Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!pro-houston.cts.com!dkl
From: dkl@pro-houston.cts.com (David Karl Leikam)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: 10 mhz chips
Message-ID: <2599.cortland.info-apple@pro-houston>
Date: 15 Nov 89 02:04:10 GMT
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 39

In-Reply-To: message from mattd@apple.com

In CS-ID: #2599.cortland/info-apple@pro-houston, mattd@apple.com (matt Deatherage) says   
>
> Faster video is one thing, but faster I/O could very well mean that none of the
> existing peripheral cards for the Apple II would work in such a new IIgs.  Do
> you think all people who would want a new IIgs would be ready to give up their
> 5.25" disk cards, their Video Overlay cards, their FPE cards, maybe their
> TransWarp cards, their parallel printer cards, their slot-based RAM cards,
> their IEEE-488 cards, and who knows what else?  I have my doubts.
> 

   The point isn't unappreciated, but I do have a little trouble with the
consistency. Hasn't Apple created exactly that incompatibility with the Mac
line?  I mean, the original Mac can't run most of today's software, the Plus
can't use the SE's cards, the SE can't use Mac // cards, and so forth?

  I grant you the aggregate investment in peripheral cards for the Mac isn't
as widespread as it is for the ][, but I betcha the typical dollar amounts are
comparable - one mac peripheral card can easily cost as much as all the ][
cards I've got, put together.  More to the point, the software obsolescence of
the original mac, and to a lesser extent, the Fat mac, means a near-total
writeoff of the original investment.

  I'm _not_ complaining. I'm saying that the organization has already bitten
that bullet, in one place. Why not in all?  I'd be perfectly willing to see a
completely new 65xxx-based computer that doesn't attempt to be compatible
with the ][+ or with Dos 3.3, or with p-System, or even CP/M.  Let the //e and
ProDos be the "bottom" for the next //. Let peripheral cards be discarded as
they may.  I don't think a misguided loyalty to Dos 3.3 ought to hold apple
back, since many of the features of the //gs can't ever be used under 3.3.
Let's let the //gs be the pinnacle of 3.3 hardware development, now and
forever. It's more than plenty good-enough. Besides, if the //x can't run dos
3.3, it'll give those guys in Carrolton something to do besides trying to get
their harder production-line under control...

UUCP: crash!pro-houston!dkl
ARPA: crash!pro-houston!dkl@nosc.mil
INET: dkl@pro-houston.cts.com