Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pro-sol.cts.com!lbotez
From: lbotez@pro-sol.cts.com (Lynda Botez)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Apple's committment to the // line
Message-ID: <8910171118.AA17723@trout.nosc.mil>
Date: 17 Oct 89 09:44:39 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 38

Network Comment: to #12318 by philip@pro-generic.cts.com

Phillip McDunnough writes:

>There is no need to have GS upgrades every few months.

Ha!  That's a good one... we've never asked for upgrades every few months...
at the rate we're going now, the next GS update should occur in 1992!

>Whether one likes it or not, the Apple II line (including the GS) was/is
>perceived by many as a less than capable product in the business/home
>business world.

Whose fault was that?  The original Apple IIGS should have been more like the
ROM 3 machine that is now on the market today.  The speed could have been
faster than it is now.  From what I've heard, a few of the Cortland prototypes
were a much superior machine than the one that was eventually put into
production.  Apple wanted to keep the IIGS in it's place; and not compete with
the Mac.

>Nevertheless, I think that some major work went into improving the current GS
>[...] this improvement is evolutionary.

Yes, an enormous amount of energy and effort was poured into writing System
Disk 5.0.2... it's greatly appreciated and we thank Apple and the hardworking,
dedicated Apple II programmers every day ... when my Finder boots up, I bow
towards Cupertino in a moment of silent appreciation.   -:)

>For not much more you can get a TWGS if speed is important.

Yes, speed IS important.  However, you should not have to get a TWGS; the new
GS should have a faster processor.  2.8 mhz is TOO slow.

>I really like the GS.

I really like mine too.

Lynda