sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) (11/16/90)
Just wanted to share some stuff with everyone: Two days ago, we had a computer expo on campus. It was kind of dumb, but they were holding a raffle for some items, so I figured I'd go and just drop my name in the contest. So I get there, and I'm supposed to be at work in two minutes, so I figure I figure I can spend ten minutes or so browsing.... :-) I passed by a really crowded NeXT booth, and an equally crowded Dec booth.... And in the back was the Apple table. They had the three new computers (the IIsi, the classic, and the LC - in case you can't remember :-) The LC was a beta machine. It looked really cool, and I was hoping to get a chance to play with the //e card, BUT they didn't have the card. Major Disappointment. I did talk to the guy (he was quite friendly). Let's see....among other things, he claimed that the //e card for the LC was a real //e, as opposed to the hacked (my word - I can't recall what he said) //e EMULATION on the GS. I didn't know the GS EMULATES a //e..... I asked him what the future was for the GS, what with the LC being priced similarly. He said as long as there's demand, they will continue to make them - there is no demand for the //c+, so it was discontinued. //e's make up most of the demand. Talking about the //e card for the LC, he said that they (I forget - marketing? engineers?) wanted the card to have GS capabilities too, but they decided not to when a survey found only %5 of the GS users use GS specific software!!!! I find that extremely hard to believe - %95 of the GS owners only use //e software ?!?!?!? He also made some comments about their having to wait for word to come down from Sculley as to the future of the computer line. I made some comments about pricing strategies, and how demand might suddenly drop (for the GS) if the LC is placed as it seems it is.....He basically agreed with me. I'd say more, but my brain is fried from lack of sleep, and the tv beckons - the Simpsons! -seth --- - tHe mAd ScienTisT, and other carnations sk2f@andrew.cmu.edu R746SK2F@CMCCVB
toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (11/16/90)
sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) writes: >I did talk to the guy (he was quite friendly). Let's see....among other >things, he claimed that the //e card for the LC was a real //e, as >opposed to the hacked (my word - I can't recall what he said) //e >EMULATION on the GS. I didn't know the GS EMULATES a //e..... It does. But the CPU and hardware do a lot more than just //e stuff!! The //e card is essentially the most cost-effective reimplementation of the //e that Apple could come up with, given that it had to use the Mac LC as I/O. The IIgs has //e emulation built into its hardware, and as such is not as compatible as it could be, but it ends up being more capable with less total hardware. The LC is a fully functional Mac, and the //e part is simply an independent CPU, RAM, and I/O (disk ][ interface, because the Mac disk port can't work with Apple II formatted 5.25" disks). The LC is literally taken over by the //e emulation, whereas the GS just has a VLSI version of the original circuitry integrated into its motherboard. The GS version of the //e circuitry could be much better implemented, but that is because Apple is to damn wussy to put some real development $$$ into the GS. They have no problems with forcing the LC to match an elementary schools' purchasing requirements -- I agree with those who predict that Laser and Tandy are going to clean up in the school market. >I asked him what the future was for the GS, what with the LC being >priced similarly. He said as long as there's demand, they will continue >to make them - there is no demand for the //c+, so it was discontinued. >//e's make up most of the demand. If Apple would bother to advertise the //c+, then it would sell quite well. Laser has more or less filled the gap left by Apple's failure to push the //c+. >Talking about the //e card for the LC, he said that they (I forget - >marketing? engineers?) wanted the card to have GS capabilities too, but >they decided not to when a survey found only %5 of the GS users use GS >specific software!!!! I find that extremely hard to believe - %95 of >the GS owners only use //e software ?!?!?!? 1. A GS card for the LC would be too expensive. It literally would be cheaper to buy both a GS and an LC and have two computers. 2. The vast majority of the GS's users are (sadly) educators who are barely able to use them as //e's, let alone as GS's. The ROM 03 and System 5.0 have done a lot to change that, but Apple is literally trying to see if they can force educators to go Mac. I don't think it will work, and Apple as a whole will suffer. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (11/16/90)
In article <EbEnSkC00WBM01_eo1@andrew.cmu.edu> sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) writes: >they decided not to when a survey found only %5 of the GS users use GS >specific software!!!! I find that extremely hard to believe - %95 of >the GS owners only use //e software ?!?!?!? It is (barely) within the realm of possibility that 95% OF THOSE SURVEYED were unaware of GS-specific software being used on GSes. However, I'd be extremely skeptical about that poll. I'm willing to bet that nobody on this net was included in the survey, just as none of use were included in the survey that Sierra On-Line calimed to have conducted. That would indicate that the sample was not very representative. In fact Apple Computer doesn't seem to have ANY corporate means of dealing with Apple II users outside the K-12 educational market; probably K-12 products are almost all 8-bit versions. (There are a few outstanding counterexamples, but GS-only products would not be easy to justify in a school where most of the installed base would not be able to use them.) I can practically guarantee that over 95% of personal IIGS users use GS-specific software. But we're the ones that Apple officially pretends do not exist.
