CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu (Christopher Tate) (10/24/90)
In article <329@ub.d.umn.edu>, halam1@ub.d.umn.edu (Haseen I. Alam) says: > I was looking at the spec sheets for a Mac IIsi, and saw that you can buy > EITHER an "030 Direct Slot Adapter Card" OR a "NuBus Adapter Card" for the > IIsi. Both of these adapters come with a 68882 FPU. [stuff deleted] First, a question: from what I've seen of the spec sheets, it seems that in order to expand your IIsi, you MUST purchase one or the other of these adapter cards -- you can't plug anything into the IIsi directly. Is this really true? Now, the complaint: why has Apple gone and forced its customers to make such a decision? It can't be that difficult to build an adapter that would allow *either* a NuBus card or an 030-Direct card, depending on (for example) a switch setting on the adapter. You might need more than one card socket, one for each type of card, but how hard is that? By arranging things this way, Apple forces people who buy IIsi's to decide whether they want NuBus or 030-Direct, but not both, as soon as they decide they need a coprocessor! Why can't the coprocessor fit into a drop-in socket on the motherboard, for instance? Why do you need a slot adapter just to have a coprocessor? IMHO, this is one of the stupider design choices Apple has ever made. It cripples the IIsi market by inflicting indecision on customers. In words often quoted, "there's got to be a better way." But no, IIsi owners are forced to decide in advance whether they would rather have NuBus or 030-Direct technology. And if they want both, they have to buy TWO coprocessors!! Stupid, stupid, stupid.... ------- Christopher Tate | etaT rehpotsirhC Bitnet: cxt105@psuvm | mvusp@501txc :tentiB Uucp: ...!psuvax1!psuvm.bitnet!cxt105 | 501txc!tentib.mvusp!1xavusp!... :pcuU Internet: cxt105@psuvm.psu.edu | ude.usp.mvusp@501txc :tenretnI
sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) (10/24/90)
>By arranging things this way, Apple forces people who buy IIsi's to >decide whether they want NuBus or 030-Direct, but not both, as soon >as they decide they need a coprocessor! Why can't the coprocessor fit >into a drop-in socket on the motherboard, for instance? Why do you >need a slot adapter just to have a coprocessor? Lowers the cost of motherboard production and saves real estate. Apple made a big thing about "Apple Engineering" and shrinking size (as compared to three-letter-companies). If you are doing dPub, word processing, or graphics, having a math coprocessor won't break you, or the speed of the machine. >IMHO, this is one of the stupider design choices Apple has ever made. >It cripples the IIsi market by inflicting indecision on customers. In >words often quoted, "there's got to be a better way." But no, IIsi >owners are forced to decide in advance whether they would rather have >NuBus or 030-Direct technology. And if they want both, they have to >buy TWO coprocessors!! Stupid, stupid, stupid.... Babbling youngster, having meditated over this question, I think it isn't a BAD idea. With the SE & SE/30, you got PDS. Period. With the II <x, no-letter, ci,cx,fx> you get (as I under stand) Only NuBus. You have a choice. The "si market" is anyone who wants a low-cost '030 machine with a color monitor. If you need a slot, I'm willing to bet that 4 out of 5 people will go get the NuBus gizmo, leaving 1 out of 5 to play with the processor-direct slot...that's not a bad idea. It might have been NICER to put both PDS and Nubus on the board, but then people would have been bitching about the cost of the si...
