crew.wicklein@pro-midnightex.cts.com (Chris Wicklein) (04/07/91)
Gee Wizz. Does TWGS'ed Mac IIfx mean an accerated (sp?) Mac or a GS with a TWGS board? Just wondering. It's not that Apple II technology isn't competitive (a well equiped GS is on par with a fast '386 running Windows, yet a GS can be purchased as minimal as a fast //e), it's just that Apple can't set a reasonable price or market the machine. For the least advertised PC of all time to sell for 14 years (so far) is beyond anything I could have ever imagined before II-dom. The II is especially well suited to some applications because of superior performance in area like high speed disk access and sound synth. I don't expect the II to last "forever", but the year 2000 isn't unreasonable. ---- ProLine: crew.wicklein@pro-midnightex Internet: crew.wicklein@pro-midnightex.cts.com UUCP: crash!pro-midnightex!crew.wicklein ARPA: crash!pro-midnightex!crew.wicklein@nosc.mil
giovin@ecs.umass.edu (04/08/91)
> I don't expect the II to last "forever", but the year 2000 isn't > unreasonable. Maybe this year 2000 date was a set goal for Apple. Notice that Appleworks will not allow a year 2000 date to be entered. Rocky
philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) (04/08/91)
In article <8436@crash.cts.com> crew.wicklein@pro-midnightex.cts.com (Chris Wicklein) writes: > > It's not that Apple II technology isn't competitive (a well equiped GS >is on par with a fast '386 running Windows Look I really like my Zip'd GS and consider the GS a fine, if very overpriced, micro. However, you can't be serious when comparing a fast 386 from a good company to a GS. A fast 386 running Windows is far better for most purposes than a GS. I am simply fortunate that these didn't exist when I obtained a GS. Otherwise, I simply would not have been able to make a reasonable case for the GS. The GS, out of the box, can't even run its native OS properly. It's simply a disgrace. At the most a GS designed to run its OS properly would be worth the price of a Mac Classic. I must tell you that the GS is, at this time, probably the worst price/performance computer on the market. Apple should be ashamed of itself. Philip McDunnough philip@utstat.utoronto.ca
mvk@itsgw.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) (04/08/91)
In article <1991Apr7.233439.11058@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes: >The GS, out of the box, can't even run its native OS properly. It's >simply a disgrace. At the most a GS designed to run its OS properly >would be worth the price of a Mac Classic. I must tell you that the >GS is, at this time, probably the worst price/performance computer >on the market. Apple should be ashamed of itself. > >Philip McDunnough >philip@utstat.utoronto.ca If you mean that out of the box, the GS doesn't have a disk drive, and thus can't load GS/OS, then I'd have to agree. But 1.125 Meg and 2.8 MHz is plenty to run GS/OS. More is nice, and necessary if you're doing audio / video digitizing. But for most people, 1.125 is adequate. A GS / monitor / disk drive combination about the same price as a Mac Classic would be a hot seller. True, it doesn't have the raw power of the Classic, but it does have things (graphics, sound) the Classic can't touch. Don't under- estimate this. Once you experience it, it's hard to go back. I can't tell you the number of people who have walked into my room and said, "A Mac IIGS, is that one of the new ones? Wow." Michael Kent mvk@itsgw.rpi.edu P.S. How do I add a signature with rn? -- Michael Kent mvk@itsgw.rpi.edu McDonnell Douglas Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute St. Louis, Missouri Troy, New York Apple II Forever!
philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) (04/09/91)
In article <2_bg0fn@rpi.edu> mvk@itsgw.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) writes: >In article <1991Apr7.233439.11058@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes: >>The GS, out of the box, can't even run its native OS properly. It's >>simply a disgrace. At the most a GS designed to run its OS properly >>would be worth the price of a Mac Classic. I must tell you that the >>GS is, at this time, probably the worst price/performance computer >>on the market. Apple should be ashamed of itself. >If you mean that out of the box, the GS doesn't have a disk drive, and thus >can't load GS/OS, then I'd have to agree. But 1.125 Meg and 2.8 MHz is plenty >to run GS/OS. More is nice, and necessary if you're doing audio / video >digitizing. But for most people, 1.125 is adequate. That is not what I mean. I realize 1.125 is adequate( but you really need more) memory. What I was referring to is the cpu speed. The GS at 2.8MHz is not fast enough to run GS/OS applications, without becoming very impatient( and I am not a speed freak). The computer really needs at least a 5 or 6 MHz processor. >A GS / monitor / disk drive combination about the same price as a Mac Classic >would be a hot seller. True, it doesn't have the raw power of the Classic, but >it does have things (graphics, sound) the Classic can't touch. Don't under- >estimate this. Once you experience it, it's hard to go back. Yes, I agree with you. The GS package should be priced at most around the price of a Classic( assuming the GS's processor was faster). I really like my GS. As for the Classic, it appears to be selling well. I wouldn't use the term "raw power" and Mac in the same sentence. >I can't tell you the number of people who have walked into my room and said, >"A Mac IIGS, is that one of the new ones? Wow." If only Apple would survey those people. >Michael Kent mvk@itsgw.rpi.edu Philip McDunnough philip@utstat.utoronto.ca
SHBOUM@MACALSTR.EDU (04/14/91)
Rocky in an earlier article writes... >> I don't expect the II to last "forever", but the year 2000 isn't >> unreasonable. > Maybe this year 2000 date was a set goal for Apple. Notice that > Appleworks will not allow a year 2000 date to be entered. Nahh, I don't think that Apple even thought it was going to last that long. Way back in 1981-1982, when the Apple /// and Lisa were the Apple's experiments, the first few versions of ProDOS could only handle dates from 1981-1984. So when 1984 came rolling around, everyone's clock reset back to 1981!!!! {Well hey, after the Lisa came out, no one would in their right mind would by a II, right?} - Hal | Hal Bouma | Send mail to: SHBoum@Macalstr.edu | Macalester College | and SHBoum@Macalstr.Bitnet | GEnie: H.Bouma | ".Sig Under Construction..."
kenfair@snowy.rice.edu (Kenneth Jason Fair) (04/16/91)
In article <22324@yunexus.YorkU.CA> philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) writes: > >>I can't tell you the number of people who have walked into my room and said, >>"A Mac IIGS, is that one of the new ones? Wow." As for myself, I've taking to punching them out. It seems that NO ONE, especially Mac owners, have even HEARD of the Apple II line. I get the last laugh, though, when I show them what my modestly upgraded GS can do. Especially demos by FTA and the new 3200 color routines. The more 3200 becomes a standard, the better. As for the piracy/suport debate: Piracy helped, if anything, make the Apple II such a popular computer. But that's because Apple supported it. From what I've heard talking to software publishers and game designers, they don't want to put money into a computer that's not being supported. Only reasonable business practice. Actually, that's not quite true. There are plenty of game designers still writing great software for the IIGS. The problem is, they can't get any companies to support their work. That's why you're seeing lots of shareware now. C'mon Apple, get on the ball! (Andy, prod the higher-ups a bit for us!!) Ken -- +-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+ "God does not play dice with the universe."- Einstein | kenfair@owlnet.rice.edu "God may play dice with the universe, but he does not | America Online: collapse electron probability waveforms."- Fair | Mr Toaster
SHBOUM@MACALSTR.EDU (04/21/91)
In an earlier article, Kenneth Fair writes: >>In article <22324@yunexus.YorkU.CA> philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) writes: >>I can't tell you the number of people who have walked into my room and said, >>"A Mac IIGS, is that one of the new ones? Wow." > As for myself, I've taking to punching them out. It seems that NO > ONE, especially Mac owners, have even HEARD of the Apple II line. I > get the last laugh, though, when I show them what my modestly upgraded > GS can do. Especially demos by FTA and the new 3200 color routines. > The more 3200 becomes a standard, the better. This fact has always been a disapointing fact of how good of a job Apple has done in hiding up its original computer. Even 3 years ago, when our high school purchased a GS for our music department and we had it in the lab for a bit, we had to place a sign on it saying "THIS IS NOT A MACINTOSH" because so many people would put their disks into it thinking it was a mac. And here at college {I am again the ONLY IIGS owner} and again lots of people come in while hearing Modulae's music come pouring out and say "Cool! What is that? IIGS?? When did that come out?" Its so sad that no one knows what it is, but there's hope because people still think that its cool... Now if we can get Apple to think this too... - Hal | Hal Bouma | Send mail to: SHBoum@Macalstr.edu | Macalester College | and SHBoum@Macalstr.Bitnet | GEnie: H.Bouma | ".Sig Under Construction..."