hagan@ecs.umass.edu (11/10/90)
Isn't it sad, that apple treats the people who purchased their older
machines (when they were brand spanking new) like they were scum for
choosing such a low end machine, and that they should go out, and
spend outrageous sums of money for a new macintosh, in order to be
able to use the latest, and greatest system. Its doubly annoying,
when looking in their adds, they'll proclaim that all of the software
works across all of their platforms, makng the mac great, because a
a person could take MacBlah home from his IIfx at work, and presto,
it will work on his mac+ (or classic, as the case may be, now).
system 7 seems to be bringing that to an end. Now the question
comes up, when i do upgrade out of my plus, what should i get?
if i get a macintosh, the odds are that when the macXXVIIgl is introduced,
the IIfx will be treated the same way ("YOu bought that hunk of ---?!")
apple should keep in mind, that their policies now towards their older
machines that they are phasing out, will come back to haunt them
as the industry progresses. Why not buy a NeXT, or an Amiga, when
you know that your machine is not going to be supported, besides
you'll save a bundle, and get more power out of the bargain.
an option might be a REALISTIC upgrade plan..
where a mac+ to SE/30 would cost less that the price of the SE/30
and the same for the other macs.
-- craig hagan Hagan@alpa.ecs.umass.edu peirce@outpost.UUCP (Michael Peirce) (11/11/90)
In article <11390.273bec86@ecs.umass.edu>, hagan@ecs.umass.edu writes: > Isn't it sad, that apple treats the people who purchased their older > machines (when they were brand spanking new) like they were scum for > choosing such a low end machine, and that they should go out, and > spend outrageous sums of money for a new macintosh, in order to be > able to use the latest, and greatest system. Ho hum. Why do these flames come up every couple of months. When Apple stops selling a Mac, it's no reason to throw the thing away because it's "obsolete". Apple isn't treating anyone "like scum!" My dad bought a Mac 512 years ago and still uses the thing. I often nudge him to upgrade (so he can run some of the software I've written), but he replies "Why bother, it does what I bought it for every bit as well as when I bought it". I think this is a healthy attitude. Do I expect Honda to allow me to upgrade my Accord to a Acura NS-X for "less that the price of a new NS-X?" Nope, nor does Black and Decker let me do something similar with my toaster. I'm happy with my Mac IIcx. It'll serve me well for years to come. Who cares if Apple isn't selling it anymore. The machine didn't break the day Apple took it off their price list. I even use my old Mac Plus on occasions and plan on upgrading it to 2.5M RAM to run System 7 on it (for less than $100) sometime next year. No one's treating me like scum... -- michael peirce -- Michael Peirce -- {apple,decwrl}!claris!outpost!peirce -- Peirce Software -- Suite 301, 719 Hibiscus Place -- Macintosh Programming -- San Jose, California 95117 -- and Consulting -- (408) 244-6554
rbarris@orion.oac.uci.edu (Robert C. Barris) (11/11/90)
In article <11390.273bec86@ecs.umass.edu> hagan@ecs.umass.edu writes: > > Isn't it sad, that apple treats the people who purchased their older >machines (when they were brand spanking new) like they were scum for >choosing such a low end machine, and that they should go out, and >spend outrageous sums of money for a new macintosh, in order to be >able to use the latest, and greatest system. Its doubly annoying, >when looking in their adds, they'll proclaim that all of the software >works across all of their platforms, makng the mac great, because a >a person could take MacBlah home from his IIfx at work, and presto, >it will work on his mac+ (or classic, as the case may be, now). >system 7 seems to be bringing that to an end. Now the question >comes up, when i do upgrade out of my plus, what should i get? >if i get a macintosh, the odds are that when the macXXVIIgl is introduced, >the IIfx will be treated the same way ("YOu bought that hunk of ---?!") >apple should keep in mind, that their policies now towards their older >machines that they are phasing out, will come back to haunt them >as the industry progresses. Why not buy a NeXT, or an Amiga, when >you know that your machine is not going to be supported, besides >you'll save a bundle, and get more power out of the bargain. > >an option might be a REALISTIC upgrade plan.. >where a mac+ to SE/30 would cost less that the price of the SE/30 >and the same for the other macs. > >-- craig hagan Hagan@alpa.ecs.umass.edu Your perception of how Apple treats its customers who have bought older machines is grossly inaccurate. Apple has made the biggest push I've yet seen to keep the old machines alive (at least, back down to the Plus). Your statement that 'system 7 seems to be bringing that to an end' is way out in left field: that is, unless you are still booting from a floppy and can't afford 45 bucks to buy an extra megabyte of RAM. It is amazing to me that so much information gets tossed about on this topic precisely. Also, no one is grabbing you by the neck and forcing you to upgrade to System 7. System 6 is going to be around for a long time, I think. InfoWorld this week (with the IBM 486's on the cover) held a tiny announcement from Dove for a 16MHz 030 board which will be compatible with the Classic, the Plus, and the SE... $799. This was in the Mac News section, by the way. No, it doesn't have the Apple label on it, but it sounds like a REALISTIC upgrade plan to me! Specifically how or where did you get this impression of how Apple (and I mean the company, not a dealer sales person working on commission) treats its customers? And I really don't think that NeXT or CBM-Amiga can really be said to be so much better in their treatment of the installed base. Rob Barris rbarris@orion.oac.uci.edu
clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) (11/11/90)
In article <11390.273bec86@ecs.umass.edu> hagan@ecs.umass.edu writes: > > Isn't it sad, that apple treats the people who purchased their older >machines (when they were brand spanking new) like they were scum for >... >apple should keep in mind, that their policies now towards their older >machines that they are phasing out, will come back to haunt them >as the industry progresses. Why not buy a NeXT, or an Amiga, when >you know that your machine is not going to be supported, besides >you'll save a bundle, and get more power out of the bargain. >... Heh, I suggest you find an owner of the original Amiga and ask how much of the brand-new Amiga software runs on it. I agree that Apple is pretty selective about providing upgrade paths for old machines, but your Plus isn't going to disintegrate or otherwise cease to work when System 7 is released. The Plus is.. what, about five years old now? If you truly bought your Plus when it was brand spanking new, don't you think it's about time to move up? I've done two upgrades and bought two new machines in the six years I've owned a Macintosh, and while many might consider that excessive, I have found the cost/con- venience ratio to be acceptable. (And please don't retort that I must be rich--the pleasure of having money to burn has not yet been mine.) Hesitant buyer: "But if I wait a while, won't prices come down, or won't they add more features?" Experienced user: "If you don't mind waiting forever, the price will be zero and the computer will be able to do everything." -- ........................................................................... : Kathy Strong : "Try our Hubble-Rita: just one shot, : : (Clouds moving slowly) : and everything's blurry" : : clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu : --El Arroyo : :..........................................................................:
wwtaroli@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Bill Taroli) (11/11/90)
In article <273C9EE2.28338@orion.oac.uci.edu> rbarris@orion.oac.uci.edu (Robert C. Barris) writes: >> >> [individual complains about Apple's treatment of its installed base] > > Your perception of how Apple treats its customers who have bought older >machines is grossly inaccurate. Apple has made the biggest push I've yet >seen to keep the old machines alive (at least, back down to the Plus). I'd say this assessment is true of almost any company; it just makes common sense. Would you completely disregard your installed base with the introduction of a new machine? You will note, however, that sometimes serious engineering kludges are performed to achieve this. Both this and the fact that certain advances are witheld (for the simple reason of backward compatability) has been the subject of many heated discussions about Apple's future. One should think about these issues with the respect to the rumors of an 88K machine in the works. >Your >statement that 'system 7 seems to be bringing that to an end' is way out >in left field: that is, unless you are still booting from a floppy and >can't afford 45 bucks to buy an extra megabyte of RAM. It is amazing to me >that so much information gets tossed about on this topic precisely. Also, >no one is grabbing you by the neck and forcing you to upgrade to System 7. >System 6 is going to be around for a long time, I think. Well, I wouldn't be so quick to stomp on people who want to use a computer that doesn't require an instantaneous investment to make it useful; this is part of the reason that most systems now aren't sold with less than 2MB of RAM. But, to upgrade to a new version of the SYSTEM SOFTWARE, a major class of users would be required to do just this (someone, not necessarily Apple, is going to make a bundle!). It's really not surprising that this issue of "7.0 or 6.0, that is the question" upsets people. Think about this for a minute. Apple already can't adequately support its own system software (they do little support themselves on any level). So, now you expect them to be able to support 6.0.x and 7.0.x at the SAME TIME??? Come on, now. What people are afraid of is that their trusty applications will soon move on to 7.0 and leave them behind. Of course, this issue of supporting more than just the latest version of any product comes into play. The software publisher would laugh at the idea they had to support two different versions of one program for a particular machine (some already have too many headaches simply support a few platforms from different manufacturers!). So, who ends up paying? The customer, of course, who is now forced to upgrade rather than face serious problems in the near future by staying with older software. You say that no one is forcing people to upgrade, but as I've briefly discussed above, that's not realistic assessment. Eventually, possibly even within a year of 7.0's appearance, vendors will have completely moved their software to at least a compatability level. Within another 6 to 12 months, the software will begin to take real advantage of 7.0's features. By this time, people using 6.0 will no longer be able to upgrade to new versions of sotware unless the publisher really went out of their way to support all platforms... and we all know how that story goes. > InfoWorld this week (with the IBM 486's on the cover) held a tiny >announcement from Dove for a 16MHz 030 board which will be compatible with >the Classic, the Plus, and the SE... $799. This was in the Mac News section, >by the way. No, it doesn't have the Apple label on it, but it sounds like >a REALISTIC upgrade plan to me! It sounded like that to me, too. At least until Apple's proclamation that no third party upgrade products (specifically the '030 upgrades) would be supported for virtual memory (and you were talking about great support???). In fact, I've upgraded my SE to an '030 and am already running Virtual. So, the amount of time that I can put off upgrading is increased; it is certainly not more than a year or two. > Specifically how or where did you get this impression of how Apple (and I >mean the company, not a dealer sales person working on commission) treats its >customers? And I really don't think that NeXT or CBM-Amiga can really be said >to be so much better in their treatment of the installed base. Let's put it this way: "Call your dealer." By having an inadequately prepared force of people (dealers) take the full burden of support, customers feel that there is no one to properly answer their questions. People often run into situations where a user calls Apple begging for support, only to get referred to their local dealer (at least Apple maintains ONE customer support database!). Then, they are disappointed yet again by the dealer (in far too many cases) who claims that Apple's support database doesn't contain the answer... go figure. Now, Apple has set up an 800 number to stab at a solution, but this number (not surprisingly) will not provide any help whatsoever unless you've already exhausted all other avenues. And THEN, you must describe all sources that you questioned and explain why their answers were inadequate. So, it appears that Apple is indirectly placing the burden of watchdoging the dealers on its CUSTOMERS! Not a very healthy attidude if you want to improve customer satisfaction on the whole, in my opinion. How about it, Apple? Why not an 800 number to provide SUPPORT (vs. support contingent upon how many people you've already been upset by)? Certainly, no company's perfect. But I don't that see that as a reason to pat Apple on the back and say "Good job, Apple". If the company doesn't clean up its problems, they'll come back to haunt them later. -- ******************************************************************************* * Bill Taroli (WWTAROLI@RODAN.acs.syr.edu) | "You can and must understand * * Syracuse University, Syracuse NY | computers NOW!" -- Ted Nelson * *******************************************************************************
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (11/12/90)
In article <39509@ut-emx.uucp> clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) writes: > >Hesitant buyer: "But if I wait a while, won't prices come down, or won't > they add more features?" >Experienced user: "If you don't mind waiting forever, the price will be > zero and the computer will be able to do everything." Yep-- isn't an industry where price drops are the norm really something? Today, the Apple II+, w/64K RAM and two 128K disk drives that my father bought in 1978 for around $1700 would probably go for about $100 The Mac Classic, a more capable machine, retails for less than that Apple II+ did-- in actual dollar amounts-- and this is over 10 years later. -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.
jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) (11/12/90)
Bill,
As far as Apple's VM not working on the 030 accelerated Pluses or SE's,
according to Connectix claims that Apple's implementation of VM is much
cruder than theirs in terms of how it chooses to cache the virtual memory
in real RAM. They also told me that Virtual will be able to work (perhaps a
upgrade will be needed) under System 7.0 as a replacement for Apple's VM.
So I would say that if you have VM for a 030 SE/Plus you'll be set for
System 7.0 regardless of what Apple does. Out of curiousity, how much total
VM do you get on a 030 SE under Virtual? I have 8 meg real/14 meg VM on my
SE/30 under Virtual 2.03. Kinda funny even to be worrying about going past
14 Meg considering that DOS people are still kludging around a 640K
memory model.
Jack Howarthwwtaroli@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Bill Taroli) (11/12/90)
In article <1990Nov11.175402.4291@rice.edu> jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) writes: >They also told me that Virtual will be able to work (perhaps a >upgrade will be needed) under System 7.0 as a replacement for Apple's VM. >So I would say that if you have VM for a 030 SE/Plus you'll be set for >System 7.0 regardless of what Apple does. Good. I've been nothing but pleased with Connectix and have no intention of abandoning their product. It's sort of ironic that outside companies do a better job of designing extensions to the Mac OS than Apple does, in most cases. >Out of curiousity, how much total >VM do you get on a 030 SE under Virtual? I have 8 meg real/14 meg VM on my >SE/30 under Virtual 2.03. Kinda funny even to be worrying about going past >14 Meg considering that DOS people are still kludging around a 640K >memory model. I'm using 16MB (4M physical). I understand that NuBus has something to do with the 14MB limit on the IIs. -- ******************************************************************************* * Bill Taroli (WWTAROLI@RODAN.acs.syr.edu) | "You can and must understand * * Syracuse University, Syracuse NY | computers NOW!" -- Ted Nelson * *******************************************************************************
wiseman@tellabs.com (Jeff Wiseman) (11/13/90)
In article <11390.273bec86@ecs.umass.edu> hagan@ecs.umass.edu writes: >an option might be a REALISTIC upgrade plan.. You're not REALLY suggesting "go Tandy" are you? :-) :-) -- Jeff Wiseman: ....uunet!tellab5!wiseman OR wiseman@TELLABS.COM
bkuo@girtab.usc.edu (Benjamin Kuo) (11/13/90)
Just a note on your comment:
>Let's put it this way: "Call your dealer." By having an inadequately prepared
force of people (dealers) take the full burden of support, customers feel that
there is no one to properly answer their questions.
Having run a small Apple-registered users group for two and a half years, I
know where Apple is now referring users... They are foregoing the usual "call
your dealer" route and saying "call your local users group"--I was fielding
four to five Mac questions or more a day from fed up users (who somehow got
the Apple corporate phone number...) And I wasn't even paid by Apple. I even
received several newsletters/etc (QuickConnect, other in-house) Apple
publications for developers, users groups, and the like, and they stated that
their new policy was to use USERS GROUPS as their customer support.
Why doesn't Apple just set up a customer support group, a support line, and
man it with 50 knowledgeable Mac experts? Relying on a very nebulous source
of aid to users (user groups, nonprofit, already suffering from lack of
volunteers) is no way to go about customer support.
Benjamin Kuo
(former) President, Macintosh Salt Lake Users Groupfiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) (11/13/90)
In article <1990Nov11.174115.29185@eng.umd.edu>, russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: > > Yep-- isn't an industry where price drops are the norm really something? > Today, the Apple II+, w/64K RAM and two 128K disk drives that my father ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Please! 143K/drive... > bought in 1978 for around $1700 would probably go for about $100 -- ------------ The only drawback with morning is that it comes at such an inconvenient time of day. ------------
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (11/13/90)
In article <2587@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) writes: >In article <1990Nov11.174115.29185@eng.umd.edu>, russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: >> >> Yep-- isn't an industry where price drops are the norm really something? >> Today, the Apple II+, w/64K RAM and two 128K disk drives that my father > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Please! 143K/drive... 4K/track * (35 tracks/disk - 4 tracks overhead + track 35) = 128K-- the usable capacity of most of my disks. (Why Woz didn't include track 35 in unmodified DOS I don't know). But, even this is incorrect-- When I bought my Apple, it had DOS 3.2-- the only 16 sector disks were Pascal. So it was 1/4K/sector * 13 sectors/track * (35 tracks - 4 tracks overhead) = 100.75 K -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.
francis@arthur.uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) (11/14/90)
In article <1990Nov13.045214.12440@eng.umd.edu> russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: >In article <2587@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) writes: >>In article <1990Nov11.174115.29185@eng.umd.edu>, russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: >>> >>> Yep-- isn't an industry where price drops are the norm really something? >>> Today, the Apple II+, w/64K RAM and two 128K disk drives that my father >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>Please! 143K/drive... > >4K/track * (35 tracks/disk - 4 tracks overhead + track 35) = 128K-- the usable >capacity of most of my disks. (Why Woz didn't include track 35 in unmodified >DOS I don't know). Er, if you're gonna deduct the FAT & system tracks of the II's disks, you should compare it with a Mac floppy with a system installed. If you want a decent system, you essentially don't have ANY overhead (unless you've gone high-density). When System 7 comes out, the question will be moot, since nobody will be able to put systems on their floppies. | Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.| | Department of Mathematics |=============================================| | University of Chicago | Non sequiturs make me eat lampshades | | francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | |
sasg0244@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven Arthur Sivier) (11/14/90)
francis@arthur.uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) writes: >gone high-density). When System 7 comes out, the question will be moot, >since nobody will be able to put systems on their floppies. is this true? what happens with a hard disk crash then? i think we'd have to be able to boot from a floppy. if not i'd think that would be reason enough to avoid system 7. Steve Sivier
rsholmes@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Rich Holmes) (11/14/90)
In article <1990Nov13.221010.5998@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> sasg0244@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven Arthur Sivier) writes: >is this true? what happens with a hard disk crash then? i think we'd >have to be able to boot from a floppy. if not i'd think that would >be reason enough to avoid system 7. I seem to recall hearing you'll be able to put (at least a minimal) Sys. 7 on (at least a FDHD) floppy. But even if not -- you can still boot Sys. 6 from a floppy to resurrect your Sys. 7 hard disk. -- - Rich Holmes rich@suhep.bitnet Syracuse U. Physics Dept. rich@suhep.phy.syr.edu or if you must: rsholmes@rodan.acs.syr.edu "I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous" -- Flying Karamazov Brothers
berger@atropa (Dire Wolf) (11/16/90)
peirce@outpost.UUCP (Michael Peirce) writes: >Do I expect Honda to allow me to upgrade my Accord to a Acura NS-X >for "less that the price of a new NS-X?" Nope, nor does Black and >Decker let me do something similar with my toaster. >-- michael peirce *---- I don't expect a toaster to be expandable or easily upgradable. I do expect that of a computer which is supposed to be more flexible than a toaster by its very nature. People who buy toaster-computers are not very foresighted, in my opinion. But I don't think it's fair to expect computer users to be satisfied with the very same hardware and software two years down the line. -- Mike Berger Department of Statistics, University of Illinois AT&TNET 217-244-6067 Internet berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu
berger@atropa (Dire Wolf) (11/16/90)
rbarris@orion.oac.uci.edu (Robert C. Barris) writes: > InfoWorld this week (with the IBM 486's on the cover) held a tiny >announcement from Dove for a 16MHz 030 board which will be compatible with >the Classic, the Plus, and the SE... $799. This was in the Mac News section, >by the way. No, it doesn't have the Apple label on it, but it sounds like >a REALISTIC upgrade plan to me! *---- And when the next minor or major release of the Mac operating system doesn't work on your third-party motherboard, and considering how well Apple supports third-party suppliers of Mac hardware, how good a deal will it be? -- Mike Berger Department of Statistics, University of Illinois AT&TNET 217-244-6067 Internet berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu
briang@bari.Eng.Sun.COM (Brian Gordon) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Nov15.220217.20055@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@atropa (Dire Wolf) writes: !peirce@outpost.UUCP (Michael Peirce) writes: ! !>Do I expect Honda to allow me to upgrade my Accord to a Acura NS-X !>for "less that the price of a new NS-X?" Nope, nor does Black and !>Decker let me do something similar with my toaster. ! !>-- michael peirce !*---- ! !I don't expect a toaster to be expandable or easily upgradable. I !do expect that of a computer which is supposed to be more flexible than !a toaster by its very nature. People who buy toaster-computers are not !very foresighted, in my opinion. But I don't think it's fair to expect !computer users to be satisfied with the very same hardware and software !two years down the line. !-- So that makes it more like the car analogy. Again, no car manufacturer I know of "upgrades" cars for any price. "Hobbiest" computer manufacturers frequently do. Like most users, I know when I buy that I probably won't "be satisfied with the very same hardware and software two years down the line", and have to take that into account when I am buying. The same system will have the same capabilities I bought it for, but available capabilities and my expectations will have continued to progress. Sounds like cars again ;-} -- :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: | Brian G. Gordon briang@Sun.COM (if you trust exotic mailers) | | ...!sun!briangordon (if you route it yourself) | :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:
george@swbatl.sbc.com (George Nincehelser 5-6544) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Nov15.220217.20055@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@atropa (Dire Wolf) writes: >I don't expect a toaster to be expandable or easily upgradable. I >do expect that of a computer which is supposed to be more flexible than >a toaster by its very nature. People who buy toaster-computers are not >very foresighted, in my opinion. But I don't think it's fair to expect >computer users to be satisfied with the very same hardware and software >two years down the line. Some of us are foresighted enough to know that we'll never need expandability or upgradability in the toaster machines that we buy. Why pay for something that you know you are not going to need? -- / George D. Nincehelser \ uunet!swbatl!george \ / / Southwestern Bell Telephone \ Phone: (314) 235-6544 \ / / / Advanced Technology Laboratory \ Fax: (314) 235-5797 \ / / / /\ 1010 Pine, St. Louis, MO 63101 \ de asini umbra disceptare \
berger@atropa (Dire Wolf) (11/17/90)
george@swbatl.sbc.com (George Nincehelser 5-6544) writes: >Some of us are foresighted enough to know that we'll never need expandability >or upgradability in the toaster machines that we buy. Why pay for something >that you know you are not going to need? >-- The computer, by its very nature, is not a toaster (nor an automobile). How many of us are really foresighted enough to KNOW what we will need two years hence? -- Mike Berger Department of Statistics, University of Illinois AT&TNET 217-244-6067 Internet berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu
george@swbatl.sbc.com (George Nincehelser 5-6544) (11/18/90)
In article <1990Nov16.215447.26110@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@atropa (Dire Wolf) writes: >george@swbatl.sbc.com (George Nincehelser 5-6544) writes: > >>Some of us are foresighted enough to know that we'll never need expandability >>or upgradability in the toaster machines that we buy. Why pay for something >>that you know you are not going to need? > >>-- >The computer, by its very nature, is not a toaster (nor an automobile). >How many of us are really foresighted enough to KNOW what we will need >two years hence? >-- I pretty much know my needs for the next 5 years (based on current conditions and likely future events). I'm sure others do also. Based on my projected future needs, I don't need many expansion slots. Based on your projected future needs, you need many expansion slots. So...to answer your question: More people than *you* obviously think. We aren't total morons, you know. Let me ask you: Would it be shortsighted of me to buy a two slice toaster rather than a four slice toaster? (I'm talking about real toasters here) Would it be shortsighted of me to buy a motorcycle rather than a station wagon? Would it be shortsighted of me to buy a 3 bedroom house rather than a four bedroom house? And finally... Would you purchase a toaster with expansion slots? The point is, you can't say a person is shortsighted about any purchase without knowing about their needs and wants. -- / George D. Nincehelser \ uunet!swbatl!george \ / / Southwestern Bell Telephone \ Phone: (314) 235-6544 \ / / / Advanced Technology Laboratory \ Fax: (314) 235-5797 \ / / / /\ 1010 Pine, St. Louis, MO 63101 \ de asini umbra disceptare \
captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) (11/18/90)