jimb@silvlis.com (Jim Budler) (10/25/90)
In article <90296.165727CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu> CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu (Christopher Tate) writes: >In article <329@ub.d.umn.edu>, halam1@ub.d.umn.edu (Haseen I. Alam) says: >> I was looking at the spec sheets for a Mac IIsi, and saw that you can buy >> EITHER an "030 Direct Slot Adapter Card" OR a "NuBus Adapter Card" for the >> IIsi. Both of these adapters come with a 68882 FPU. [stuff deleted] >First, a question: from what I've seen of the spec sheets, it seems that >in order to expand your IIsi, you MUST purchase one or the other of these >adapter cards -- you can't plug anything into the IIsi directly. Is >this really true? Yes >Now, the complaint: why has Apple gone and forced its customers to make >such a decision? To give them a choice of the cards available for the SE/30 or the MacII, maybe. > It can't be that difficult to build an adapter that >would allow *either* a NuBus card or an 030-Direct card, depending on >(for example) a switch setting on the adapter. You might need more than >one card socket, one for each type of card, but how hard is that? Sure you probably could do it for $500 list or so. >By arranging things this way, Apple forces people who buy IIsi's to >decide whether they want NuBus or 030-Direct, but not both, as soon >as they decide they need a coprocessor! Why can't the coprocessor fit >into a drop-in socket on the motherboard, for instance? Why do you >need a slot adapter just to have a coprocessor? No room. How many people really are likely to need both types? The idea was that the IIsi was for people who only need one add-in card. >IMHO, this is one of the stupider design choices Apple has ever made. >It cripples the IIsi market by inflicting indecision on customers. In >words often quoted, "there's got to be a better way." But no, IIsi >owners are forced to decide in advance whether they would rather have >NuBus or 030-Direct technology. And if they want both, they have to >buy TWO coprocessors!! Stupid, stupid, stupid.... Most people are going to buy *zero* or *one* card to put in their IIsi. Most people are going to buy neither adapter, since most people can get by quite happily without an FPU. IMHO Apple made a reasonable decision. Instead of offering only a Nubus slot, or only a 30PDS slot they offered a choice. Some of the space constraints may have encouraged it, but it's here now. If you want more than one card get a IIci. >------- >Christopher Tate | etaT rehpotsirhC jim -- __ __ / o / Jim Budler jimb@silvlis.com | Proud / / /\/\ /__ Silvar-Lisco, Inc. +1.408.991.6115 | MacIIsi /__/ / / / /__/ 703 E. Evelyn Ave. Sunnyvale, Ca. 94086 | owner
CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu (Christopher Tate) (10/25/90)
In article <0093EAB1.E1F7F0A0@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>, sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) says: > >> [I ask why the IIsi coprocessor doesn't go on the motherboard] > >Lowers the cost of motherboard production and saves real estate. Apple made a >big thing about "Apple Engineering" and shrinking size (as compared to >three-letter-companies). If you are doing dPub, word processing, or graphics, >having a math coprocessor won't break you, or the speed of the machine. Okay, I'll accept this. However, I contest the claim that "doing graphics" isn't computationally intensive. You really should have a coprocessor if you're doing heavily graphics intensive work; the speed difference is noticable. >> [I say that the necessity of deciding in advance whether one wants to >> use NuBus instead of PDS is a bad thing, as is the necessity of >> paying for two coprocessors if you want to be able to use both PDS >> and NuBus] > >Babbling youngster, having meditated over this question, I think it isn't a >BAD idea. With the SE & SE/30, you got PDS. Period. With the II <x, no-letter, >ci,cx,fx> you get (as I under stand) Only NuBus. You have a choice. > >The "si market" is anyone who wants a low-cost '030 machine with a color >monitor. If you need a slot, I'm willing to bet that 4 out of 5 people will >go get the NuBus gizmo, leaving 1 out of 5 to play with the processor-direct >slot...that's not a bad idea. > >It might have been NICER to put both PDS and Nubus on the board, but then >people would have been bitching about the cost of the si... (At this point, I will completely ignore the subject of whether or not the entire Macintosh line should, in fact, be less expensive.) This still doesn't explain why I have to buy the coprocessor twice if I want to use both NuBus and PDS. Why can't I just transfer the 68882 from the one adapter to the other (by putting it on a mini-card, or some such)? Apple has assumed that people are going to want to use one expansion method or the other, but not both. I'm wondering whether this will really be the case. If Macintoshes in general were significantly cheaper, then I'd believe it; people who now are locked into buying Classics (or formerly Plus's) for budget reasons could buy IIsi's instead, and be happier about getting a machine with SOME expansion capability.... However, many people have wanted to upgrade/expand their SE's, or their Plus's, which I take as evidence that the similar group of new Macintosh owners who get IIsi's will also want to upgrade. The adapter/coprocessor cards for the IIsi cost about $180 (academic). How much of that is the cost of the coprocessor? Would it really be prohibitively expensive to change the design of the adapter cards to allow coprocessors to be moved from one to another? PDS and NuBus each have their own advantages and disadvantages (NuBus is slow, but there are lots of different products available; PDS is fast, but there are currently few products available). If the coprocessor is a significant portion of the cost of the adapter cards (as implied by the fact that, contrary to Apple's past claims to the contrary, the new Macs do not come with the coprocessor standard), it would be a boon to those people on tight budgets (at whom the machine is supposedly targeted) to be able to buy their second adapter card without the additional cost of the duplicate coprocessor.... or, they could buy just one adapter, without the coprocessor, if they don't need the math boost, thereby avoiding paying money for a feature they didn't ask for. I guess I just resent not being able to pay for ONLY what I want to have, instead of being forced to pay for just those arrangements that Apple has deigned to offer us....
