edwatkeys@pro-sol.cts.com (Ed Watkeys) (06/06/91)
There have been a couple rumors flying around lately regarding the II. For those who missed them, these are THE RUMORS: System 6 for the GS is coming out, and it's supposed to be as fast as System 5 was compared with System 4. Along with System 6, Apple will releasea new II CPU, probably a 2MB IIgs packaged in a different way, and possibly faster (most probably...) The Macintosh LC is dying Anyway, I work at an Apple dealer, and we got something we haven't recieved in a LONG TIME: promotional material for the II. It was talking about software, and multimedia and other stuff of interest to schools. It *did*, however talk about individual consumers, which is something that blew me away. I don't know how true the rumors above are, but I am inclined to think that *something* is happening. Ed Watkeys III Internet: edwatkeys@pro-sol.cts.com ProLine: edwatkeys@pro-sol UUCP: crash!pro-sol!edwatkeys ARPA: crash!pro-sol!edwatkeys@nosc.mil BitNET: edwatkeys%pro-sol.cts.com@nosc.mil slf@pro-berks Internet: slf@pro-berks.cts.com UUCP: crash!pro-berks!slf ARPA: crash!pro-berks!slf@nosc.mil
kenfair@flammulated.rice.edu (Kenneth Jason Fair) (06/07/91)
In article <1991Jun6.111608.436@crash.cts.com> edwatkeys@pro-sol.cts.com (Ed Watkeys) writes: >There have been a couple rumors flying around lately regarding the II. For >those who missed them, these are THE RUMORS: > >System 6 for the GS is coming out, and it's supposed to be as fast as >System 5 was compared with System 4. > >Along with System 6, Apple will releasea new II CPU, probably a 2MB IIgs >packaged in a different way, and possibly faster (most probably...) > >The Macintosh LC is dying > >Anyway, I work at an Apple dealer, and we got something we haven't recieved >in a LONG TIME: promotional material for the II. It was talking about >software, and multimedia and other stuff of interest to schools. It *did*, >however talk about individual consumers, which is something that blew me >away. I don't know how true the rumors above are, but I am inclined to >think that *something* is happening. > > >Ed Watkeys III > >Internet: edwatkeys@pro-sol.cts.com ProLine: edwatkeys@pro-sol >UUCP: crash!pro-sol!edwatkeys ARPA: crash!pro-sol!edwatkeys@nosc.mil >BitNET: edwatkeys%pro-sol.cts.com@nosc.mil > slf@pro-berks >Internet: slf@pro-berks.cts.com >UUCP: crash!pro-berks!slf >ARPA: crash!pro-berks!slf@nosc.mil Strains of Handel's Messiah in the background (Hallelujah! Hallelujah!) I think that we are beginning to see a new view at Apple, Inc. System 6.0, the rumors of a new GS, increasing support, even the (*ACK*) Apple II Guide, all of these make me think that Apple may be coming to realize that the Apple II line is not so outdated after all. Hopefully, they are starting to see that us II users DON'T want to change computers, especially when we have so much invested in the ones we have. That's the point I think Apple missed when it introduced the LC and the Classic, the fact that they ALREADY HAD a low-end, home and school user's machine. Dream...the impossible dream... Mr Toaster -- KEN FAIR - Rice Physics # kenfair@owlnet.rice.edu # AOL: Mr Toaster DISCLAIMER: I don't need one, so this is a non-disclaimer disclaimer. "Well, you didn't bother to find out, did you?" -Dennis
EWINGRA@CTRVAX.VANDERBILT.EDU (06/08/91)
I like the Apple IIgs as much as everyone, but this notion of the Mac LC as being the anti-Christ has got to stop. The Mac LC was created for the sole purpose of creating an entry-level color Mac that didn't cost mega-thousands of dollars. We were getting killed in the college sales ranks because we couldn't directly compete against the IBM Model 55SX. Sure the SE/30 will run computational rings around it, but a small nine-inch black and white screen didn't help our cause at all. The next machine at the time was the IIcx which was too expensive for most students. We needed something cheaper. Plain and simple. Marketing of the LC has been poor lately (read nonexistant) which is really a shame because early shortages no longer exist, and its really a neat little machine. It's far from dying, but it could be selling more. That's part of the reason why Apple introduced two new LC configurations to sell to business since the LC is a perfect 386SX competitor. --Rick Ewing Vanderbilt University P.S. And yes I did work for Apple which is where this perspective comes from.