In article <2587@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) writes: >In article <1990Nov11.174115.29185@eng.umd.edu>, russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: >> Yep-- isn't an industry where price drops are the norm really something? >> Today, the Apple II+, w/64K RAM and two 128K disk drives that my father >Please! 143K/drive... >> bought in 1978 for around $1700 would probably go for about $100 ^^^^ Well, as long as we're nitpicking... back in '78 it would've been a 13-sector per track drive, i.e., 116K/drive... That seemed like a lot back then... and now I'm short on space on my 175 meg Imprimis... ;-) -Ivan Cavero Belaunde Hardware Design Engineer GCC Technologies Internet: captkidd@ATHENA.MIT.EDU Standard disclaimers apply
jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) (11/18/90)
>I'm using 16MB (4M physical). I understand that NuBus has something to do with >the 14MB limit on the IIs. > >-- >******************************************************************************* >* Bill Taroli (WWTAROLI@RODAN.acs.syr.edu) | "You can and must understand * >* Syracuse University, Syracuse NY | computers NOW!" -- Ted Nelson * >******************************************************************************* Bill, The VM on the II series of Mac's (that includes the SE/30 which has essentially IIx ROMs) is implemented giving the VM access to memory mapped to each NuBus slot. The Nubus slots get 1 meg each. As the Mac and video card each are a slot, only 6 extra meg can be assigned beside the 8 meg available through the motherboard's simm slots. It is my understanding that 32 bit clean ROMs (aka IIci, IIfx or IIsi) are required to get more than 8 meg real or 14 meg virtual memory. When if ever Apple will do a ROM upgrade for the II, IIx, IIcx and SE/30 is another question. My guess is they won't and we'll be locked at 14 meg VM until Apple implements premptive multitasking and protected memory in System 8.0 which would require yet another ROM upgrade. On the otherhand by then Apple may assume we'll dump our II's like we did the 128 and 512 K Macs and buy newer models. Cheers... Jack p.s. Apple sells hardware, the system software is just part of the packing material...
sund@tde.lth.se (Lars Sundstr|m) (11/20/90)
In article <1990Nov17.230151.9843@rice.edu> jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) writes: It is my understanding that 32 bit clean ROMs (aka IIci, IIfx or IIsi) are required to get more than 8 meg real or 14 meg virtual memory. When if ever Apple will do a ROM upgrade for the II, IIx, IIcx and SE/30 is another question. My guess is they won't and we'll be locked at 14 meg VM until Apple implements premptive multitasking In my SE/30 manual it says that it will be possible to use up to 128Megs!!! of RAM when appropiate SIMMs are available. Well, 4MB SIMMs are available and at a reasonable price too. If Apple promised us the opportunity to use more than 8Megs then they have promised us a ROM-upgrade too. /Lars -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Lars Sundstrom, Lund University, Department of Applied Electronics, | | Box 118, S-221 00 Lund, Sweden Phone: +46-46121598 Fax:+46-46129948 | | Internet: sund@tde.lth.se | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
wilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) (11/21/90)
In article <1990Nov17.230151.9843@rice.edu> jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) writes: >It is my understanding that >32 bit clean ROMs (aka IIci, IIfx or IIsi) are required to get more than >8 meg real or 14 meg virtual memory. Very true. >When if ever Apple will do a ROM upgrade >for the II, IIx, IIcx and SE/30 is another question. My guess is they won't Recently, someone from Apple started collecting comments on the Net from people who wanted such an upgrade. Shortly afterward, he posted that the person at Apple who would be in charge of such a thing responded "Hmm. We never guessed that anyone would want such an upgrade." So there are now people looking into it. Never fear! If enough people say they want a product it's likely to appear, although it may take a while. -- Mark Wilkins -- ******* "Freedom is a road seldom traveled by the multitude!" ********** *-----------------------------------------------------------------------------* * Mark R. Wilkins wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu {uunet}!jarthur!wilkins * ****** MARK.WILKINS on AppleLink ****** MWilkins on America Online ******
jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) (11/21/90)
In article <9716@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> wilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) writes: > Recently, someone from Apple started collecting comments on the Net from >people who wanted such an upgrade. Shortly afterward, he posted that the >person at Apple who would be in charge of such a thing responded "Hmm. We >never guessed that anyone would want such an upgrade." > > So there are now people looking into it. Never fear! If enough people >say they want a product it's likely to appear, although it may take a while. > >-- Mark Wilkins >-- >******* "Freedom is a road seldom traveled by the multitude!" ********** >*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------* >* Mark R. Wilkins wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu {uunet}!jarthur!wilkins * > >****** MARK.WILKINS on AppleLink ****** MWilkins on America Online ****** Mark, You have to remember that Apple has a deep fear of wandering ROMs and will avoid have more than one set of ROMs for each CPU at all costs. Considering the number of 128K ROMs floating about, I believe Apple will need to assure itself this won't happen with the 256/512K ROMs. Maybe they will, maybe they won't... Jack
wilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) (11/21/90)
Re: the proposition that Apple must control their ROM distribution.
Very true, but the issue remains that they put the ROM SIMM socket there
in the first place, probably because they knew that it would be needed.
Face it, if they decide it's important they'll figure out a way to protect
their intellectual property rights, and I don't think it'll take more than a
few days for someone to think up a good idea.
It might even be as simple as requiring a serial number from the dealer
for every upgrade kit sold. If the warranty registration card was sent in,
they can cross-check the number. If a set goes astray, the dealer gets
support revoked.
No, seriously. All indications are that it just wasn't seen as that big
an issue, and conspiracy theories are probably just paranoia.
-- Mark Wilkins
--
******* "Freedom is a road seldom traveled by the multitude!" **********
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Mark R. Wilkins wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu {uunet}!jarthur!wilkins *
****** MARK.WILKINS on AppleLink ****** MWilkins on America Online ******clarson@ux.acs.umn.edu (Chaz Larson) (11/21/90)
[Much discussion about ROM replacement distribution deleted] OK, I've got a 32-bit clean ROM question for you folks. I have an SE/30, a mcahine whose ROMs are not, of course, 32-bit clean. I would like them to be so. Now, say a friend has a machine which features a 32-bit clean ROM SIMM -- say, a IIci. He doesn't care if his machine is 32-bit clean, since he is not a particularly technically-oriented user -- he'll never want 500 Mb of VM, for example. My question is this: Can these two ROM SIMMs be swapped in order to accomplish the 32-bit cleanness of the SE/30, or is the ROM SIMM pinout different for every machine, like the PDS pinout is? chaz -- Someone please release me from this trance. clarson@ux.acs.umn.edu AOL:Crowbone
wwtaroli@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Bill Taroli) (11/22/90)
In article <1990Nov17.230151.9843@rice.edu> jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) writes: >>I'm using 16MB (4M physical). I understand that NuBus has something to do with >>the 14MB limit on the IIs. > >[...] >only 6 extra meg can be assigned beside the 8 meg >available through the motherboard's simm slots. It is my understanding that >32 bit clean ROMs (aka IIci, IIfx or IIsi) are required to get more than >8 meg real or 14 meg virtual memory. You are quite corect in your statement. Connectix's Virtual product maps your physical RAM to a virtual memory space. Thus, you aren't getting 14M ADDED to the 8M of physical RAM... the extra 6M of address space is simply being used to make it appear as though you had 14M ALTOGETHER. (Thus, only 8M of the 14M can be present in physical RAM at one time.) -- ******************************************************************************* * Bill Taroli (WWTAROLI@RODAN.acs.syr.edu) | "You can and must understand * * Syracuse University, Syracuse NY | computers NOW!" -- Ted Nelson * *******************************************************************************
rmh@apple.com (Rick Holzgrafe) (11/22/90)
In article <2748@ux.acs.umn.edu> clarson@ux.acs.umn.edu (Chaz Larson) writes: > I have an SE/30, a mcahine whose ROMs are not, of course, 32-bit clean. I would > like them to be so. Now, say a friend has a machine which features a 32-bit > clean ROM SIMM -- say, a IIci. He doesn't care if his machine is 32-bit clean, > since he is not a particularly technically-oriented user -- he'll never want > 500 Mb of VM, for example. > > My question is this: Can these two ROM SIMMs be swapped in order to accomplish > the 32-bit cleanness of the SE/30, or is the ROM SIMM pinout different for > every machine, like the PDS pinout is? I'm not the ultimate guru on this, but I strongly suspect the ROMs are not interchangable regardless of the pinouts. The ROMs will contain hardware-specific code that will differ for the SE/30 and the IIci. ========================================================================== Rick Holzgrafe | {sun,voder,nsc,mtxinu,dual}!apple!rmh Software Engineer | AppleLink HOLZGRAFE1 rmh@apple.com Apple Computer, Inc. | "All opinions expressed are mine, and do 20525 Mariani Ave. MS: 3-PK | not necessarily represent those of my Cupertino, CA 95014 | employer, Apple Computer Inc."