MQUINN%UTCVM@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU (11/16/90)
On Fri, 16 Nov 90 00:49:52 GMT Seth D. Kadesh said: >Just wanted to share some stuff with everyone: > >Talking about the //e card for the LC, he said that they (I forget - >marketing? engineers?) wanted the card to have GS capabilities too, but >they decided not to when a survey found only %5 of the GS users use GS >specific software!!!! I find that extremely hard to believe - %95 of >the GS owners only use //e software ?!?!?!? I can believe that. I think that most of the GS's out there are probably in school labs and if most school labs are anything like our lab here at UTC, then they don't even KNOW that the GS is a different machine than a //e. In our lab, they have NOTHING but //e software for about 20 GS's. I was in the 'watchdogs' office the other day (the guy that watches over the lab) and I saw a book for Appleworks GS. That's the only evidence I've seen of ANY GS specific software. They still use the //e system disk to boot up the GS's. I see, maybe, ONE person per month using a GS there (not including myself). Everyone uses the 25 ps/2's that are sitting right next to the GS's or they use the 40 MAC SE's on the other side of the room. I've heard comments from users of the lab saying that they didn't even know why the had the GS's there. So, I brought a copy of the FTA demos and a self running disk of 3200 color pictures on the only GS with a color monitor. I walked down the hall to go to the bathroom. When I came back, there was a CROWD of at least 15-20 people standing around watching! :) Did my heart good! >-seth >--- > - tHe mAd ScienTisT, and other carnations >sk2f@andrew.cmu.edu >R746SK2F@CMCCVB _______________________________________ | | | BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm | | pro-line-- mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com | |---------------------------------------| | Assembly- a low level language | | Assembler- used to create an assembly | | Language program. | ---------------------------------------
q4kx@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Joel Sumner) (11/17/90)
The Apple surveyer may have also become confused between '8-bit' vs '16-bit' software and '//e' vs 'IIgs' software. For example. Zany Golf is an 8-bit program but it most certainly is not a piece of '//e' software. I admit that I spend about equal times in ProDOS 8 as in GS/OS (90% of my ProDOS 8 time is telecommunications). But I know that there are many pieces of software that I could not do without. Thus, I will NEVER go back to a '//e' machine. It just won't happen. -- Joel Sumner GENIE:JOEL.SUMNER These opinions are q4kx@cornella.ccs.cornell.edu q4kx@cornella warranted for 90 days or q4kx@vax5.cit.cornell.edu q4kx@crnlvax5 60,000 miles. Whichever .................................................... comes first. Never test for an error condition that you can't handle.