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (06/08/91)
In article <1991Jun6.111608.436@crash.cts.com> edwatkeys@pro-sol.cts.com (Ed Watkeys) writes: >Anyway, I work at an Apple dealer, and we got something we haven't recieved >in a LONG TIME: promotional material for the II. It was talking about >software, and multimedia and other stuff of interest to schools. It *did*, >however talk about individual consumers, which is something that blew me >away. That is the most encouraging thing to come out of Apple regarding the II family in a long time! I always thought that one of the major causes of the unjust neglect by Apple of the II as a personal computer was that they had assigned Apple II marketing to their educational division, who naturally paid no attention to markets other than the educational market.
philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) (06/09/91)
In article <6D583AE48062A9F8@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu> EWINGRA@CTRVAX.VANDERBILT.EDU writes: >I like the Apple IIgs as much as everyone, but this notion of the Mac LC >as being the anti-Christ has got to stop. Well this certainly makes sense. I've never understood the rational for hoping the LC would fail. > The Mac LC was created for the >sole purpose of creating an entry-level color Mac that didn't cost >mega-thousands of dollars. We were getting killed in the college >sales ranks because we couldn't directly compete against the IBM Model 55SX. >Sure the SE/30 will run computational rings around it, but a small nine-inch >black and white screen didn't help our cause at all. The next machine at >the time was the IIcx which was too expensive for most students. >We needed something cheaper. Plain and simple. The LC was still too expensive. Most scientific software just wasn't being followed up for the Mac. It's not clear why but many significant projects just seemed to disappear. Moreover at a higher level A/UX has not been a raving success.This isn't to say that the GS could have filled in the gap. It could not. However the target market and the price/performance of the LC just didn't coincide. Furthermore, the LC came to be an ill defined computer. The Mac has headed away from the scientific community. As a long term Mac user I must tell you that people just don't want to spend all that much on it when they can get X-terminals, NeXT's, clones,etc...for much less. Moreover the lack of a CLI in the Mac OS is truly a retrictive environment. It's one thing to spend $1000 on a Classic which you can regard as a throw away computer, but any more and you have to ask why.The future does not lie in proprietary systems which is why PC's have been so successful. The Mac and the GS( and NeXT,etc...) need clones. Price is now a major factor. I suggest you look at what happened to plans to move S+ to the Mac, at what happened to the evolution of MathCad for the Mac( compared to the Windows' version it really doesn't hold its own). There is MathWriter which is an excellent technical word processor for the Mac. But much development has shifted away from the Mac and towards Windows, Risc Unix machines( with X as the windowing scheme),.... The GS could stand as a low cost computer for the home which would enable people to communicate with work, do some programming, be a family asset,etc... It may be too late, I don't know. I do know that a commercial that Apple Canada runs which compares a model 70 PS/2 and a IIci and basically conveys the notion that people like using the Mac( and not the PS/2) is simply misleading. I suspect people don't really like using either. That's why you have to pay them to do it. >Marketing of the LC has been poor lately (read nonexistant) which is really >a shame because early shortages no longer exist, and its really a neat >little machine. It's far from dying, but it could be selling more. >That's part of the reason why Apple introduced two new LC configurations >to sell to business since the LC is a perfect 386SX competitor. The LC simply costs too much. So does the GS. Colour "loaded" versions of the 386sx can be had for around $1200( not IBM), and the prices are dropping every month. People know about the LC. They simply feel more comfortable living in a world, which although may not be as elegant, has more choices and costs less in the long run. I hope the LC does succeed. It's a nice computer. I just wouldn't bet on it. The same goes for the si. Perhaps Apple made a mistake in dropping the cx? >--Rick Ewing > Vanderbilt University >P.S. And yes I did work for Apple which is where this perspective comes from. Philip McDunnough Professor, University of Toronto philip@utstat.utoronto.ca [my opinions,...]
edwatkeys@pro-sol.cts.com (Ed Watkeys) (06/10/91)
In-Reply-To: message from philip@utstat.uucp As for the LC, I hope it does suceed, but I don't really like it all that much. I think the entire 12" color monitor thing is a scam to get people to think that it's "bigger" than a nine inch monitor. I also think that it should include a MMU, as well as an FPU. This would increase costs, I know, I know, but the computer is currently a "powerful" computer. At work I describe the LC as "a color Classic." In all, I think it is true, and the least dishonest way of describing the LC. I think a color Classic would be pretty neato (9" color monitor in the Classic box...) Ed Watkeys III Internet: edwatkeys@pro-sol.cts.com ProLine: edwatkeys@pro-sol UUCP: crash!pro-sol!edwatkeys ARPA: crash!pro-sol!edwatkeys@nosc.mil BitNET: edwatkeys%pro-sol.cts.com@nosc.mil
whitewolf@gnh-starport.cts.com (Tae Song) (06/13/91)
|I think that we are beginning to see a new view at Apple, Inc. System |6.0, the rumors of a new GS, increasing support, even the (*ACK*) |Apple II Guide, all of these make me think that Apple may be coming to |realize that the Apple II line is not so outdated after all. |Hopefully, they are starting to see that us II users DON'T want to |change computers, especially when we have so much invested in the ones |we have. That's the point I think Apple missed when it introduced the |LC and the Classic, the fact that they ALREADY HAD a low-end, home and |school user's machine. | |Dream...the impossible dream... | |Mr Toaster The question was never of support (althouth there could've been more), it's Apple realizing the GS's potential... IMHO. INET: whitewolf@gnh-starport.cts.com UUCP: crash!gnh-starport!whitewolf ARPA: crash!gnh-starport!whitewolf@nosc.mil