carsup@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Fisher Library support) (10/25/90)
In article <90296.165727CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu> CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu (Christopher Tate) writes: >First, a question: from what I've seen of the spec sheets, it seems that >in order to expand your IIsi, you MUST purchase one or the other of these >adapter cards -- you can't plug anything into the IIsi directly. Is >this really true? Yes, sort of. The slot on board is really a PDS to start with. That means you are welcome to stick your SE/30 PDS card in as long as you don't put the lid back on. Sort of driving your mac like a convertible with a surf board sticking out! :) >Now, the complaint: why has Apple gone and forced its customers to make >such a decision? It can't be that difficult to build an adapter that >would allow *either* a NuBus card or an 030-Direct card, depending on >(for example) a switch setting on the adapter. You might need more than >one card socket, one for each type of card, but how hard is that? > You can jam a 96 pin NuBus card into a 120 pin PDS. Apple doesn't want that. You don't want that. Macs aren't just for experienced users like you. One of the important aspects of macs is their ease in setting up. There is a less chance of confusion this way. >By arranging things this way, Apple forces people who buy IIsi's to >decide whether they want NuBus or 030-Direct, but not both, as soon >as they decide they need a coprocessor! Why can't the coprocessor fit >into a drop-in socket on the motherboard, for instance? Why do you >need a slot adapter just to have a coprocessor? > In order to save cost, less is more. It costs a lot more to do it your way. I think they *should* have done it your way. It's a matter of $$$. >IMHO, this is one of the stupider design choices Apple has ever made. >It cripples the IIsi market by inflicting indecision on customers. In >words often quoted, "there's got to be a better way." But no, IIsi >owners are forced to decide in advance whether they would rather have >NuBus or 030-Direct technology. And if they want both, they have to >buy TWO coprocessors!! Stupid, stupid, stupid.... > Or buy an si for each :) Seriously, NuBus in general costs less than PDS equivalents. NuBus is hampered by a max of 10MHz bus speed (correct me if I'm wrong, but the point here is in the comparison) whereas PDS can be 20MHz. If you want speed, get the PDS. If you want variety and savings, get NuBus. How hard could it get? Don't forget, you can only have one card! Otherwise, get a IIci. Also, when you stop and think what Apple is really trying to do, it probably makes sense. Ponder this: what is the *real* market that the IIsi is targeted at? I don't really think it's our market. The people who gets to read this probably belongs to some non-commercial institutions. In bringing out three low cost machines, the Classic is for the masses, labs, home use etc. The LC is clearly targeted at the schools/unis and labs. But the IIsi I think is aimed squarely at the business market. Consider this: Not all PCs come with an FPU standard. Not all businesses need FPUs. In offering as an option, cost savings. The si has a lot of built-in features. Built-in video support for the 2 12" monitors, the 13" and *especially* the A4 portrait is an important marketing exercise. There is AppleTalk of course, what do you think the businesses would need in an expansion card? I believe si's will probably cover about 70% at least of what businesses need in a machine. For the others, there is still the ci and fx... So, before we all get worked up over Apple's quirks, is the si meant to be for us in the first place? If you were the buying officer in a business, would it not be better to have an si with these sort of specs? The si will probably be faster without an FPU than a Compaq 386/25e and IBM Model 70 386 (25 MHz). The si/'882 will beat even the IBM Model 70 486 (25 MHz) provided the PCs are running Windows 3.0 and running applications such as Wingz, PowerPoint, Excel, Word, PageMaker, Omnis etc. (Mail me for more info) In conclusion, try to understand Apple before accusing them. I am a harsh critic of Apple myself, and I also agree with you had the machine been targeted at the academic market. It would just about be impossible to have a 24 bit colour system on Ethernet (not using the SCSI for comms) with an si. I want more slots too, alas it is not to be. I just hope the IIsi will be a success in the market I think it is targeted at so Apple may be able to provide us with what *we* want in the not too distant future. **** My employers ignore me, I'm on my own when I speak out in public **** Norton Chia | My address is Micro Support | carsup@extro.ucc.su.oz.au *******************************************************************************
