aford@pro-mansion.cts.com (Adam Ford) (03/29/91)
In-Reply-To: message from rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu
Why can't Apple make a ROM revision of the IIGS again?
Computer: Apple IIgs
ROM: 4
Memory: 2 meg
Speed: 24mhz
Then add a SCSI interface like MACs.
I was told by several Mags, and people that the IIGS has better sound
capibilities than the MACs.
---
ProLine: aford@pro-mansion | Please Support the Apple II
Internet: aford@pro-mansion |
UUCP: crash!pro-mansion!aford | Line of computers.
ARPA: crash!pro-mansion!aford@nosc.mil |
BitNet: aford%pro-mansion.cts.com@nosc.mil |
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (03/30/91)
In article <8259@crash.cts.com> aford@pro-mansion.cts.com (Adam Ford) writes: >In-Reply-To: message from rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu >Why can't Apple make a ROM revision of the IIGS again? Why can't they? They CAN, but it seems a large number of people in charge at Apple have their priorities messed up, so instead of selling a "color Mac" to users cheaply, they try to pawn off an 'old' design Mac in a new case. Write to Apple (as in a PAPER letter) and tell them that you have heard ominous signs about lack of support for the Apple II, and you wish them to continue on the line indefinitely. Don't make it sound like a threat, but simply say that if they stop the Apple II line, you have no intention of ever buying a Mac. Plain and simple. >Computer: Apple IIgs >ROM: 4 >Memory: 2 meg >Speed: 24mhz Now that 24 mhz built in speed is a LITTLE much.. I mean sure it's a dream machine, but that would require a whole redesign of the whole computer, as most of the internals require to be "spoken to" at 1mhz. A Zip GS-type accelerator with a cache built in on the motherboard might be feasible, but Apple certainly wouldn't do it from what we see from them nowadays. Besides, that still leaves the whole bottleneck of going down to 1mhz all the time. >Then add a SCSI interface like MACs. Built in SCSI would be very nice.. We already have the DMA SCSI card and the RamFast SCSI card which is BETTER than Apple's in some ways.. (doesn't support removable media completely yet though which is a reason I won't buy it, also I already have Apple's.. heh) >I was told by several Mags, and people that the IIGS has better sound >capibilities than the MACs. The GS has better sound capabilities than IBMs, Macs, Atari STs, or Amigas.. The only computer I can think of that has better sound capabilities is the NeXT, and that's a workstation and not a PC. -- /unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu Apple IIGS Forever! ULTIMA VI GS -mail me. CDs-mail me\ \ McIntosh Junior: The Power to Crush the Other Kids. /
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (03/30/91)
In article <8259@crash.cts.com> aford@pro-mansion.cts.com (Adam Ford) writes: >Why can't Apple make a ROM revision of the IIGS again? >Computer: Apple IIgs >ROM: 4 >Memory: 2 meg >Speed: 24mhz >Then add a SCSI interface like MACs. >I was told by several Mags, and people that the IIGS has better sound >capibilities than the MACs. Yes, the Apple IIGS's Ensoniq synthesizer is fairly nice, but any enhanced IIGS model really should provide stereo output (rather than requiring a third-party add-on for this). The computer you describe would not be a simple ROM revision, but would require an entirely overhauled mother board, as well as an as-yet nonexistent 24MHz 65816 CPU chip.
toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (03/31/91)
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes: >Yes, the Apple IIGS's Ensoniq synthesizer is fairly nice, but any >enhanced IIGS model really should provide stereo output (rather than >requiring a third-party add-on for this). Hear hear. >The computer you describe would not be a simple ROM revision, but >would require an entirely overhauled mother board which is the best thing Apple could possibly do to the GS. However it would probably qualify as a new CPU rather than an upgraded CPU. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
ryanb@pro-charlotte.cts.com (Ryan Baucom) (03/31/91)
In-Reply-To: message from aford@pro-mansion.cts.com
That's right, as far as I know, _nothing_ has better sound than a IIGS.
Of course, stereo if fully supported but you can't hear it without buying
a card (grumble).
---------------------------------------------
ProLine: ryanb@pro-charlotte
Internet: ryanb@pro-charlotte.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pro-charlotte!ryanb
ARPA: crash!pro-charlotte!ryanb@nosc.mil
---------------------------------------------
Charlotte, North Carolina
---------------------------------------------declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) (03/31/91)
In article <13917@darkstar.ucsc.edu>, unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: > The GS has better sound capabilities than IBMs, Macs, Atari STs, > or Amigas.. The only computer I can think of that has better sound > capabilities is the NeXT, and that's a workstation and not a PC. And what, pray tell, is the difference? -Declan
philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) (04/01/91)
In article <Mar.31.03.24.21.1991.22346@remus.rutgers.edu> declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: >In article <13917@darkstar.ucsc.edu>, unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: > >> The GS has better sound capabilities than IBMs, Macs, Atari STs, >> or Amigas.. The only computer I can think of that has better sound >> capabilities is the NeXT, and that's a workstation and not a PC. > >And what, pray tell, is the difference? > >-Declan Well Declan, the difference is that workstation hardware is becoming less expensive than higher end PC's. The catch is that, with the possible exception of the NeXT, workstation vendors then get you on maintenance contracts, software costs, peripheral costs,etc...It does you very little good to be given a workstation only to discover that it will cost you more to maintain it than the price of a micro. Prices of PC's are going way down. The numbers are unbelievable. They do have the momentum. People should think very carefully about buying into the workstation world. Philip McDunnough NeXT/GS Mail -> philip@utstat.utoronto.ca
declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) (04/01/91)