francis@arthur.uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) (11/22/90)
In article <1990Nov20.085055.29421@lth.se> sund@tde.lth.se (Lars Sundstr|m) writes: >In my SE/30 manual it says that it will be possible to use up to >128Megs!!! of RAM when appropiate SIMMs are available. Well, 4MB >SIMMs are available and at a reasonable price too. If Apple promised >us the opportunity to use more than 8Megs then they have promised >us a ROM-upgrade too. Not at all. Simply read "appropriate SIMMs" to include ROM SIMMs. :-) | Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.| | Department of Mathematics |=============================================| | University of Chicago | Non sequiturs make me eat lampshades | | francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | |
francis@arthur.uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) (11/22/90)
In article <9728@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> wilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) writes: >an issue, and conspiracy theories are probably just paranoia. Ever think about who starts conspiracy theories? Maybe THEY want us to be afraid! :-) :-) | Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.| | Department of Mathematics |=============================================| | University of Chicago | Non sequiturs make me eat lampshades | | francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | |
jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) (11/22/90)
In article <1990Nov21.191611.8439@rodan.acs.syr.edu> wwtaroli@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Bill Taroli) writes: >In article <1990Nov17.230151.9843@rice.edu> jack@Taffy.rice.edu (Jack W. Howarth) writes: >>>I'm using 16MB (4M physical). I understand that NuBus has something to do with >>>the 14MB limit on the IIs. >> >>[...] >>only 6 extra meg can be assigned beside the 8 meg >>available through the motherboard's simm slots. It is my understanding that >>32 bit clean ROMs (aka IIci, IIfx or IIsi) are required to get more than >>8 meg real or 14 meg virtual memory. > >You are quite corect in your statement. Connectix's Virtual product maps your >physical RAM to a virtual memory space. Thus, you aren't getting 14M ADDED to >the 8M of physical RAM... the extra 6M of address space is simply being used >to make it appear as though you had 14M ALTOGETHER. (Thus, only 8M of the 14M >can be present in physical RAM at one time.) > >-- >******************************************************************************* >* Bill Taroli (WWTAROLI@RODAN.acs.syr.edu) | "You can and must understand * >* Syracuse University, Syracuse NY | computers NOW!" -- Ted Nelson * >******************************************************************************* That's what I like so much about Virtual is that it is actually a ram cache of sorts. When applications allocate 2 or 3 meg, much of that heap space is empty or seldom used by the application. Virtual decides how many pages of virtual memory deserve to get actual ram memory. A much more effective use of actual memory than Apple's heap/stack system alone. Jack Howarth
sund@tde.lth.se (Lars Sundstr|m) (11/23/90)
In article <1990Nov21.213351.694@midway.uchicago.edu> francis@arthur.uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) writes: In article <1990Nov20.085055.29421@lth.se> sund@tde.lth.se (Lars Sundstr|m) writes: >In my SE/30 manual it says that it will be possible to use up to >128Megs!!! of RAM when appropiate SIMMs are available. Well, 4MB >SIMMs are available and at a reasonable price too. If Apple promised >us the opportunity to use more than 8Megs then they have promised >us a ROM-upgrade too. Not at all. Simply read "appropriate SIMMs" to include ROM SIMMs. Sigh. The manual was referring to the RAM SIMM slots. -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Lars Sundstrom, Lund University, Department of Applied Electronics, | | Box 118, S-221 00 Lund, Sweden Phone: +46-46121598 Fax:+46-46129948 | | Internet: sund@tde.lth.se | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
ken@slhisc.uucp (Ken Stamm) (11/26/90)
Concerning ROM upgrades for older macs, specifically the mac II: Apple sells something called a FDHD ROM upgrade for the II, to enable the II to use superdrives (and combo FDHD + 800K (yes? no?)) They also sell the superdrive to go along with this upgrade, separately. Question: Is this ROM upgrade for II owners good for anything other than FDHD use? Are these new ROMs 32-bit clean? Is this upgrade the holy grail for Mac II owners wanting new ROMs? Please post answers. Enquiring minds want to know. -- Ken Stamm (ken@slhisc.uucp, sun.com!gotham!slhisc!ken) (212)341-3868 Shearson Lehman Brothers, 390 Greenwich St. 4W, New York NY 10013 Views expressed here are opaque to the above corporation.
woods@convex.com (Darrin Woods) (11/27/90)
In regards to the Mac II ROM upgrade to the FDHD - they are the same ROM as the IIx (just in separate chips rather than on SIMM socket), they are NOT 32 bit clean. Right now the only 32 bit clean ROM's are in the IIci, fx and si. As to whether or not Apple will upgrade the ROM's when 7.0 is available to the general public - Probably. If (and when) they do, it will be handled the same way ROM's are treated now. You will take your mac to an authorized Apple Dealer - they will install the ROM's. Apple law says - "For every set of ROM's we sell you, you must return an equal amount of valid ROM - OR ELSE NO DEALERSHIP" No serial number tracking, no end user hassle. No Problem Darrin R. Woods (Blacksheep) Senior Systems Engineer -- Darrin R. Woods woods@convex.com This is a guest account. Convex knows nothing about what I'm saying, or even that I'm saying it.
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (11/28/90)
In article <1990Nov26.154537.177@slhisc.uucp> ken@slhisc.uucp (Ken Stamm) writes: >Concerning ROM upgrades for older macs, specifically the mac II: > >Apple sells something called a FDHD ROM upgrade for the II, to enable the >II to use superdrives (and combo FDHD + 800K (yes? no?)) >They also sell the superdrive to go along with this upgrade, separately. > >Question: Is this ROM upgrade for II owners good for anything other than >FDHD use? Are these new ROMs 32-bit clean? Is this upgrade the holy grail >for Mac II owners wanting new ROMs? According to one of the tech notes, these are IIx ROMS ( I believe the SWIM chip also comes with this upgrade). Thus, they are not 32-bit clean. -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.