Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com (05/04/90)
Now that comp.sys.apple2 has replaced comp.sys.apple, can we MacPeople finally take over this board until it's dumped? Hehehe. --Randy Padawer (with a Mac II and a big, big hard drive)
cs122aw@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Alfter) (05/05/90)
In article <29581@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >Now that comp.sys.apple2 has replaced comp.sys.apple, can we MacPeople >finally take over this board until it's dumped? Hehehe. Hehehe--very funny--hardy-har-har. I hope your Mac gets CyberAIDS. (OK, so CyberAIDS was an Apple II virus. Who cares? :-) ) Scott Alfter------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet: cs122aw@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu _/_ Apple II: the power to be your best! alfter@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu / v \ saa33413@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu ( ( A keyboard--how quaint! Bitnet: free0066@uiucvmd.bitnet \_^_/ --M. Scott, STIV
cyliao@eng.umd.edu (Chun-Yao Liao) (05/05/90)
In article <29581@cup.portal.com> Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com writes: >Now that comp.sys.apple2 has replaced comp.sys.apple, can we MacPeople >finally take over this board until it's dumped? Hehehe. >--Randy Padawer (with a Mac II and a big, big hard drive) Is this a joke or what? If not, then now WE ALL UNDERSTAND WHY APPLE // PEOPLE *HATE* MAC PEOPLE! IT WAS BECAUSE MAC PEOPLE WANT TO TAKE OVER APPLE //. WE THE APPLE // PEOPLE ALWAYS CLAIM WE HAVE NOTHING AGAINST MAC, NOW I THINK THERE'S ONE. loudspeaker off... BTW, I have a VERY BIG hard drive connected to my //c too! it's about 55ft x 47ft x 90ft! (but it's got 0k in it, and is basically made of air though...) -- 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 = cyliao
Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com (05/05/90)
I'm not hatable. My Mac // with a big, big hard drive just smells that way. :-D
Justin_Randall_Padawer@cup.portal.com (06/16/90)
Well, it finally happened. Now that the Apple 2 people have moved to comp.sys.apple2, we Mac people can be the only posters over here. Bahaha. Sign me, Randy with a Big, Big Mac
asd@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Kareth) (06/28/90)
In article <1990Jun27.041352.12067@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes: >Noone is perfect. Apple has a job on its hands dealing with the competition. >The 6502 based computers are hardly a base to build a computer company on. Interesting! Exceedingly so, considering a quite large and influential (at least to the history of personal computing) was built entirely on the 6502 and that ALL of their current product lines could NEVER have come about without that lowly 6502. This is not to mention any other companies that built themselves using 6502 based computers. I seem to recall that first company's name being Apple too, and that Apple doesn't have to build itself, it already has. >Apple has supported them on a technical basis. I see no reason why Apple should >continue to make them. Maybe cuz folks still want em? Because they are affordable (comparitively to the Mac)? Hacker (in the good sense of the word) friendly? Have a large installed base of users, software and hardware? >... No amount of work will >convince new users to opt for a 6502 based computer when there are others >available for the same price with better graphics, better programs,...As I see Well, that sure ain't anything in the Mac "If ya have to ask how much it costs, ya can't afford it" dept. And if that statement IS true, then it seems like, logically, the only people buying Apple II's are people who already have Apple II's, which I can't quite believe. >it the GS needs a speedup to around 7MHz, better graphics, easier integration Nah, go for 20MHz! I mean, at least while we are dreaming let's dream big! :-) >could provide a list pages long. However, cost is important. People will not >buy expensive educational/home computers. Nor will they buy $5,000+ for a bare-bones box & motherboard ither. > I'm sorry to sound so negative about >8 bit AppleII's, but it's time to move on(that doesn't mean throwing them >away!). Nope, it means pack up thy bags and move to Amiga! If Apple does dump the II's, I do believe they will find themselve quite pinched into a small hole by Sun/NeXT/etc workstations at the top, and increasingly dominant Amiga's for low-cost power as well as getting completely forced out of the K-12 educational market by cheap PC clones. Course only time will tell. BTW, if one moves on but doesn't throw em away, what IS one supposed to do with a unsupported (software wise at least) II? Time to get back to work. Gotta save up some pennies for a color '040 NeXT (fogware :-) box. My GS is gonna be the console or an extra terminal for it (should be possible) as well as faithfully speeding along doing whatever else I ask of it. I wonder what Jobs would think of that.... -k
philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) (06/28/90)
I have received many letters regarding my statement that Apple does support the AppleII, that the 8 bit II's should be dropped, that one cannot base a computer company on the 6502(20 years ago times were different) and that the GS should form the basis of a product line aimed at the educational- home market with better connectivity to the Mac. I'd like to respond to some of the critics. RE: Amiga It has been said that the GS needs to be speeded up(MHz-wise) to a point where one can compete with an Amiga. I feel the markets are very different for the 2 computers. A 7MHz GS with better graphics,stereo sound and a LOW PRICE is what is needed. I personally do not want a dedicated game machine(there are many out there) but a general computer with close ties to education, the Mac and graphics' oriented. Apple appears to be headed that way, and will surely accelerate their efforts given IBM's attempt to aim at the educational-home market. RE: 8 bit AppleII's I have nothing against them, but they are essentially text based. I feel the future lies in graphics' based computers. The GS is, in my view, capable of being a good graphics' based computer, but needs a little speedup. Many AppleII computers(8 bit) are still in schools serving useful functions. They need to be supported by Apple, and this has been done via software support. I think it is not in the cards, nor desirable, to expand the 8 bit II's at the expense of the GS. The emphasis at this time should be on the GS- improving it (while remaining cost effective) and tying it more closely to the Mac. The GS/Mac combination is a wonderful way to head into the 90's. The fact that Apple began with the 6502 is interesting but should not be something which holds back people from moving on. We need scanners, printer drivers, ability to deal with the various graphics' formats which are evolving, a tektronics' emulator,etc...This argues for an improved GS with better graphics. RE: NeXT Those who insist that their next computer will be a UNIX workstation( to replace their current personal computer) should price out workstation software,peripherals,etc...If they did this I have every confidence that they would think twice. Philip McDunnough Professor, University of Toronto philip@utstat.toronto.edu [my opinions]
asd@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Kareth) (06/28/90)
In article <1990Jun27.234930.14015@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes: >I have received many letters regarding my statement that Apple does support >the AppleII,... >.... I'd like to respond to >some of the critics. Okay, and we'll respond to you. >RE: Amiga >It has been said that the GS needs to be speeded up(MHz-wise) to a point >where one can compete with an Amiga. Well, MHz isn't the true indicator of speed, like Job's likes to say, thru-put is, but it's sure a good place to start if the cpu is basically strapped with doing almost all the work. >I feel the markets are very different for the 2 computers. A 7MHz GS with I disagree, naturally. The Apple line used to be the machine for everything, but has been relegated to home/K-12. Amiga was born of games of course, but has always been firmly planted in the home market. Of course, it is a hacker's machine, just what the II used to be (is?), but is rapidly developing. The markets may differ somewhat, but they still play in the same arena, home, and no matter what the differences, they still get compared to AppleII's, or rather, they look down with utter contempt on the II's. >better graphics,stereo sound and a LOW PRICE is what is needed. I personally Very very LOW! >do not want a dedicated game machine(there are many out there) but a general Ah, but the Amiga is no longer a dedicated game machine! I wouldn't even dream of saying that. If ya do, take a look at the new Amiga 3000. It's no longer just a game anymore, although you can play some fantastic stuff on it. What it IS is a quite powerful, low-cost color Mac yet for the home market and still open to being hacked with. I've seen some might impressive stuff for the Amiga, things that had NOTHING to do with game playing but with SERIOUS productivity goals in mind! >RE: 8 bit AppleII's [lot of sound thoughts that I pretty much agree with] >RE: NeXT >Those who insist that their next computer will be a UNIX workstation( to >replace their current personal computer) should price out workstation >software,peripherals,etc...If they did this I have every confidence that >they would think twice. You do, do you? Allow me a second to consider twice..... considered. Well, that's probably the hundredth or so time I've considered, and guess what, I STILL think it's a better buy! Namely, talking about the NeXT cube as it's the only workstation that really borders in the PC market also, like the Mac is doing. And pricing it out? Get a clue! 1 basic NeXT system = $6500 (if Mac II's can be considered personal computers at their prices, so can a NeXT) 1 NeXT printer $2000 I *presume* folks know what's included with a NeXT. Here's a quick list: 25MHz '030 (25MHz '040 soon out doubles the speed), 25MHz 68882 FPU, 25MHz 56001 digital signal processor (if ya haven't seen it in action, you've missed something!), 256MB removable optical drive, 17" mono monitor (color soon to be out from what NeXT indicates, that's 24bit color if I recall correctly!), keyboard, mouse, Mach/BSD4.3 compatible OS (Unix), and MANY programs/utilities bundled with the box. Now, just going with the basic setups, at university prices a Mac IIx back in Jan 89 would cost around $4500 MORE and wouldn't include ANY of the software products that the NeXT buyer gets free, products that would cost the Mac person thousands to buy. So unless Apple can ever price a machine like NeXT can, I'll never get a Mac for my next computer. And IBM/clones have ALWAYS seemed user hostile to me, and don't even speak to me about Windows, makes me gag. Now an Amiga I might buy as my next machine, but for about twice the price I can get a NeXT and have the world of Unix at my fingertips! Along with a very respectable deal of powerful hardware/software products, all for ONE price. I think you might be suprised at the number of people who wouldn't think twice about a NeXT workstation as their next machine up from an AppleII. I know I've corresponded with quite a few that were/are going from AppleII to NeXT. I know I sure am! Course it don't mean I still don't love my II! -k
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (07/04/90)
In article <4990@mace.cc.purdue.edu> asd@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Kareth) writes: >So unless Apple can ever price a machine like NeXT can, I'll never get >a Mac for my next computer. And IBM/clones have ALWAYS seemed user >hostile to me, and don't even speak to me about Windows, makes me gag. A lot of people happily run genuine UNIX on their IBM/clone hardware. These days a variety of display-oriented user interfaces are available. It's hard to beat that family for hardware prices, because it is an extremely competitive market. 386 and 486 platforms can look quite unlike the old MS-DOS environments that made IBM PCs so unappealing.