In article <22184@yunexus.YorkU.CA>, philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) writes: > In article <Mar.31.03.24.21.1991.22346@remus.rutgers.edu> declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: > >In article <13917@darkstar.ucsc.edu>, unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: > > > >> The GS has better sound capabilities than IBMs, Macs, Atari STs, > >> or Amigas.. The only computer I can think of that has better sound > >> capabilities is the NeXT, and that's a workstation and not a PC. > > > >And what, pray tell, is the difference? > > > Well Declan, the difference is that workstation hardware is becoming > less expensive than higher end PC's. The catch is that, with the > possible exception of the NeXT, workstation vendors then get you on > maintenance contracts, software costs, peripheral costs,etc...It does > you very little good to be given a workstation only to discover that > it will cost you more to maintain it than the price of a micro. I'm quite aware that workstation prices are dropping, and that PC prices are far from competitive in the MIPS/$ market. However, I hesitate to draw an arbitrary line separating the two; it's just not possible. In ease-of-use? A NeXT is worlds ahead when compared to any MS-DOS machine. (though not as far ahead of one running Windows). In speed? A 50 MHz 486 running Windows will be faster - in MIPS - than a 25 MHz 68040 NeXT or a SPARCstation 1. In software costs? Perhaps. But there's a lot of good, free, UNIX stuff out there if you care to look: EE CAD software, for instance. Berkeley alone has SPICE and MAGIC. In peripheral costs? SCSI is SCSI. Laser printers are laser printers. Again, it's just not possible to arbitrarily label computers as "workstations" or "PCs". They can be both. > Prices of PC's are going way down. The numbers are unbelievable. They > do have the momentum. People should think very carefully about buying > into the workstation world. Prices of PCs are going way down? Sorry, but you're wrong. This is the price for the IIfx *after* Apple just lowered it: Macintosh IIfx: 80 MB HD, 4 MB RAM, 21" Monitor $5644 NeXTstation: 105 MB HD, 8 MB RAM, 17" Monitor $3100 Those are common academic prices for the two systems. Needless to say, the NeXT is much faster. Prices for SPARCstations are similar. This thread, too, is no longer appropriate for comp.sys.apple2. -Declan
asong@pro-nbs.cts.com (Andi Song) (04/01/91)
In-Reply-To: message from gwyn@smoke.brl.mil
A ROM 04 IIgs with 2 meg RAM and running at 24mhz (or even
13-14mhz)....Hmmm, do you think Apple would REALLY even THINK about making
one? A machine this good would kill Mac sales! So, even though it's our
dream machine and it would be totally awesome, Apple (Mac, Inc.) would
never in a million years make this.
Maybe Andy Nicholas could tell us what's going on at Apple
regarding any Apple II developments (other than Sears ain't gonna sell the
II line).
----
ProLine: asong@pro-nbs
Internet: asong@pro-nbs.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pro-nbs!asong
ARPA: crash!pro-nbs!asong@nosc.milphilip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) (04/01/91)
In article <Mar.31.21.19.19.1991.22739@remus.rutgers.edu> declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: [question regarding the difference between a micro and a workstation] >I'm quite aware that workstation prices are dropping, and that PC >prices are far from competitive in the MIPS/$ market. However, I >hesitate to draw an arbitrary line separating the two; it's just not >possible. You've missed my whole point. It is the cost of maintaining a workstation both from the hardware maintenance and s/w purchasing point of view. Try pricing out a maintenance contract on a Sparc or even a NeXT. >In ease-of-use? A NeXT is worlds ahead when compared to any MS-DOS machine. >(though not as far ahead of one running Windows). Well the NeXT is very nice, so I have to agree with you there. As far as ease of use goes, an MS-DOS machine doesn't require a PhD to operate. I mainly use a NeXT and a GS. But I'm involved in PC's and have a couple of Mac's. The ease of use thing is overrated in my view. >In speed? A 50 MHz 486 running Windows will be faster - in MIPS - >than a 25 MHz 68040 NeXT or a SPARCstation 1. So? We were talking price of ownership. MIPS isn't the whole story anyway. >In software costs? Perhaps. But there's a lot of good, free, UNIX >stuff out there if you care to look: EE CAD software, for instance. >Berkeley alone has SPICE and MAGIC. I haven't got the time to be hacking away at unsupported software. That's one reason Unix has had such a hard time gaining acceptance-lack of good supported software. That's quickly changing though the prices are very high. >In peripheral costs? SCSI is SCSI. Laser printers are laser >printers. Be reasonable. There's more to peripherals than laser printers and hard drives. Try getting a reasonable NTSC compatible colour cube. Or even an inexpensive colour printer for the NeXT. Or a digitizer, a Midi program, a sheet music program, games,etc...Or a CD-ROM. By PC, I mean the Intel family. >Again, it's just not possible to arbitrarily label computers as >"workstations" or "PCs". They can be both. The NeXT is trying to be. If I could find some software under $500, I might agree( and I'm not counting the free stuff). The whole point of the Intel world revolves around standards( good or bad). They have the numbers and hence the lower prices for virtually everything. >> Prices of PC's are going way down. The numbers are unbelievable. They >> do have the momentum. People should think very carefully about buying >> into the workstation world. > >Prices of PCs are going way down? Sorry, but you're wrong. This is >the price for the IIfx *after* Apple just lowered it: > >Macintosh IIfx: 80 MB HD, 4 MB RAM, 21" Monitor $5644 >NeXTstation: 105 MB HD, 8 MB RAM, 17" Monitor $3100 I was referring to the Intel micros. You can't look at the Mac. The standard micro is an Intel one, and you can get a fully loaded 386 for around $2000( colour). The 105 NeXTstation is not usable. In any case, would you please quote some maintenance figures. These things break you know. >Those are common academic prices for the two systems. Needless to >say, the NeXT is much faster. Prices for SPARCstations are similar. Again you miss the point. Need I repeat myself. Workstations cost more to own. It wouldn't matter if they were free. >This thread, too, is no longer appropriate for comp.sys.apple2. That's not clear. The GS is a good personal computer. People thinking of jumping into the workstation or higher end MacII lines should consider the total cost of ownership. My GS costs very little to maintain. The Mac's and the NeXT will no doubt force me to eat crumbs. >-Declan Philip McDunnough NeXT/GS Mail-> philip@utstat.utoronto.ca
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (04/01/91)
In article <926.apple.a2.net@pro-nbs> asong@pro-nbs.cts.com (Andi Song) writes: > A ROM 04 IIgs with 2 meg RAM and running at 24mhz (or even >13-14mhz)....Hmmm, do you think Apple would REALLY even THINK about making >one? A machine this good would kill Mac sales! So, even though it's our >dream machine and it would be totally awesome, Apple (Mac, Inc.) would >never in a million years make this. NO -- let's not support this bogus argument that Apple has in the past used internally to cripple the Apple II line; the Apple II and Macintosh families serve quite different needs and should not be thought of as competing with each other. Rather, they should have been thought of as complementary.
declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) (04/02/91)
In article <22190@yunexus.YorkU.CA>, philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) writes: > You've missed my whole point. It is the cost of maintaining a workstation > both from the hardware maintenance and s/w purchasing point of view. Try > pricing out a maintenance contract on a Sparc or even a NeXT. I haven't missed your point; I just disagree with you. I've owned a NeXT for two years, and the only problem I've had with it was an OD cable going bad. That was replaced - cheerfully, for free - by the local campus service center. The ONLY other expenditure I had was one toner cartridge. Period. Perhaps my experience has been an exception to the rule, but I've visited NeXT's factory, and I'm quite convinced that they have better quality control than anyone else in the industry. Now, I've had an Apple II for seven years, and things have gone wrong with that, too: 5.25" disk controller card blew, Apple RGB died, 3.5" drives started to eat disks, and so on. My Mac's power supply died, and the internal floppy died. Please don't tell me that PCs are all that much cheaper than workstations to maintain. > So? We were talking price of ownership. MIPS isn't the whole story anyway. I didn't say it was, and neither would most sane people. I didn't have SPECmarks handy at the time. > I haven't got the time to be hacking away at unsupported software. That's > one reason Unix has had such a hard time gaining acceptance-lack of good > supported software. That's quickly changing though the prices are very > high. > > Be reasonable. There's more to peripherals than laser printers and > hard drives. Try getting a reasonable NTSC compatible colour cube. > Or even an inexpensive colour printer for the NeXT. Or a digitizer, > a Midi program, a sheet music program, games,etc...Or a CD-ROM. > By PC, I mean the Intel family. I didn't know MIDI software and games fall under the heading of "peripheral devices." As for a color printer - any color PostScript one will work. And the NeXT uses SCSI CD-ROM drives. True, software prices aren't necessarily going to be as cheap as they are in the PC community. But I haven't had to BUY anything for my NeXT yet. The included software and the excellent shareware and freeware that you so casually dismiss serve my purposes famously. And companies like Lighthouse Design are offering their products at something like $25 - student prices. That's just a little less than $500. > The 105 NeXTstation is not usable. In any case, would you please quote > some maintenance figures. These things break you know. Sorry, but I beg to differ. I have a 105 MB NeXTstation in my room right now, networked to my cube. It's working fine. If you're talking about HD space, I can free up to 50 -60 MB on a 105 MB system - that's quite usable. As for RAM, add it yourself later, if you must. > Again you miss the point. Need I repeat myself. Workstations cost more > to own. It wouldn't matter if they were free. Again, you fail to make one. I understand what you're saying and disagree with you. I speak from years of personal experience. How about you? -Declan
shrinkit@Apple.COM (Andrew Nicholas) (04/02/91)
In article <926.apple.a2.net@pro-nbs> asong@pro-nbs.cts.com (Andi Song) writes: > Maybe Andy Nicholas could tell us what's going on at Apple >regarding any Apple II developments Er, ah, no. I like my job. On the other hand, we've seen the Multiswitch advertisements and are kind of wondering exactly what the French folks have done to get all of that to work right. There are a lot of really bizarro issues that they'd have to contend with... andy -- Andy Nicholas GEnie & America-Online: shrinkit Apple IIGS System Software CompuServe: 70771,2615 Apple Computer, Inc. InterNET: shrinkit@apple.com
philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) (04/02/91)
In article <Apr.1.14.12.12.1991.2032@remus.rutgers.edu> declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: [lot's gone...] >I didn't know MIDI software and games fall under the heading of >"peripheral devices." As for a color printer - any color PostScript >one will work. And the NeXT uses SCSI CD-ROM drives. I know that midi programs and games don't fall under the category of peripherals. I was just leafing through a dealer catalogue for PC's (MS-DOS) and workstations( Sun and Dec). I could list you thousands of devices that you can get for very little money for PC's. But the corresponding prices for workstations are just very high. As for SCSI, typically peripheral devices that use it are expensive. CD-ROM's for PC's can be had for $200. Price out the ones for the Sun's. Also have a look at fax modems. They exist now for PC's at 9600/9600. That will no doubt come about in the future for workstations, but I doubt they will cost the same.I wish you would stop bringing up the NeXT as that computer is a "fence" computer. It is aimed at the high end micro market, even though software for it isn't inexpensive( like Mac sw). I feel more comfortable talking about Sun's and Iris's and RS6000's and HP-UX workstations. Look at the software costs( and the maintenance). Since you bring up the NeXT however, please let me know how to get a colour system for a cube for $2000. Not everyone is a graphic artist. Moreover, where are the graphics' libraries for it? Cost? However, I'm digressing. >True, software prices aren't necessarily going to be as cheap as they >are in the PC community. But I haven't had to BUY anything for my >NeXT yet. The included software and the excellent shareware and >freeware that you so casually dismiss serve my purposes famously. Well, I'm glad they serve your purpose. The NeXT is the exception. So stop using it as an example. However, try getting a tektronics 4014 terminal emulator for it. >And companies like Lighthouse Design are offering their products at >something like $25 - student prices. That's just a little less than $500. Oh please. First of all they are really the exception. Moreover that is a student price. I have the catalogue, and supplements, in front of me. Let's see. Well, here's a nice Fortran compiler. Educational price $800. >> The 105 NeXTstation is not usable. In any case, would you please quote >> some maintenance figures. These things break you know. > >Sorry, but I beg to differ. I have a 105 MB NeXTstation in my room >right now, networked to my cube. It's working fine. That's right, you had to network it to the cube( does it have a larger hard drive, perhaps?) in order to get it to work properly. Again, why won't you state some maintenance costs. Your NeXT products may not break, but that is neither here nor there. If the things were indestructible NeXT would offer a longer warranty. Even HP gives you 3 years. >If you're talking about HD space, I can free up to 50 -60 MB on a 105 >MB system - that's quite usable. As for RAM, add it yourself later, >if you must. You lose too much of the NeXT by doing that. I never claimed RAM was expensive. >> Again you miss the point. Need I repeat myself. Workstations cost more >> to own. It wouldn't matter if they were free. > >Again, you fail to make one. I understand what you're saying and >disagree with you. I speak from years of personal experience. How >about you? Since we've gotten down to the bottom line, I can assure you that I've been at this stuff since before you started grade school. That being said, of all the high end computers I've used the NeXT is my favorite. I do have an SE/30 and a IIci gathering dust, and a GS which I use a lot. Maintenance costs matter to me. They may not to you. >-Declan Philip McDunnough philip@utstat.utoronto.ca (NeXT/GS mail)
