wichers@husc9.harvard.edu (John Wichers) (06/27/90)
In article <6645@vax1.acs.udel.EDU> bach@vax1.udel.edu (Baskaran Subramaniam) writes: >Another interesting thing I notice about the prices is that, when I compare >the prices of the existing Macs quoted in the article with the prices quoted >by our University, I find that the Mac SE/30 prices are about 56% cheaper at the >university, whereas the price of a MacIIci is only 42% cheaper! For some >reason Mac SE/30s are discounted heavily for the university! The prices of >SE/30s dropped by about $600 last month at our university. Did the general >market also see a price drop recently for the SE/30s? Does anybody know if >there is going to be another price cut for the SE/30s at universities? We are >thinking of getting a couple of SE/30s for our lab now, should we wait a little >longer? A month or two ago, Apple lowered the (educational, I dunno about market) prices on the Plus, SE, and SE/30. Because of this, you'll probably find a greater educational discount for the compact macs than you will for the II line. As for holding out, I'd wait until one or more of the new macs comes out. You may well decide that one of those will do the job for less (or, alternatively, the introduction of the new macs will force the price of the SE/30 down). Then again, that's just a guess. My advice is worth what you paid for it. =8^) --jjw __ Hail to the sungod. || John Wichers || wichers@husc4.harvard.edu He sure is a fun god. || 121 Museum St #2, Somerville Ma. 02143 Ra! Ra! Ra! || Anarchy - It's not a law, it's just a good idea. || Jesus saves sinners ... and redeems them for valuable cash prizes!!! ||
wichers@husc9.harvard.edu (John Wichers) (06/27/90)
In article <1990Jun26.185628.18480@cbnews.att.com> jbr0@cbnews.att.com (joseph.a.brownlee) writes: >In article <C7SLP4D@xavier.swarthmore.edu> jrd90@campus.swarthmore.edu (James >Deane) writes: >> ... They say it is upgradable to 17 Meg - I'm not sure how >>they do this [...] >Same as now with the IIcx -- 4 1MB SIMMs + 4 256K SIMMs = 17MB Hey, that's a neat trick. Hmmm, the other twelve megs must be virtual, huh? Just a thought. --jjw __ Hail to the sungod. || John Wichers || wichers@husc4.harvard.edu He sure is a fun god. || 121 Museum St #2, Somerville Ma. 02143 Ra! Ra! Ra! || Anarchy - It's not a law, it's just a good idea. || Jesus saves sinners ... and redeems them for valuable cash prizes!!! ||
KPURCELL@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK (06/27/90)
Anybody any idea why Apple are bringing out their new low budget machines based on the 68020, rather than the 68030? Are they going to put in the socket for the 68851 MMU or are they going to try to cripple the machines and omit them (same goes for the 68881/2 FPU). Are they going to try to memory cripple them too? Kevin Purcell ................................... kpurcell @ liverpool.ac.uk \ Surface Science \ Stepwise Refinement n. A sequence of kludges K, \ Liverpool University \ neither distinct or finite, applied to a program P \ Liverpool L69 3BX \ aimed at transforming it into the target program Q.
amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker) (06/29/90)
In article <90178.172523KPURCELL@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK>, KPURCELL@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK writes: > Anybody any idea why Apple are bringing out their new low budget machines > based on the 68020, rather than the 68030? Well, seeing as they're supposed to be as cheap as possible, my first guess would simply be cost. A 68020 + socket is loads cheaper than a 68030... -- Amanda Walker InterCon Systems Corporation -- "Fear not those who argue, but those who dodge." -- Marie Ebner-Eschenbach
bert@snuffleupagus.csd.scarolina.edu (Bert Still) (07/04/90)
amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes: :KPURCELL@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK writes: :: Anybody any idea why Apple are bringing out their new low budget machines :: based on the 68020, rather than the 68030? : :Well, seeing as they're supposed to be as cheap as possible, my first :guess would simply be cost. A 68020 + socket is loads cheaper than a :68030... They might also be staying away from putting even more commitment into the 68030, given that wonderful little court fight between Motorola and Hitachi(?)... After all, no one has ordered Motorola to cease producing the MC68020. ;-) (I really ought to put in a plug for OzTeX sometime. The developers did a very nice job of porting TeX, a technical typesetting program, to the Macintosh, and it sure has been nice to work on a dissertation at home for a change... ;-) ->bert -- __ bert@cs.scarolina.edu OR \----\ __/ | bert@vision1.ece.scarolina.edu | 4 | __ /---/ Fabi|-------__ __ Bert Still \----// \ _/-----------------___^/ \ Univ of South Carolina | () |:|#4|P O R S C H E | _| () |\__ Parallel Supercomputer \__/ ---------------------/ \__/ \--> Initiative ************************************************************************* Porsche: Schonheit ist ihre eigene Belohnung. *************************************************************************
J.COOK@ENS.Prime.COM (07/05/90)
amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes: :KPURCELL@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK writes: :: Anybody any idea why Apple are bringing out their new low budget machines :: based on the 68020, rather than the 68030? : :Well, seeing as they're supposed to be as cheap as possible, my first :guess would simply be cost. A 68020 + socket is loads cheaper than a :68030... Well, I don't know about this for two reasons. One, I seem to recall reading in an article about the time the IIx came out that Apple, with its large order-size clout, was able to convince Motorla to sell 68030s to Apple for about the price of a 68020. The article also rumored that perhaps Motorola wanted to get everyone to go to 68030s so they could stop making 68020s. Second, from a cost of manufacturing point of view, it is cheaper to put a one chip on a board (a 68030) than a chip and a socket (68020 and MMU socket). Jim Cook J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM
eb1z+@andrew.cmu.edu (Edward Joseph Bennett) (07/10/90)
>amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes: > >:KPURCELL@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK writes: >:: Anybody any idea why Apple are bringing out their new low budget machines >:: based on the 68020, rather than the 68030? >: >:Well, seeing as they're supposed to be as cheap as possible, my first >:guess would simply be cost. A 68020 + socket is loads cheaper than a >:68030... >Well, I don't know about this for two reasons. One, I seem to recall reading >in an article about the time the IIx came out that Apple, with its large >order-size clout, was able to convince Motorla to sell 68030s to Apple for >about the price of a 68020. The article also rumored that perhaps Motorola >wanted to get everyone to go to 68030s so they could stop making 68020s. >Second, from a cost of manufacturing point of view, it is cheaper to put a >one chip on a board (a 68030) than a chip and a socket (68020 and MMU socket). >Jim Cook >J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM From what I heard the '020 are less than $100 in bulk while '030 are still around $300. Anyhow I what you say may be true but I'm sure prices have changed considerably since the intro of the IIx (That was ages ago in computer time). I doubt that there are long term fears about '030 production. Most people fear a temporary problem while the courts untangle this. Most are confident of a settlement. Ed