joseph@porthos.rutgers.edu (Seymour Joseph) (11/17/90)
Seth, the 95% of users who use only //e software on their //gs's might just be the k-12 schools that were the backbone of the Apple // population. Many of them started using Apple //s long before the //GS and when they upgraded to //GSs they used much of the same software on the new machines. I know a local high school that is running Apple Pascal v1.1 on them now. Since a great deal of the volume of educational software was never specifically converted to the //GS, many schools cotinue using them as fast //es. I run a users group in NJ and you would be AMAZED at the number of calls I get from people who have 256k or 512k GSs and run some old version of AppleWorks (not GS) or AppleWriter on it. These people have no Idea of what an Apple //GS is really capable of. Neither does much of the press. When you see the Apple //GS being defamed in print, it is usually by someone who sees the GS as a glorified, overpriced //e. I still get suprised looks from dedicated Macheads when I show them what "state of the art" Apple //GS software actually looks, and works like on a reasonably configured Apple //GS (Reasonably configured = 2 Mb ram + SCSI hard disk) Seymour Joseph Coordinator ACGNJ Apple II Users Group
pirmann@porthos.rutgers.edu (Dave Pirmann) (11/17/90)
Seymour- I wasn't aware that you ran an Apple II users group -- could you fill me in with some more information? I've owned an apple GS for years, and am interested in expanding it a little bit... Thanks for the info, Dave -- David Pirmann pirmann@rutgers.edu Rutgers LCSR Operations pirmann@njin.BITNET
rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) (11/17/90)
In article <EbEnSkC00WBM01_eo1@andrew.cmu.edu>, sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) writes: > Just wanted to share some stuff with everyone: [Stuff Deleted] > The LC was a beta machine. It looked really cool, and I was hoping to > get a chance to play with the //e card, BUT they didn't have the card. > Major Disappointment. > > I did talk to the guy (he was quite friendly). Let's see....among other > things, he claimed that the //e card for the LC was a real //e, as > opposed to the hacked (my word - I can't recall what he said) //e > EMULATION on the GS. I didn't know the GS EMULATES a //e..... The way I understand it, the 65816 chip thats in the GS has a 6502 emulation mode that runs the Apple ][ software. The card for the LC must have a real 65C02 chip on it. It would be the proper way to emulate a computer. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ryan 'Gozar' Collins ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ o__)\ rlcollins@miavx1.BITNET / ) RC1DSANU@miamiu.acs.muohio.edu / / ____ R.COLLINS1 (On GEnie) /(____/__(_) o)_/ /) [ || ] Atari Computers, "There is no Substitute." [ || ] They're not just Vs lbh pna ernq guvf, lbh'er geniryvat // || \\ for breakfast gbb pybfr! // || \\ anymore ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Yea, right, thats what I said.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cbdougla@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Collin Broad Douglas) (11/17/90)
In article <2913.27444614@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) writes: >In article <EbEnSkC00WBM01_eo1@andrew.cmu.edu>, sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) writes: >> Just wanted to share some stuff with everyone: > >[Stuff Deleted] > >> The LC was a beta machine. It looked really cool, and I was hoping to >> get a chance to play with the //e card, BUT they didn't have the card. >> Major Disappointment. >> >> I did talk to the guy (he was quite friendly). Let's see....among other >> things, he claimed that the //e card for the LC was a real //e, as >> opposed to the hacked (my word - I can't recall what he said) //e >> EMULATION on the GS. I didn't know the GS EMULATES a //e..... >The way I understand it, the 65816 chip thats in the GS has a 6502 >emulation mode that runs the Apple ][ software. The card for the LC must >have a real 65C02 chip on it. It would be the proper way to emulate a >computer. > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ryan 'Gozar' Collins ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > o__)\ rlcollins@miavx1.BITNET > / ) RC1DSANU@miamiu.acs.muohio.edu > / / ____ R.COLLINS1 (On GEnie) > /(____/__(_) o)_/ > /) [ || ] Atari Computers, > "There is no Substitute." [ || ] They're not just > Vs lbh pna ernq guvf, lbh'er geniryvat // || \\ for breakfast > gbb pybfr! // || \\ anymore >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Yea, right, thats what I said.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ but the 65816 running in 6502 mode is as good or better than a real 65c02. Also, GS users don't have to run a program before they want to use //e stuff. we just put it in a boot. Mac LC users have to run a program first. Collin Douglas cbdougla@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu
rtyu@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Rafael T Yu) (11/17/90)
Well, Since I got my GS I haven't used my IIe softwares at all, exept for
AppleWorks and Proterm. So I can hardly believe that only 5% of GS users use
GS-specific softwares. Maybe the survey was run on school and that may be true
since most schools still use theirs already invested IIe programs. But, what
about us, home GS users like myself. When I bought my computer I had the
option of either buying a GS or a Mac (B&W models) so I choosed the GS and I
have been a happy user since then.
I believe the problem begins in Apple Comp., Inc. They are so busy working
for their be loved Macintosh, that they forgot the machine that start it all, the Apple II. For a Mac to have the same capabilities of the GS, it has to be
one of the Mac II models. The B&W MAcs have no ground when compared to the GS.
Maybe the Mac has an advantage on software and technology over the GS, but the
GS outperform the B&W Macs on capabilities. All the ports found in a Mac can
be found on a GS plus seven expantion slots (compare to none on the B&W mac and
six on the IIfx). Well, my point is that the GS is a dam great machine for
home and personal use. It has a lot of potential if they are expored, and
can be expanded as needed.
Sierra On-line stopped developing products for the GS on the grounds that
the machine was too slow and technologicaly outdated, so they went to develop
softwares (concentrate) for the IBM and Mac. Well, that's something I can
believe. I have seen different Sierra games for both the GS and IBM, and the
GS versions are 100% better quality than the IBM versions. King of Chicago,
Defender of the Crown and Sinbad are a few examples. The graphics and sounds
(GS stand) on the GS version are super. If you don't believe me ask some IBM
user to show you this games after you have seen the GS version.
The GS version, win.....!!!
All I'm asking for is for Apple Inc. to take a look at the great potential
the GS have. I know the Macs are great computers but the GSs are too...!
==============================================================================
Rafael Yu
Internet: rtyu@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu
America Online: Veraguas
==============================================================================gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (11/17/90)
In article <1990Nov17.052755.29141@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu> rtyu@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Rafael T Yu) writes: > Sierra On-line stopped developing products for the GS on the grounds that >the machine was too slow and technologicaly outdated, so they went to develop >softwares (concentrate) for the IBM and Mac. Well, that's something I can >believe. I have seen different Sierra games for both the GS and IBM, and the >GS versions are 100% better quality than the IBM versions. King of Chicago, >Defender of the Crown and Sinbad are a few examples. The graphics and sounds >(GS stand) on the GS version are super. If you don't believe me ask some IBM >user to show you this games after you have seen the GS version. > The GS version, win.....!!! Those aren't Sierra products. Sierra On-Line's IIGS problems have been discussed at length previously. Basically, what it comes down to is that their games are written in a special game-programming language, which is in turn implemented as an interpreter on each kind of computer that Sierra supports. The IIGS implementation of the game system did not perform as well as would have been required for market acceptability. Some people blame it on the use of a high-level language (C) to implement the kernel of the interpreter, while others of us blame it on the poor quality of the code generated by the compiler that Sierra used. In any case, a good implementation would be considerably faster. Sierra declines to allow anyone to work on this without becoming a full-time Sierra employee, which of course rules out the majority of qualified IIGS programmers.
cyliao@hardy.u.washington.edu (Chun-Yao Liao) (11/18/90)
Ha, a week ago, there was a small expo here too, there were IBM (hey RT 6000
is nice one, and resonablly priced!) Zenith, MicroSoft, and Apple com.
Most people gathered with IBM and Apples. Obviously, Classic, LC and IIsi are
there. A rep was trying to convince a //e owner to get the LC because
it can add a //e card. While the rep was pushing more and more "goodeis"
of Mac LC, I played around with it (yeah, the LC) and in a few minutes,
"Crash!" "Sorry, Fatal system erro, please reboot"(or something similar) alone
with a "bomb!" I said (yes, said, not laughed) "ha ha". The guy who was
almost conviced by the rep then showed doubtful of getting a LC :-) He then
said to rep that one thing he liked his //e is because it's so reliable
that almost never crashes:-)
Ok, no Apple //s there nor //e card. I was a bit mad... so I was playing
with //si... another rep with smillie face came to me and asked me "which
one of these you are going to buy?" I replied "I am not going to buy
any 'Mac'". Without a single word spoken, this rep went away from me, ha.
oh well, what can I say?
cyliao@wam.umd.edu o NeXT : I put main frame power on two chips.
@epsl.umd.edu o people: We put main flame power on two guys.
@bagend.eng.umd.edu o ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
xxxxx@xxxxx.xxx.xxx (reserved) o RC + Apple // + Classic Music + NeXT = cyliaotaob@pnet91.cts.com (Brian Tao) (11/18/90)
From MQUINN%UTCVM@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU: > So, I brought a copy of the FTA demos and a self running disk of 3200 color > pictures on the only GS with a color monitor. I walked down the hall to > go to the bathroom. When I came back, there was a CROWD of at least 15-20 > people standing around watching! :) Did my heart good! Ah yes, the joys of turning the stray flock back to the light! ;) I had a similar experience at my former high school. There is ONE (count'em ONE) GS in the whole school of 1600 students. It was located in the remedial education centre. Care to guess what it was running? Bank Street Writer III and MultiScribe //e. I had a case study in Systems Analysis class coming up in a couple months, so I decided to write something on the GS. Everyone else either used the Mac Pluses or the XT's. On the day of the presentation, we had a lot of spare time given to us by the teacher during class. Luckily, I just HAPPENED to have Dungeon Master, a couple FTA demos and Xenocide with me that day... borrowed the speakers from the teacher's Mac SE and plugged them into the the GS (no stereo though). 0 to 30 people in under 10 seconds... BT \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ | Brian T. Tao | UUCP: torag!pnet91!taob | / \ | University of Toronto | INET: taob@pnet91.cts.com | \ The Apple II / | Scarberia, ON | taob@pro-micol.cts.com | / Lives On!! \ |:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::| \ / | "Computer guru? Someone who got their computer a | /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ | couple of weeks before you did." (Alvin Toffler) |
sb@pnet91.cts.com (Stephen Brown) (11/18/90)
joseph@porthos.rutgers.edu (Seymour Joseph) says: >the 95% of users who use only //e software on their //gs' might just >be the k-12 schools that were the backbone of the Apple // population. [cut] >v1.1 on them now. Since a great deal of the volume of educational >software was never specifically converted to the //GS, many schools >cotinue using them as fast //es. [cut] >version of AppleWorks (not GS) or AppleWriter on it. These people >have no Idea of what an Apple //GS is really capable of. Neither B O Y ! Do I agree wholeheartedly. I have an teacher acquaintance who has a bunch of IIGS's (he liked mine so much that he got one for himself and a few for the classroom, when he saw what it could do). He acknowledges that he uses mostly IIe software. He contacted one of Toronto's largest (Toronto, Canada) Apple dealers to get a demo of what educational software was avaialble for the IIGS. The rep that visited the school was intent on doing something... apparently, it wasn't demo'ing educational software for the IIGS. I'll give you a hint: He brought Macs. People use IIe software because they don't know what IIGS software is available. And until recently (System Disk 5) most IIGS software ran like molasses, so who'd want to use it anyway? Only recently has the IIGS OS finally become 'of age', and people ask why IIGS'ers use IIe software? Inquiring minds want to learn more about the IIGS and IIGS software. How many impediments must Apple (and their Agents) place in the road to discourage them?? :( Stephen Brown UUCP: lsuc!graham!pnet91!sb INET: sb@pnet91.cts.com
daveharv@pro-novapple.cts.com (Dave Harvey) (11/19/90)
In-Reply-To: message from gwyn@smoke.brl.mil >I can practically guarantee that over 95% of personal IIGS users >use GS-specific software. But we're the ones that Apple officially >pretends do not exist. Sorry, I can't agree. Unfortunately, there's still not that much out specifically for the GS in certain catagories. Most GS owners I know use Proterm for communications software, PublishIt! 3 for desk top publishing, Classic Appleworks for word processing and Proline for BBS software. Sure there're packages specific for the GS and I'm sure many GS owners use them. But in the four catagories above, there's really nothing that's really surpassed them in terms of sales or popularity. proline: pro-novapple!daveharv | uucp: crash!pnet01!pro-novapple!daveharv | Pro-novapple BBS arpa: crash!pnet01!pro-novapple!daveharv@nosc.mil | 300/1200/2400/9600 Baud Internet: daveharv@pro-novapple.cts.com | 703-671-0416 | Northern Virginia Apple Users Group | P.O. Box 8211, Falls Church, VA 22041 |
lhaider@pro-beagle.cts.com (Laer Haider) (11/22/90)