carsup@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Fisher Library support) (10/26/90)
In article <90297.220655CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu> you write: > >Okay, I'll accept this. However, I contest the claim that "doing graphics" >isn't computationally intensive. You really should have a coprocessor if >you're doing heavily graphics intensive work; the speed difference is >noticable. > There graphics coprocessors to speed up QD directly, you are only partly correct. :) > >This still doesn't explain why I have to buy the coprocessor twice if I >want to use both NuBus and PDS. Why can't I just transfer the 68882 from >the one adapter to the other (by putting it on a mini-card, or some such)? > Look, why don't you buy a ci if you really need more than one slot? >Apple has assumed that people are going to want to use one expansion >method or the other, but not both. I'm wondering whether this will really >be the case. If Macintoshes in general were significantly cheaper, then >I'd believe it; people who now are locked into buying Classics (or formerly >Plus's) for budget reasons could buy IIsi's instead, and be happier about >getting a machine with SOME expansion capability.... However, many people >have wanted to upgrade/expand their SE's, or their Plus's, which I take as >evidence that the similar group of new Macintosh owners who get IIsi's will >also want to upgrade. > >The adapter/coprocessor cards for the IIsi cost about $180 (academic). >How much of that is the cost of the coprocessor? Would it really be >prohibitively expensive to change the design of the adapter cards to >allow coprocessors to be moved from one to another? PDS and NuBus each >have their own advantages and disadvantages (NuBus is slow, but there >are lots of different products available; PDS is fast, but there are >currently few products available). If the coprocessor is a significant >portion of the cost of the adapter cards (as implied by the fact that, >contrary to Apple's past claims to the contrary, the new Macs do not >come with the coprocessor standard), it would be a boon to those people >on tight budgets (at whom the machine is supposedly targeted) to be able >to buy their second adapter card without the additional cost of the >duplicate coprocessor.... or, they could buy just one adapter, without >the coprocessor, if they don't need the math boost, thereby avoiding >paying money for a feature they didn't ask for. > >I guess I just resent not being able to pay for ONLY what I want to have, >instead of being forced to pay for just those arrangements that Apple has >deigned to offer us.... The last paragraph seems to contradict what you had been saying till now. I guss you're not an economics major, right? :) Please see my post on your original posting. **** My employers ignore me, I'm on my own when I speak out in public **** Norton Chia | My address is Micro Support | carsup@extro.ucc.su.oz.au *******************************************************************************
granteri@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Grant Erickson) (10/26/90)
CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu (Christopher Tate) writes: >In article <0093EAB1.E1F7F0A0@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>, sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug >Mohney) says: >> >>> [I ask why the IIsi coprocessor doesn't go on the motherboard] >> >>Lowers the cost of motherboard production and saves real estate. Apple made a >>big thing about "Apple Engineering" and shrinking size (as compared to >>three-letter-companies). If you are doing dPub, word processing, or graphics, >>having a math coprocessor won't break you, or the speed of the machine. > >Okay, I'll accept this. However, I contest the claim that "doing graphics" >isn't computationally intensive. You really should have a coprocessor if >you're doing heavily graphics intensive work; the speed difference is >noticable. > >>> [I say that the necessity of deciding in advance whether one wants to >>> use NuBus instead of PDS is a bad thing, as is the necessity of >>> paying for two coprocessors if you want to be able to use both PDS >>> and NuBus] >> >>Babbling youngster, having meditated over this question, I think it isn't a >>BAD idea. With the SE & SE/30, you got