Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!ucbvax!pro-generic.cts.com!ericmcg
From: ericmcg@pro-generic.cts.com (Eric Mcgillicuddy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Support Apple II's
Message-ID: <7235.infoapple.net@pro-generic>
Date: 10 Nov 89 20:08:16 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 21

In-Reply-To: message from crdgw1!zaire!rankins@uunet.uu.net

I've a friend with an Amiga and sign on to his board from time to time to
chat. Browsing the comments guess what I see. ' Why doesn't Commodore provide
cheaper expansion', ' I can get an IBM drive cheaper than the C= one', 'Why
isn't any Mac software ported over yet?', 'Why isn't the 1000 still
supported?'. An IBM conference on another board complained about the lack of
sound quality, ease of use and general unreliability of certain clones.

I guess the grass really is 'greener on the other side of the fence'. Everyone
complains about what their particular machine can't do, but don't accept that
the machine that can do it can't do something you are already doing. All
designs accept trade-offs. IBM designed their machines for business, sound is
low on business want lists, ease of use is also low since MIS takes care of
training anyway (they have for years). The Amiga is designed for the
Home/Entertainment market and thus lacks much of the connectivity for use in
business. The Mac wass designed in response to the PC (i'm gonna get letters
for that!) and all Mac's thus easy to use and connect, but difficult to expand
(until recently).

I guess you only see the crabgrass in the lawn when you're standing in it.