declan@romulus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) (04/02/91)
In article <22202@yunexus.YorkU.CA>, philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) writes: > I feel more comfortable talking about Sun's and Iris's and RS6000's > and HP-UX workstations. Look at the software costs( and the maintenance). I don't know enough about them to discuss the systems and companies in depth. Feel free to go ahead and make your own observations, however. > Since you bring up the NeXT however, please let me know how to get > a colour system for a cube for $2000. Not everyone is a graphic artist. > Moreover, where are the graphics' libraries for it? Cost? However, I'm > digressing. You want a color cube for $2,000? So do I. But try to piece together a comparable system - 24 bit color, 8 bit alpha, video in/out, compression (eventually) on a Macintosh for under $20,000. Look at the January MacWorld - a "nice" NeXTdimension system cost ~$16,000. A comparable Macintosh IIfx system costs ~$28,000 - and that's with all the slots filled. $-) I don't know how much a comparable PC system would be, but I'd imagine it would be fairly pricey. I never said that color workstations are cheap. You do have a point - the lack of a low-cost color system is something that NeXT should eventually address, and perhaps they will. I'd rather see a low cost B&W NeXT, though; it would be a lot cheaper. > Well, I'm glad they serve your purpose. The NeXT is the exception. So > stop using it as an example. Why is it an exception? Most manufacturers are trying to move in the same direction as NeXT. You know, the ones who found the religion of X/Motif... > However, try getting a tektronics 4014 terminal emulator for it. How about getting a tek 4014 emulator for a Mac? PC? Amiga? IIgs? > Oh please. First of all they are really the exception. Moreover that is > a student price. I have the catalogue, and supplements, in front of me. > Let's see. Well, here's a nice Fortran compiler. Educational price $800. Yup, and faculty price for Diagram! is $75. There's a 'f2c' converter for free, which can convert generic Fortran code to C. It does it quite well, actually. > That's right, you had to network it to the cube( does it have a larger > hard drive, perhaps?) in order to get it to work properly. Again, why > won't you state some maintenance costs. Your NeXT products may not break, > but that is neither here nor there. If the things were indestructible > NeXT would offer a longer warranty. Even HP gives you 3 years. To work 'properly'? Huh? The 'station doesn't work improperly by itself, if that's what you mean. But you're right - I have a 660 MB HD and OD in my cube, and there's no reason to put a bigger HD in the 'station, since it's fine for me the way it is now. Tomorrow, for instance, I'm taking the 'station (by itself!) and showing it to my English professor. I have NeXTstep, Webster's Dictionary & Thesaurus, Oxford Quotations, 10 MB of Shakespeare, 5 MB of the KJ Bible, Milton's Paradise Lost, the included NeXT apps, and a half dozen of my own apps including Improv, Create (demo), WordPerfect (loaner), and so on. That's on a 105 MB disk with room to spare. If I was to delete all but NeXTstep and NeXT's apps (that is, getting rid of Webster's), I'd have about 53 MB free. As for reliability, NeXTs aren't indestructible. Though I don't know how many NeXTs break, I can say in over two years that I was involved with NeXT in one way or another, I've never heard of a motherboard die. One of my friends who used to have a IIc went through four. Again, I can only state maintenance costs that I've experienced - $0. I don't see why you're so hung up on this maintenance issue. The hardware used in the NeXT is very, very similar to that used in Macintoshes. SCSI, Ethernet, SIMMs, same serial ports, same processor family, and so on. > Maintenance costs matter to me. They may not to you. On the contrary, maintenance costs matter a lot to me - I'm just a poor starving college student. But, as I said in my last post, I haven't had ANY costs in two years with my NeXT, while I've had hundreds of dollars worth of expenses with my IIgs and Macintosh. -Declan
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (04/02/91)
In article <51032@apple.Apple.COM> shrinkit@Apple.COM (Andrew Nicholas) writes: <In article <926.apple.a2.net@pro-nbs> asong@pro-nbs.cts.com (Andi Song) writes: <> Maybe Andy Nicholas could tell us what's going on at Apple <>regarding any Apple II developments <Er, ah, no. I like my job. Haha.. Your method of answering that was really funny. I chuckled out loud when I first read it. <On the other hand, we've seen the Multiswitch advertisements and are kind <of wondering exactly what the French folks have done to get all of that to <work right. There are a lot of really bizarro issues that they'd have to <contend with... There's someone who mailed me who thinks the Multiswitch advertizements were an April Fools joke.. It now seems very plausible, but one of his arguments was one that I "refuted" and he hadn't thought about that. (The "area code" was "33".. He thought it was just something bogus, and I said it was a phone # in France so the "33" might be appropriate. {Isn't that the # you dial to dial international phone #s?}) -- /unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu Apple IIGS Forever! ULTIMA VI GS -mail me. CDs-mail me\ \ McIntosh Junior: The Power to Crush the Other Kids. /
asong@pro-nbs.cts.com (Andi Song) (04/02/91)
In-Reply-To: message from gwyn@smoke.brl.mil
I'm not saying that in the past that Apple has crippled
intentionally the II line, but I'm saying that they are subconsciously
trying to phase out the II in favor of the Mac. Keep in mind that any
major Apple hardware is now designed specifically for the Macintosh, and
the Apple II is a lucky beneficiary of those products. Apple at least had
the good sense to use the same connectors and the SCSI interface on the
IIgs and the Mac.
But it IS true...Apple would never create a GS that would
outperform a Macintosh. That simply would not make good business sense to
them, and would represent a step backwards for them (in their minds).
----
ProLine: asong@pro-nbs
Internet: asong@pro-nbs.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pro-nbs!asong
ARPA: crash!pro-nbs!asong@nosc.milMQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET (04/03/91)
On Tue, 2 Apr 91 07:41:45 GMT The Unknown User said: [stuff about the supposed 'multiswitch' application] > There's someone who mailed me who thinks the Multiswitch advertizements >were an April Fools joke.. It now seems very plausible, but one of his Just to put my 2 cents worth in: I saw a post of that a few days before April 1st on a local BBS. >/unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu Apple IIGS Forever! ULTIMA VI GS -mail me. CDs-mail me\ >\ McIntosh Junior: The Power to Crush the Other Kids. / ---------------------------------------- BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm <------------send files here pro-line-- mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com
daveh@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (04/03/91)
In article <Apr.2.01.18.07.1991.13967@romulus.rutgers.edu>, declan@romulus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: >How about getting a tek 4014 emulator for a Mac? PC? Amiga? IIgs? Well, NCSA Telnet does Tek 4014 on the Mac, Kermit does that on the IBMs, I don't know about the Amiga, but GSVT has some sort of Tek emulation for the GS... ---Dave daveh@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
EWINGRA@CTRVAX.VANDERBILT.EDU (04/03/91)
I have to agree with Andy on this one. If they've accomplished half of what they say, they must have done some pretty funky things to get it to work. The ad has been posted on all major bboards, including Compuserve, Genie and AOL. Personally, I'll believe it when I see it. --Rick Ewing Vanderbilt University
THINGVOL@LAX.WISC.EDU (04/03/91)
The 'multiswitch' application was posted on GEnie last week and I got it off
GEnie and posted it here.
Daniel Thingvold thingvol@lax.wisc.edu
@uwlax.bitnet
The three most dangerous things in the world are:
1. A programmer with a soldering iron,
2. A hardware type with a program patch, and
3. A user with an idea.declan@romulus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) (04/03/91)
In article <46578@ut-emx.uucp>, daveh@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu writes: > In article <Apr.2.01.18.07.1991.13967@romulus.rutgers.edu>, declan@romulus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: > >How about getting a tek 4014 emulator for a Mac? PC? Amiga? IIgs? > > Well, NCSA Telnet does Tek 4014 on the Mac, Kermit does that on the IBMs, > I don't know about the Amiga, but GSVT has some sort of Tek emulation for the > GS... And Communicae does it on the NeXT. I also know someone who's working on a public-domain Tek 4010/4014 emulator. -Declan
shrinkit@Apple.COM (Andrew Nicholas) (04/03/91)
In article <Apr.2.01.18.07.1991.13967@romulus.rutgers.edu> declan@romulus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: I've been watching Declan and Doug go at it now for a while with a whole lot of amusement, but this one isn't going to slide: >On the contrary, maintenance costs matter a lot to me - I'm just a >poor starving college student. But, as I said in my last post, I >haven't had ANY costs in two years with my NeXT, while I've had >hundreds of dollars worth of expenses with my IIgs and Macintosh. Wow! I bigger exaggeration I have never seen! Declan is a poor, starving college student when he owns BOTH and '030 NeXT machine, and the '040 NeXT machine, and in the same breath mentions that he owns a IIGS and a Macintosh?? I hope everyone on the net realizes that Declan is just 'funning' Doug on a lot of this. Declan: You? A starving college student? Hahahahahahahahaha... andy -- Andy Nicholas GEnie & America-Online: shrinkit Apple IIGS System Software CompuServe: 70771,2615 Apple Computer, Inc. InterNET: shrinkit@apple.com
shrinkit@Apple.COM (Andrew Nicholas) (04/03/91)
In article <14027@darkstar.ucsc.edu> unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: > There's someone who mailed me who thinks the Multiswitch advertizements >were an April Fools joke.. I doubt that they were a joke for one reason: the BrainStorm software guys mailed me information about MultiSwitch GS back in (gee, when was it?) about November. I didn't think much about it seeing as how it was vaporstuff until just recently. andy -- Andy Nicholas GEnie & America-Online: shrinkit Apple IIGS System Software CompuServe: 70771,2615 Apple Computer, Inc. InterNET: shrinkit@apple.com
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (04/03/91)
In article <51032@apple.Apple.COM> shrinkit@Apple.COM (Andrew Nicholas) writes: >On the other hand, we've seen the Multiswitch advertisements and are kind >of wondering exactly what the French folks have done to get all of that to >work right. There are a lot of really bizarro issues that they'd have to >contend with... It occurred to me that that posting might be an "April Fool's Day" joke. It seemed to say that for $80 one would be able to buy not only that software but also two hardware support devices, which seems improbable. An almost-functional switcher was posted to some information services a year or two ago; I tried it and it worked so long as one didn't press it TOO hard. It simply patched the tool vectors so that it could intercept those tools calls that needed intertask coordination. That would also be a good place for a task switch if one wanted to implement a true multitasking system.
philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) (04/03/91)
In article <Apr.2.18.20.00.1991.24080@romulus.rutgers.edu> declan@romulus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: [stuff re terminal emulators] > >And Communicae does it on the NeXT. I also know someone who's working >on a public-domain Tek 4010/4014 emulator. Well Declan, let's look at that inexpensive to own NeXT for Communicae. Hmm...on page 151 of the s/w and peripherals catalogue I see the bargain price of $395. But wait, I'll call NeXTConnection. Sorry, they don't carry it. On the other hand, there is a whopping $50 off educational price. I'm sure you'll just be on the phone to order it. What's $400. >-Declan Philip McDunnough philip@utstat.utoronto.ca (NeXT/GS Mail)
kreme@isis.cs.du.edu (Max Headshop) (04/04/91)
In article <997.apple.a2.net@pro-nbs> asong@pro-nbs.cts.com (Andi Song) writes: >In-Reply-To: message from gwyn@smoke.brl.mil > > > I'm not saying that in the past that Apple has crippled >intentionally the II line, but I'm saying that they are subconsciously >trying to phase out the II in favor of the Mac. Keep in mind that any >major Apple hardware is now designed specifically for the Macintosh, and >the Apple II is a lucky beneficiary of those products. Apple at least had >the good sense to use the same connectors and the SCSI interface on the >IIgs and the Mac. Actually, if you want to be completely correct on this the statement should read "Apple at least had the good sense to use the same connectors...on the Mac as on the GS. See, the ADB port was developed for the APPLE IIGS. You know the nifty setup that the System Folder on system 7 (Mac OS) has (with lots of subfolders). That was a developement for the GS/OS system software which has been PORTED over to the Mac. Most of the nifty new things on the Mac were taken from the Apple II developmetn teams inivations. Most notably, of course, is the ADB port on the GS, but the idea of combinig slots and ports was also first explored on the GS. Also the use of DMA (up to 8 Megs) was first explored on the GS. Then Apple limited the GS to 4 Megs of DMA (rumor is it was because they didn't want the GS having more RAM than their Macs). So when you say that the apple is using Mac parts, remember that that "ain't exactly the whole story." > But it IS true...Apple would never create a GS that would >outperform a Macintosh. That simply would not make good business sense to >them, and would represent a step backwards for them (in their minds). The GS (stock) already outperforms the Mac. It has a CLI *AND* a GUI. I supports color (all apples do... only some Macs). and it will do anything a mac will do, including running a laserprinter, much cheaper than a Mac. Oh sure, it can't outperform a $5000+ Mac, but it is certainly a better machine than the Mac+, Mac SE, Mac Classic, or any of the other 68000 non-modular macs. -- | kreme@nyx.cs.du.edu |The Coven BBS (303) 777 2911 PCP via CODEN Stalr*nk too| |---------------------|100 Megs of storage. Areas for IBM/MAC/Apple. Games. | | Hackers, as a rule, do not handle obsolescence well |
toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (04/04/91)
kreme@isis.cs.du.edu (Max Headshop) writes: > Most of the nifty new things on the Mac were taken from >the Apple II developmetn teams inivations. Initially, maybe, but with an order of magnitude more people working on it the Mac system software has far outgrown the GS's. The GS's may be better designed in many ways, but Apple has not implemented some crucial things yet -- things that would make a MultiFinder actually feasible, for example. > Then Apple limited the GS to 4 Megs of DMA (rumor is it was >because they didn't want the GS having more RAM than their Macs). That's totally unfounded. It is a design limitation of the DRAM control section of the FPI chip, which was designed to handle addressing and refresh for four ROWS, NOT MEGS, of DRAM's. The FPI also only supports 64K and 1 Meg rows (Be glad -- Jobs still worked there and he thought the original Mac ONLY needed 128K) so the limit on RAM fully controlled by the FPI (and therefore totally DMA compatible) is 4 megs. AE's original hack to get more than four rows of chips on the GS-Ram cards broke when DMA accesses occured, because of a timing limitation in the early 65816's that the FPI had to respect. So they had to design around things again. But it is possible to DMA over 4 megs in a GS, you just need to have a memory card that's smart enough. If all that went over your head, the 4 meg DMA problem DID NOT have anything to do with rivalry and the Mac. It was an unfortunate engineering fiasco. >The GS (stock) already outperforms the Mac. The stock GS might outperform a Lisa, but that's about it. Even the 128K Mac runs faster than the stock GS. A Zipped GS, however, is different. > It has a CLI *AND* a GUI. Damn straight. There's something fundamentally right about .CONSOLE, if only Mike Westerfield would stop using the damn texttools for I/O redirection... [more debatable claims] I won't comment on these. You got into stuff that's value judgement and personal preferences, and it appears that a good number of Mac owners don't agree with you. I agree the GS is better, but that's because I like all the things the Mac doesn't have (CLI, synth, etc). Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) (04/05/91)
In article <997.apple.a2.net@pro-nbs>, asong@pro-nbs.cts.com (Andi Song) writes: > But it IS true...Apple would never create a GS that would > outperform a Macintosh. That simply would not make good business sense to > them, and would represent a step backwards for them (in their minds). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is one of the reasons I like reading this group, to try to picture what color the sky is in their worlds! I really doubt Apple could create a GS that would outperform the Mac, or that they would want to put so much time and effort into something that would be overpriced and hard to sell. This is one of the reasons that I didn't buy a GS or a Mac, the prices were far beyond my economic status. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ryan 'Gozar' Collins Question for MAC Users: rlcollins@miavx1.BITNET |||| Power Without What IS the format of a rc1dsanu@miamiu.BITNET / || \ The Price!! MAC HFS floppy disk? R.COLLINS1 on GEnie ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dat33228@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Derek A. Taubert) (04/05/91)
In article <4651.27fb735d@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) writes: >> But it IS true...Apple would never create a GS that would >> outperform a Macintosh. That simply would not make good business sense to >> them, and would represent a step backwards for them (in their minds). > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >This is one of the reasons I like reading this group, to try to picture >what color the sky is in their worlds! I really doubt Apple could create a >GS that would outperform the Mac, or that they would want to put so much >time and effort into something that would be overpriced and hard to sell. >This is one of the reasons that I didn't buy a GS or a Mac, the prices were >far beyond my economic status. Yea, right. First off, my IIgs DOES outperform macs. Not only do I have a superior OS, I also have a COLOR hypercard, and beter STEREO sound than any mac. Next, my IIgs runs ][ software, and it didn't cost me thousands to have that ability. If you think my IIgs is slow, then I can tell you that I do in fact have an accelerator that plugs into one of my SLOTS, and since it is an apple and not an atari, I can get documentation for it so that I can program it (hey, neet idea, huh? someone writing programs rather than complaining about the software that doesn't exist!). Apple CAN make a GS MUCH better than a mac, and it wouldn't cost them like you think it would. If you knew more about the IIgs, it's architecture and apple's in general, you would realize this. Go ahead. Tell ME that I am wrong. -- + Derek Taubert --> derek@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu + Author of : GScii + + dat33228@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu + {MUCH more to come...} + + "Well, ...lettuce is a transformation of a dead cougar that suffered a + + relapse on a lion's toe. And he swallowed the lion and something happened. + + The ...see, the ...Gloria and Tommy, they're two heads and they're not + + whales. But they escaped with herds of vomit, and things like that." +
MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET (04/05/91)
>>The GS (stock) already outperforms the Mac. > >The stock GS might outperform a Lisa, but that's about it. Even the 128k Mac >runs faster than the stock GS. A Zipped GS, however, is different. It's certainly faster, but there's more to performance than speed. There's Graphics ability, sound, expandability, and, of course, a CLI! :) ...and DARNIT! There's SLOTS... LOT'S of'em! ---------------------------------------- BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm <------------send files here pro-line-- mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com
MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET (04/05/91)
On Thu, 4 Apr 91 23:41:33 GMT <info-apple-request@APPLE.COM> said: >In article <997.apple.a2.net@pro-nbs>, asong@pro-nbs.cts.com (Andi Song) >writes: >> But it IS true...Apple would never create a GS that would >> outperform a Macintosh. That simply would not make good business sense to >> them, and would represent a step backwards for them (in their minds). > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >This is one of the reasons I like reading this group, to try to picture >what color the sky is in their worlds! I really doubt Apple could create a >GS that would outperform the Mac, or that they would want to put so much Which mac are YOU refering too? It already outperforms the Classic in Everything but SPEED, but with a ZIP, even that's covered. >time and effort into something that would be overpriced and hard to sell. HA! Have you ever heard of a Macintosh??? >This is one of the reasons that I didn't buy a GS or a Mac, the prices were >far beyond my economic status. You're right here! The prices for ALL Apple hardware (with the exception of the Stylewriter) is rediculous. BUT, the stylewriter is made by Cannon anyway, so it's hard to classify that as Apple hardware. It just has their plastic case on it. >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Ryan 'Gozar' Collins Question for MAC Users: rlcollins@miavx1.BITNET > |||| Power Without What IS the format of a rc1dsanu@miamiu.BITNET > / || \ The Price!! MAC HFS floppy disk? R.COLLINS1 on GEnie >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------- BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm <------------send files here pro-line-- mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com
rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) (04/05/91)
>>>
Apple CAN make a GS
MUCH better than a mac, and it wouldn't cost them like you think it would.
If you knew more about the IIgs, it's architecture and apple's in general,
you would realize this. Go ahead. Tell ME that I am wrong.
<<<<
Apple could make a high end Apple II which is better than a low end Mac
(Okay, maybe even better than some of the middle range units). I doubt
they could make an Apple II which outperforms a Mac IIfx or a NeXT Station.
And if they could, would you be willing to pay $10,000 for it?
I don't want Apple to build a high end apple iigs, why should they?
The Mac is a good high end machine with lots of support from Motorola for the
future (68040, 68050, etc.) which we'll never get from WDC or others.
What I would like to see is a *cheap* Apple IIgs. If they can sell a Mac
Classic with 2 megs for well under $1,000, why can't they sell a 1 meg
Apple iigs, monochrome (like the Classic) with floppy disk drive (like the
Classic) for under $500?
*** Randy HydeMQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET (04/06/91)
On Fri, 5 Apr 91 08:24:39 GMT randy hyde said: >What I would like to see is a *cheap* Apple IIgs. If they can sell a Mac >Classic with 2 megs for well under $1,000, why can't they sell a 1 meg >Apple iigs, monochrome (like the Classic) with floppy disk drive (like the >Classic) for under $500? >*** Randy Hyde They CAN, but then, that would give people a reason to get a GS. ---------------------------------------- BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm <------------send files here pro-line-- mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com
whitewolf@gnh-starport.cts.com (Tae Song) (04/07/91)
Apple is pretty cruddy when it comes to hardware. They disabled the burst mode on the 68030 and the burst mode on the NuBus. SCSI hardware is different for almost each of the Mac models. No nybble/page-mode or interleaved memory. You can get pretty good memory access speed with these stuff. You can find this stuff on 20+Mhz IBM clones, Amiga 3000, and the NeXT... not on a Mac/Apple computer. Took them what 4years just to start using VRAM to speed up the Mac SE. VRAMs would be great on a GS. Nope, Apple isn't innovative, it's all bottom line... how much they can charge, while how little they give you... It won't take much to out perform a Mac... a 4Mhz GS with VRAMs could give the low-end Macs a run for their money... provided Apple doesn't raise the prise on the machine. /es whitewolf@gnh-starport!info-apple
rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) (04/08/91)
In article <13349@ucrmath.ucr.edu>, rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: > they could make an Apple II which outperforms a Mac IIfx or a NeXT Station. > And if they could, would you be willing to pay $10,000 for it? > I don't want Apple to build a high end apple iigs, why should they? > The Mac is a good high end machine with lots of support from Motorola for the > future (68040, 68050, etc.) which we'll never get from WDC or others. > What I would like to see is a *cheap* Apple IIgs. If they can sell a Mac > Classic with 2 megs for well under $1,000, why can't they sell a 1 meg > Apple iigs, monochrome (like the Classic) with floppy disk drive (like the > Classic) for under $500? > *** Randy Hyde Yea, why can't they? Yo can get an Amiga 500 with a meg of ram and floppy drive (no monitor though) for $500-$600 dollars, and you can get an Atari 1040 STe with a meg of Ram and floppy drive for $399. (Again no monitor) Add $150 for a mono monitor, and they both have Stereo sound, 4096 colors, GUI, CLI, the Amiga multitasks, the Atari has built in MIDI. Thats why I think that there is no market for the IIgs, it justs outprices itself out of everyones pocketbook. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ryan 'Gozar' Collins Question for MAC Users: rlcollins@miavx1.BITNET |||| Power Without What IS the format of a rc1dsanu@miamiu.BITNET / || \ The Price!! MAC HFS floppy disk? R.COLLINS1 on GEnie ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
whitewolf@gnh-starport.cts.com (Tae Song) (04/11/91)
|>What I would like to see is a *cheap* Apple IIgs. If they can sell a Mac |>Classic with 2 megs for well under $1,000, why can't they sell a 1 meg |>Apple iigs, monochrome (like the Classic) with floppy disk drive (like the |>Classic) for under $500? |>*** Randy Hyde | |They CAN, but then, that would give people a reason to get a GS. LOL, ROTF... :) whitewolf@gnh-starport!info-apple
whitewolf@gnh-starport.cts.com (Tae Song) (04/11/91)
|>>> |Apple CAN make a GS |MUCH better than a mac, and it wouldn't cost them like you think it would. |If you knew more about the IIgs, it's architecture and apple's in general, |you would realize this. Go ahead. Tell ME that I am wrong. |<<<< | |Apple could make a high end Apple II which is better than a low end Mac |(Okay, maybe even better than some of the middle range units). I doubt |they could make an Apple II which outperforms a Mac IIfx or a NeXT Station. |And if they could, would you be willing to pay $10,000 for it? |I don't want Apple to build a high end apple iigs, why should they? |The Mac is a good high end machine with lots of support from Motorola for the |future (68040, 68050, etc.) which we'll never get from WDC or others. |What I would like to see is a *cheap* Apple IIgs. If they can sell a Mac |Classic with 2 megs for well under $1,000, why can't they sell a 1 meg |Apple iigs, monochrome (like the Classic) with floppy disk drive (like the |Classic) for under $500? |*** Randy Hyde What I think he's trying to say is a GS which would be faster than the Mac Classics and SEs... and I for one agree that Apple could do it and that they should. Even if it was a 4Mhz GS THAT woulf be nice... whitewolf@gnh-starport!info-apple
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (04/14/91)
In article <3097E4CBE0218523@MACALSTR.EDU> SHBOUM@MACALSTR.EDU writes: > Yea, you're right, the Apple IIGS is overpriced and underpowered. >However, both of these problems have been from Apple's MANAGERIAL decisions >and we have had no say it. Why do you think they keep dropping the prices >of the Macs? Because Apple is possessed in its thinking that Macs are >they only thing in the future. Now if Apple was really serious in selling >the II's, not only would they immediatly slash their prices, but they would >make a new and improved CPU. You can save many hundreds of dollars on a GS system. The following ideas will NOT be obvious to the first-time computer buyer at all, and I didn't even think about most of them when I put together my GS system piece by piece.. (but I did think about one of 'em) I saw a mail order ad for new GSes in the box for $699. Even cheaper were reconditioned GSes with 512K (partially populated Apple memory card????) for like $569. So even if you take the more expensive one, it's $699 vs. Apple's list, which is what?? Like $1299 still or something OUTRAGEOUS like that? So with that you get the keyboard and mouse (right? I upgraded from a //e, saving even more money). You go out and buy a third party RGB monitor, saving tons of money. From what I've learned, the Amiga monitor would be the best deal. I believe you can get that for about $250 vs. the $400-$450 SALE price you can get the Apple one for. This one was the one I had thought of a little bit beforehand, although I wasn't thinking of the Amiga monitor at the time. I was thinking of the TV/monitor (Magnavox or Sony? there might've been two similar ones) that had multiple inputs and you could switch between them easily.. Like analog and digital RGB and an NTSC input.. It seemed like a great monitor and was less than Apple's. But I ended up getting the Apple one through my mom's company, which could buy them cheaper. (I think I paid like $400 a few years ago) You can get a third party 3.5" daisy-chainable drive. They are around $200 now (I think even cheaper, like $189, mail order). That is vs. Apple's insane list price, which I am pretty sure is $399. (Strange, a few years ago when I got one it was at least $50 less, and I found it at a DEALER for like $300 exactly) So for the basic system you've saved what, like $500 AT LEAST? (I'm too lazy to go adding it all up now, especially when a bunch of my prices are off the top of my head and not positively correct, although close) Now if you go into hard drives and such you save ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE over Apple's prices. And you even save around 1/2 the price of the AE and AI and even external drives sold 'for the Apple'. (The BEST thing about the Mac introduction to Incider/A+ is that there are now DECENT prices for hard drives in that mag!) Laser printers too.. although I'd admittedly probably get a LaserWriter because that's what I'm used to. IBM clone people brag about how much money they can save by getting third party products rather than brand name stuff. The same kinds of techniques work on the Apple II and Macintosh worlds, just not with the actual CPU itself. (Note, I'm -NOT- trying to get into a discussion/argument about clones vs. any kind of Apple here. I'm just saying that putting together systems of many different third party products because they're cheaper is thought of as an IBM clone practice) -- /unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu Apple IIGS Forever! ULTIMA VI GS -mail me. CDs-mail me\ \ McIntosh Junior: The Power to Crush the Other Kids. /
SHBOUM@MACALSTR.EDU (04/14/91)
In an earlier article, Randy Collins writes: > Yea, why can't they? Yo can get an Amiga 500 with a meg of ram and floppy > drive (no monitor though) for $500-$600 dollars, and you can get an Atari > 1040 STe with a meg of Ram and floppy drive for $399. (Again no monitor) > Add $150 for a mono monitor, and they both have Stereo sound, 4096 colors, > GUI, CLI, the Amiga multitasks, the Atari has built in MIDI. > Thats why I think that there is no market for the IIgs, it justs outprices > itself out of everyones pocketbook. Yea, you're right, the Apple IIGS is overpriced and underpowered. However, both of these problems have been from Apple's MANAGERIAL decisions and we have had no say it. Why do you think they keep dropping the prices of the Macs? Because Apple is possessed in its thinking that Macs are they only thing in the future. Now if Apple was really serious in selling the II's, not only would they immediatly slash their prices, but they would make a new and improved CPU. But that does not mean an upgraded 10Mhz {maybe faster} GS with 640x400 graphics {or even the same} with some other modifications at the same price would be outrageously priced. Because one thing that Apple still does better with the II then say the Amiga or the Atari is support it. Sure the Amiga and Atari may be "cheap" computers, but you get what you pay for. And because their profit margins are so low from selling them at such prices, they cannot afford to spend lots of money on both hardware development and software development. Apple dealers may not know much about the II anymore, but its not that difficult to find someone who does. Compared to my roomate having to call 11 places looking for a cable to hook their C-64 up to an Amiga either. - Hal | Hal Bouma | Send mail to: SHBoum@Macalstr.edu | Macalester College | and SHBoum@Macalstr.Bitnet | GEnie: H.Bouma | ".Sig Under Construction..."
crew.wicklein@pro-midnightex.cts.com (Chris Wicklein) (04/16/91)
In-Reply-To: message from MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET I disagree that "even the 128k Mac runs faster than the stock GS.". I was in the lab today and played with a Mac SE for the first time. For whatever reason (higher resolution, less efficient firmware, etc.) it ran about as fast a stock GS. Disk access seemed noticibly faster, but I was comparing its HD 20 to a 3.5" drive... And, the GS is very open like its little brothers and sisters, and 7 slots (and one for memory)!! Don't forget color, Ensoniq DOC, RAMFastSCSI, etc. The system software on the Mac (6.0.5) didn't impress me at all after I started using GS 5.0.4. ---- 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
MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET (04/19/91)
>In-Reply-To: message from MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET ^^^^^^ > I disagree that "even the 128k Mac runs faster than the stock GS.". ...just so no one gets the wrong idea, this isn't in reply to anything that -I- said. :) ---------------------------------------- BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm <------------send files here pro-line-- mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com