In-Reply-To: message from daveharv@pro-novapple.cts.com >>I can practically guarantee that over 95% of personal IIGS users >>use GS-specific software. But we're the ones that Apple officially >>pretends do not exist. >Sorry, I can't agree. Unfortunately, there's still not that much out >specifically for the GS in certain catagories. >Most GS owners I know use Proterm for communications software, PublishIt! 3 >for desk top publishing, Classic Appleworks for word processing and Proline >for BBS software. Sure there're packages specific for the GS and I'm sure >many GS owners use them. But in the four catagories above, there's really >nothing that's really surpassed them in terms of sales or popularity. I have to admit that these P8 programs are still strong in the market. However, it isn't that people prefer using P8 software; such software for the GS/OS side of the GS just hasn't been developed to the same level yet. There is NO IIgs program capable of doing what ProTERM is. None with the features Classic AppleWorks offers. No BBS software with the power and features of Proline. No DBMS with the same power as DB Master. The only catagory in which there is an equal is in spreadsheets; and Apple II folks don't seem to have a great interest in them. Even with word processors, the only thing that offers any reasonable level of power and functionality is WordPerfect GS, and that isn't even supported under System 5.0x. When (if?) we start seeing quality software produced for the GS's native mode, people will purchase and use these programs. As it stands, I for one prefer using the GUI, but can't reasonably use it for many applications. / \ / / ______________________________________________________ \\\' , / // ProLine: pro-beagle!lhaider \\\//, _/ //, INET: lhaider@pro-beagle.cts.com \_-//' / //<, /\\ UUCP: crash!pro-beagle!lhaider \ /// <//` //\\\ ARPA: crash!pro-beagle!lhaider@nosc.mil / >> \\\`__/_ ///\\\\ /,)-^>> _\` \\\ ////\\\\\ The opinions expressed here belong to (/ \\ /\\\ // IIgs \\\ no entity(s), living or dead! // _//\\\\ ------------------------------------------------------ ((` ((
greg@hoss.unl.edu (Hammer T. H.) (11/24/90)
In <1990Nov17.052755.29141@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu> rtyu@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Rafael T Yu) writes: > Well, Since I got my GS I haven't used my IIe softwares at all, exept for >AppleWorks and Proterm. So I can hardly believe that only 5% of GS users use >GS-specific softwares. Hmm, myself, I've been using mostly //e software, but a very limited library thereof. I run ProTERM, several packing programs, and a BBS running in ACOS (same OS that GBBS "Pro" uses). I've found that one can make real simple modifications to programs that were in DOS 3.3 that wouldn't run in ProDOS (due to size mostly) and be able to use GS techniques (temporarily relocating them in upper banks of memory with a little code) to get them to work. In fact, I'm about to rewrite the ACOS ProTERM video driver so that it is located in an upper bank of memory, and will recognize more ProTERM codes than it does. But I assure you, the moment I get myself a hard drive (still on a 3.5" and 5.25" and 1 MB RAMdisk) I'll be using GS specific software more often. >============================================================================== > Rafael Yu > Internet: rtyu@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu > America Online: Veraguas >============================================================================== -- __ _____________ __ \ \_\ \__ __/ /_/ / "I'm working the Eight Minus Zero Shift..." \greg@hoss.unl.edu/ "Eight Minus Zero Shift?" \_\ \_\|_|/_/ /_/ "Yup, the Happiness Patrol."
-Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) (11/24/90)
I used to use mostly 8-bit programs, when using 3.5" drives. But since getting a new QUANTUM 105S, I find myself using very few 8-bit programs. Currently I use PT 2.2 and BINSCII for modem work, as there are really no alternatives. But I have stopped using SHRINKIT 3.03 in favor of GS SHRINKIT, and I use NDA's instead of the old 8-bit utilities. They get the job done better and faster. P8 is much more convenient than GS/OS for a 2 disk 3.5" system. And I imagine for those with less, it is not practical to run most 16-bit applications. Most of the Apple // users in Silicon valley that I know who have HD's use GS/OS. While most of those with floppy's use P8. So in conclusion, the statement that most GS owners use P8 programs seems to be equivalent to saying that GS/OS is most useful when run from a HD, which most //gs owners do not have. I would also like to point out that many operations are SLOW in GS/OS, though not as slow as P16. The GS/OS programmers have done a wonderful job, but the //gs still is kinda underpowered to drive a GUI. I just ordered a ZipChip GSX, which should hopefully put some life back into GS/OS. I wonder how much it will cost to upgrade to 64K of cache??? And of course, any resemblance between the hallucinations you are seeing above, and reality, if such exists, is just bad luck. Rich -rich-@cup.portal.com
AABENSON@MTUS5.BITNET (12/06/90)
Same thing here.... Hard drives are too expensive, though.
-Andrew A. Benson (Internet: aabenson@balance.cs.mtu.edu)
(BITNET : AABENSON@MTUS5.BITNET)AABENSON@MTUS5.BITNET (12/07/90)
WHo was that the is running the Apple II users' group? Could whoever you are please send me some information? THanks a bunch! - Andrew. P.S. I can't read news on a regular basis, so please send mail to me at "aabenson@balance.cs.mtu.edu" -- NOT "AABENSON@MTUS5.BITNET"