PDS. Period. With the II <x, no-letter, >>ci,cx,fx> you get (as I under stand) Only NuBus. You have a choice. >> >>The "si market" is anyone who wants a low-cost '030 machine with a color >>monitor. If you need a slot, I'm willing to bet that 4 out of 5 people will >>go get the NuBus gizmo, leaving 1 out of 5 to play with the processor-direct >>slot...that's not a bad idea. >> >>It might have been NICER to put both PDS and Nubus on the board, but then >>people would have been bitching about the cost of the si... > >(At this point, I will completely ignore the subject of whether or not the > entire Macintosh line should, in fact, be less expensive.) > >This still doesn't explain why I have to buy the coprocessor twice if I >want to use both NuBus and PDS. Why can't I just transfer the 68882 from >the one adapter to the other (by putting it on a mini-card, or some such)? > >Apple has assumed that people are going to want to use one expansion >method or the other, but not both. I'm wondering whether this will really >be the case. If Macintoshes in general were significantly cheaper, then >I'd believe it; people who now are locked into buying Classics (or formerly >Plus's) for budget reasons could buy IIsi's instead, and be happier about >getting a machine with SOME expansion capability.... However, many people >have wanted to upgrade/expand their SE's, or their Plus's, which I take as >evidence that the similar group of new Macintosh owners who get IIsi's will >also want to upgrade. > >The adapter/coprocessor cards for the IIsi cost about $180 (academic). >How much of that is the cost of the coprocessor? Would it really be >prohibitively expensive to change the design of the adapter cards to >allow coprocessors to be moved from one to another? PDS and NuBus each >have their own advantages and disadvantages (NuBus is slow, but there >are lots of different products available; PDS is fast, but there are >currently few products available). If the coprocessor is a significant >portion of the cost of the adapter cards (as implied by the fact that, >contrary to Apple's past claims to the contrary, the new Macs do not >come with the coprocessor standard), it would be a boon to those people >on tight budgets (at whom the machine is supposedly targeted) to be able >to buy their second adapter card without the additional cost of the >duplicate coprocessor.... or, they could buy just one adapter, without >the coprocessor, if they don't need the math boost, thereby avoiding >paying money for a feature they didn't ask for. > >I guess I just resent not being able to pay for ONLY what I want to have, >instead of being forced to pay for just those arrangements that Apple has >deigned to offer us.... I'd just like to add the comment that, "There are always 3rd party vendors." Grant Erickson .______________________________________________________. | UUCP: {crash, tcnet}!orbit!pnet51!granteri | | ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!granteri@nosc.mil | | INET: granteri@pnet51.orb.mn.org | |------------------------------------------------------| | The right half of the brain controls the left half | | of the body. This means that only left-handed people | | are in their right mind. | !______________________________________________________!
francis@arthur.uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) (11/08/90)
In article <3376@orbit.cts.com> granteri@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Grant Erickson) writes: >CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu (Christopher Tate) writes: >>In article <0093EAB1.E1F7F0A0@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>, sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug >>Mohney) says: >>> >>>> [I say that the necessity of deciding in advance whether one wants to >>>> use NuBus instead of PDS is a bad thing, as is the necessity of >>>> paying for two coprocessors if you want to be able to use both PDS >>>> and NuBus] >>> Wait a minute? How are you gonna be able to use both of them under any circumstances? There's only one bus for a slot to attach to. Anyway, you don't need to get an FPU to get a slot. There's a 3rd- party vendor that's gonna come out with an adapter without FPU. Sorry, don't remember the details; saw it mentioned on one of these newsboards the week the new Macs came out. | Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.| | Department of Mathematics |=============================================| | University of Chicago | Non sequiturs make me eat lampshades | | francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | |