sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) (05/03/90)
Just a bit fed up with a whole bunch of stuff.
Get a clue, people:
The Apple II as a HOME MACHINE.
We're not asking for superior number crunching.
We're not asking for supersonic speed.
We're not asking for a machine that is the equal of the Mac IIfx!
There is a viable market for a reasonably priced, technically able
computer. Apple has neglected the
low end user! They have admitted so themselves!
And while it is Apple's decision whether or not to market a Rom 4 GS, or
an Apple II card nubus card, I think we have are perfectly justified in
expecting more from Apple. There is nothing inherently BAD about the
65816 (in fact, Mensch [who doesn't seem to be exactly dependable...]
has plans for a 65832 (8/32 bit version of the 6502), and a something
else which would be a self contained computer-on-a-chip, to be used in a
parallel processing machine!) The age of the machine doesn't matter -
WHAT MATTERS IS WHETHER OR NOT THE MACHINE DOES WHAT YOU NEED
IT TO DO!
Case in point: I was the witness to a computer salesman trying to sell a
Mac II to a student who
was looking for something to do WORD PROCESSING on!! OVERKILL!!!! I
could accomplish all
that on my GS!!!!
To all those people talking about cars: Do you sell your current year
car at the end of the year,
because you know that a newer one is coming out next year?! I don't
think so. WHEN do you buy a
new car - perhaps when your old one doesn't reasonably function
anymore?? And do they EVER, EVER stop servicing your car because it's
not new anymore??!!! DO THEY EVER STOP MAKING
STEREOS, AND RADAR DETECTORS, AND BABY SEATS, AND BATTERIES?????!!!! These
are all things one can easily expect to find on the market today. So is
it too much to expect Apple to
provide support for us??!! Is it too much to expect Apple to
acknowledge that they have more than
one computer family, and treat us accordingly instead of looking the
other way as if we were
illegitimate??!!
Look - the home computer idea - that's something that I personally see
as the niche (if you want to call it that) for the Apple II family.
That, and low cost educational computers.
But support, and acknowledgement - that's something we all want, and are
owed in a big way.
-seth kadesh
sk2f@andrew.cmu.edu
Y612SK2F@CMCCVBjayg@wpi.wpi.edu (Jay Giurleo) (05/05/90)
In article <4aDvrMK00Ws185_UNi@andrew.cmu.edu> sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) writes: >Just a bit fed up with a whole bunch of stuff. >Get a clue, people: > > The Apple II as a HOME MACHINE. > >We're not asking for superior number crunching. >We're not asking for supersonic speed. >We're not asking for a machine that is the equal of the Mac IIfx! I'd sure love a Mac IIfx, but I own an Apple IIgs. All I would like to see is apple make a computer that realistically does the things that the computers of today do. The Mac is a "today" machine. The II line is yesterdays machine. Don't get me wrong(I know someone will) The apple is a good machine, but it needs updating. > >parallel processing machine!) The age of the machine doesn't matter - >WHAT MATTERS IS WHETHER OR NOT THE MACHINE DOES WHAT YOU NEED >IT TO DO! > Yes that is true. However, it would be nice to think that the computer could still do more if I asked it to. The reason I compare the GS to the Mac is because that is exactly what the Mac does for me. I can use the Mac without a problem. I can customize my Mac without waiting eons for it to boot the finder. However, I can also program the Mac. And it's not as difficult as some people might believe. Yes it does more, but it has managers and other routines which do the dirty work for you. Maybe it's more restrained as far as having ultimate control over the whole machine, but it is much more refined. >Case in point: I was the witness to a computer salesman trying to sell a >Mac II to a student who >was looking for something to do WORD PROCESSING on!! OVERKILL!!!! I >could accomplish all >that on my GS!!!! I hate word processing on my GS. Have you ever word processed on a Mac? The only word processor I'll use on my GS is Appleworks Classic. Why? I don't have to wait for it. >anymore?? And do they EVER, EVER stop servicing your car because it's >not new anymore??!!! DO THEY EVER STOP MAKING >STEREOS, AND RADAR DETECTORS, AND BABY SEATS, AND BATTERIES?????!!!! These >are all things one can easily expect to find on the market today. So is >it too much to expect Apple to >provide support for us??!! (Must you yell?) Look. If you have an old car. You ca get it serviced. Present some money, and anything is possible. What makes you think that you can't get your apple serviced? Just because it's not Apple that services it doesn't mean anything. When was the last time you had Apple service your computer? I mean Apple in Cupertino, California, and not an authorized dealer. So, then, even if Apple doesn't want to help us out, I'm SURE that we can find other sources of support. User groups, for one, are the next best thing to having the entire company by your side. I'm a member of the BCS, the Boston Computer Society. What a great source of knowledge and skill! I don't need apple if I need help. Organizations such as this are not going away because they are made up of people just like us who realize that there is more to owning a computer than complaining that the company doesn't support a 12 year old machine the way it used to. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Murphy's Military Laws: 1. Never share a foxhole with anyone braver than you are. ---------- Jay Giurleo ------ jayg@wpi.wpi.edu -----jayg@wpi.bitnet ------
sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) (05/05/90)
I said: ->Just a bit fed up with a whole bunch of stuff. ->Get a clue, people: -> -> The Apple II as a HOME MACHINE. -> ->We're not asking for superior number crunching. ->We're not asking for supersonic speed. ->We're not asking for a machine that is the equal of the Mac IIfx! to which Jay Giurleo <jayg@wpi.wpi.edu> replies: > I'd sure love a Mac IIfx, but I own an Apple IIgs. All I would like >to see is apple make a computer that realistically does the things that >the computers of today do. The Mac is a "today" machine. The II line >is yesterdays machine. Don't get me wrong(I know someone will) The >apple is a good machine, but it needs updating. At the risk of being blunt, you're missing the point. Totally. If you need or want a IIfx, get one. But I ask you, what are you going to do with it? What will the IIfx do for you that your current computer won't? There is a market for the power computer, and there is a market for a personal computer. You really, really, DON'T need to word process at 25 mHz. It's overkill - just plain dumb. Unfortunately, the average consumer has been educated to look at the age of the machine, the speed at which it runs, and even the company label as reasons to buy a certain machine. I contend that a large percentage of users don't need there '386 accelerated super turbo PC for what they do. And when you say that the Mac is a "today" machine, I get ill. You're blind. You're not seeing the whole picture. There is no reason at all why the II and the Mac cannot coexist. They serve different markets (or they should). If you're not in that particular market, then your needs are serviced else where (power user). IF YOU TRUELY NEED THE POWER. Lest I be accused of being blind, I'm certainly not claiming that there are not problems with the IIgs as it stands now. That's why I'm writing this :-) ->parallel processing machine!) The age of the machine doesn't matter - ->WHAT MATTERS IS WHETHER OR NOT THE MACHINE DOES WHAT YOU NEED ->IT TO DO! > Yes that is true. However, it would be nice to think that the computer >could still do more if I asked it to. The reason I compare the GS to the if you NEED it to do more, then you should get a computer that does what you need. And what kind of "more" are you looking for that the GS cannot provide? >Mac is because that is exactly what the Mac does for me. I can use the >Mac without a problem. I can customize my Mac without waiting eons for it >to boot the finder. However, I can also program the Mac. And it's not as I'm sorry, but I find this difficult to believe. You have a problem using the GS? and the GS does not take "EONS" to boot the finder - have you used GS/OS 5.0? compare it to a Mac, which doesn't even touch the drives for the first few minutes after you turn it on! (kinda reminds me of an old tv that we had, which needed time for the picture tube to warm up). And that's just official system software. I've seen some amazingly complex programs start up so fast you would think they were on a hard drive, or something. And by amazingly complex, I mean something long as well as complicated. >difficult as some people might believe. Yes it does more, but it >has managers and other routines which do the dirty work for you. Maybe >it's more restrained as far as having ultimate control over the whole >machine, but it is much more refined. How much do you actually know about the GS? The GS has a complex set of toolbox routines and other managers that compare (design-wise) very favorably to the GS. As someone else mentioned elsewhere, there is a event manager (I've probably got it wrong, but my recall isn't very good today) that simplifies desktop programming and communication tremendously! Doesn't exist for the cumbersome Mac world. And GS/OS beats HFS hands down, in terms of expandibility and user support for outside functions. ->Case in point: I was the witness to a computer salesman trying to sell a ->Mac II to a student who ->was looking for something to do WORD PROCESSING on!! OVERKILL!!!! I ->could accomplish all ->that on my GS!!!! >I hate word processing on my GS. Have you ever word processed on a Mac? >The only word processor I'll use on my GS is Appleworks Classic. Why? >I don't have to wait for it. OK. A tarnish on the GS image - it's speed. I would say it's currently inadequate for anything involving intensive graphics. Yes, I've used Macs to do word processing. But the word processing only seems to get reasonable on the IIci's, and such forth. I had the opportunity to use a Mac+ last night, and it was awful. Slow as all hell! Give me Appleworks GS/classic any day. Of course, I'm one of those strange people who loved Applewriter. And I use emacs to do a lot of work work on the big machines here at school - I'm thinking of writing a basic text editor in the emacs style. ->anymore?? And do they EVER, EVER stop servicing your car because it's ->not new anymore??!!! DO THEY EVER STOP MAKING ->STEREOS, AND RADAR DETECTORS, AND BABY SEATS, AND BATTERIES?????!!!! ->These ->are all things one can easily expect to find on the market today. So is ->it too much to expect Apple to ->provide support for us??!! >(Must you yell?) it's been a bad week. > Look. If you have an old car. You ca get it serviced. Present some >money, and anything is possible. What makes you think that you >can't get your apple serviced? Just because it's not Apple that services >it doesn't mean anything. When was the last time you had Apple service >your computer? I mean Apple in Cupertino, California, and not an authorized >dealer. So, then, even if Apple doesn't want to help us out, I'm SURE that >we can find other sources of support. User groups, for one, are the >next best thing to having the entire company by your side. I'm a member >of the BCS, the Boston Computer Society. What a great source of knowledge >and skill! I don't need apple if I need help. Organizations such as this >are not going away because they are made up of people just like us who >realize that there is more to owning a computer than complaining that >the company doesn't support a 12 year old machine the way it used to. You're taking me just a bit too literally: I wasn't referring to the actual, physical servicing of a piece of machinery. Maybe service was a bad word. How about just support and commitment? And the problem is also that nothing gets done for a market that's not going anywhere. There's no growth in third party support. If the support strengthened from Apple, third party people wuold do so likewsie. I really really really REALLY REALLY wish people would realize that there is a LOT more to the GS than just a 12 year old relative! The GS is not 12 years old, no matter how you count! Let's try to be a bit more informed. To quote you from the very next article: >I may have to disagree with you there. Apple has not made two machines >and called one the GS and one the Mac. They ARE very different machines. >One is more current than the other, and comes with SCSI built in. Let's all practice saying it ten times slowly: AGE DOESN'T MATTER AGE DOESN'T MATTER AGE DOESN'T MATTER and built in scsi? is that how you distinguish between the computers? :< > -- >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Murphy's Military Laws: >1. Never share a foxhole with anyone braver than you are. >---------- Jay Giurleo ------ jayg@wpi.wpi.edu -----jayg@wpi.bitnet ------ seth kadesh the mad scientist@andrew.cmu.edu (sk2f) ^--- this doesn't really work. use this --^ --- - tHe mAd ScienTisT, and other carnations / | /--->(seth kadesh) \ |/a math/cs major in four acts :: Carnegie Mellon University \ |\sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu -or- P254SK2F@CMCCVB / | \<---Smile. It makes people wonder :-)
toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (05/05/90)
jayg@wpi.wpi.edu (Jay Giurleo) writes: > I can customize my Mac without waiting eons for it to boot the finder. Chances are your Mac has a hard drive and the GS doesn't. Makes a world of difference. If your GS has a hard drive, get a DMA SCSI card. That makes a world of difference too. > However, I can also program the Mac. And it's not as >difficult as some people might believe. Yes it does more, but it >has managers and other routines which do the dirty work for you. Maybe >it's more restrained as far as having ultimate control over the whole >machine, but it is much more refined. The GS toolbox is more refined than the Mac in its basic design. Desktop grunge is made easier by TaskMaster, a call that handles many system events for you. GS/OS based programs are capable of the same sophistication as Mac programs -- the hardware as it currently stands just doesn't do them justice. A 7 mhz transwarp pretty much fixes that. >I hate word processing on my GS. Have you ever word processed on a Mac? >The only word processor I'll use on my GS is Appleworks Classic. Why? >I don't have to wait for it. Well, I use AW Classic on the GS because I hate waiting for the Macs! Many of the Mac's fonts are annoying to read in 9 point or less anyway, so I just edit in AW Classic and use a Mac to add fonts before I print. Next year I will have an Appletalk hookup in my room and I will use AW GS instead. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (05/05/90)
sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) writes: [ in reply to someone else ] >How much do you actually know about the GS? The GS has a complex set of >toolbox routines and other managers that compare (design-wise) very favorably >to the GS. As someone else mentioned elsewhere, there is a event manager (I've ^^ typo! this should be "Mac" >probably got it wrong, but my recall isn't very good today) that simplifies ^^^^^ nope, you're talking about TaskMaster and MessageCenter >desktop programming and communication tremendously! Doesn't exist for the >cumbersome Mac world. And GS/OS beats HFS hands down, in terms of >expandibility and user support for outside functions. That last is true but its potential is largely unrealized. An HFS FST (Apple had better be planning to release one!) would install on a GS 5.0 system disk, and whammo we will be able to read/write and use Mac disks in every GS/OS program. The Mac won't have anything as convenient as this until system 7. >OK. A tarnish on the GS image - it's speed. I would say it's currently >inadequate for anything involving intensive graphics. Take a look at ORCA/Desktop. The 4.0 version has the best desktop text editing I've seen on the GS. Period. You only get one font, but it's as fast as a Mac. Their 5.0 friendly version is in beta 11 (gag) but when it comes out I am going to shell out for it and a Toolbox Ref 3. >I really really really REALLY REALLY wish people would realize that there is a >LOT more to the GS than just a 12 year old relative! The GS is not 12 years >old, no matter how you count! Amen, brother. The GS has a bad reputation because everyone thinks it is limited by 8 bit Apple // compatibility. In software nothing could be further than the truth, if anything GS/OS is more 'current' than the Mac. The hardware suffers from idiotic design decisions on Apple's part which are scandalously easy to fix; they were caused by internal politics, not technological barriers. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
S707503@UWEC.BITNET (MARK RINECK) (05/06/90)
In reply to statements from sk2f+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU: [There is a market for the power computer, and there is a market for a personal computer. You really, really, DON'T need to word process at 25 mHz. It's overkill - just plain dumb.] Well, for word processing, it's not likely 25Mhz is needed. But, then again, Appleworks GS word processing is frustratingly slow at 2.8 Mhz. And even so, I would love to play FA-18 Interceptor on the 25 Mhz Amiga 3000 (that he will buy in the future) than the 8Mhz A500 he has now. There is always some advantage to speed. And when you say that the Mac is a "today" machine, I get ill. You're blind. You're not seeing the whole picture. There is no reason at all why the II and the Mac cannot coexist.] The Macintosh is a "today". The old Apple II's (//e and down) are *yesterday's* machines. (Not that they don't work just fine.) The Apple IIGS however, should be a "today" machine also. It is just not living up to the requirements for a "today" machine, which are: 16-bit, at least 8 Mhz, stereo sound (on board!) and 640X400 (somehow, interlace, whatever) with some nice colors. And, ESPECIALLY, priced around $1000 for a starter COMPLETE system. There are two reasons why the GS shouldn't be right up there in sales and popularity (like the II had) with a Macintosh: Capabilities are lagging behind for anyone to consider a GS as more than a "souped up" IIe. Isn't this true? The GS is great, but there are those little things that you wish the computer had...etc. With an Amiga 3000 with student discount rumored at around $2000 WITH a multisync monitor...makes it hard to see where you can find a better value in a GS. If the GS was priced right, there would be no reason for the Amiga 500 to exist...but it does! Mark Rineck University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire S707503@UWEC.BITNET