. I see on the Mac product list that I have that there is something called a Macintosh LC 512K VRAM SIMM which supposedly allows greater color depth. What is this item and why is it needed for the LC? What is different about the LC architecture to require this SIMM? Is there a significant difference between the graphics capabilties between the LC and the si? 3. Concerning monitors, I would like to hear opinions on the 12" vs 13" color monitors. I do not plan on doing alot of game playing, but my work will require me to do detailed drawings. Also, I will require the ability to display some maps and charts. 4. Is there any difference in the area of MIDI capabilities between the two systems? 5. Does the LC conform to Mac architecture to the degree that software written on the LC will run on the Mac? thanks in advance I would also like to hear from LC owners about their satisfaction with the system. jim basara uunet!ssdc!jbasara
cfejm@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (John Miller) (02/13/91)
In article <631@ssdc?> jbasara@ssdc (jim basara) writes: > >My SO & I are about to purchase a Mac and are deciding between an IIsi and >an LC. Actually we want to go with the LC because of $$$$ but wont if there >is a significant limitation. I would like to hear some answers and opinions > [some questions deleted] >3. Concerning monitors, I would like to hear opinions on the 12" vs 13" color >monitors. I do not plan on doing alot of game playing, but my work will >require me to do detailed drawings. Also, I will require the ability to >display some maps and charts. > Having just investigated the Apple color monitor situation, I' strongly in favor of the 13" system--the 12" has roughly the same pixel resolution as the _small_ mac screen (512 wide and a little deeper), and just gives you larger pixels. Any detailed work would profit from the higher resolution of the 13" screen (640x480). You might want to wait 'till mid March, when Ehman is coming out with a (presumably less expensive-than-Apple's) color monitor system (Trinitron based in 13 and 20" configurations, I hear). __John
ingemar@isy.liu.se (Ingemar Ragnemalm) (02/14/91)
labc-1ic@e260-1e.berkeley.edu (Willy S. Liao) writes: >In article <631@ssdc?> jbasara@ssdc (jim basara) writes: >> >>...stuff deleted... >> >>2. I see on the Mac product list that I have that there is something called >>a Macintosh LC 512K VRAM SIMM which supposedly allows greater color depth. >>What is this item and why is it needed for the LC? What is different about >>the LC architecture to require this SIMM? Is there a significant difference >>between the graphics capabilties between the LC and the si? >Yes, there is a difference between the LC & si. The si internal video is >virtually the same as the ci's--it uses main DRAM, NOT dedicated VRAM. Due >to technical details about bus contention, this can impose a slight >performance penalty on CPU accesses to RAM on the si & ci, depending >on how deep the screen is. The fact is that in *some* cases, the performance penalty is severe. My IIsi runs slower *only* with 8-bit mode *and* Multifinder. It all depends on in what memory the active program runs, I guess. There is no noticable dependency on screen depth, except for the amount of data involved. Just displaying 8 bits instead of 4, 2 or 1 makes no difference. >The LC has dedicated VRAM on the motherboard, separate from the 2 megs >DRAM soldered on for main memory. --more-- >On this subject, you should be aware that since the data path is only 16 bits >wide, video writes will be slower than on the IIsi, even accounting for the >dedicated VRAM on the LC. I don't think it's that much slower, but check >with someone who owns an LC on this subject. If you do a lot of graphics, >this may be a problem. It is not noticable as far as I could tell. All tests I could run said that the LC is as fast as a (plain) Mac II. The IIsi is usually noticably faster, but when it slows down, it is slower than both a MacII and an LC. --more stuff deleted-- -- Ingemar Ragnemalm Dept. of Electrical Engineering ...!uunet!mcvax!enea!rainier!ingemar .. University of Linkoping, Sweden ingemar@isy.liu.se