Xref: utzoo comp.sys.apple:23699 comp.sys.mac:50821 comp.sys.apple2:215
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!jarthur!spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu!tybalt.caltech.edu!toddpw
From: toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Accepting the Mac (was Re: More Macweek Rumors)
Message-ID: <1990Mar17.105403.17776@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu>
Date: 17 Mar 90 10:54:03 GMT
References: <1848@crash.cts.com> <18491@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <12667@thorin.cs.unc.edu>
Sender: news@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 71

certain@washington.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Certain) writes:

> That means there have been 5 new Mac models
>(the II, IIx, IIcx, IIci and SE/30) relesed since then with NO new
>Apple II models released.

Not true; the //c+ was released in 1988. This is a 4 mhz 65c02 based Apple II,
with a built in 3.5 disk and disk port on the back that acts like a IIGS
disk port with one 3.5 on it -- this disk port has its own coprocessor too but
I don't know how much it helps since prodos drivers will wait for it anyway. It
does make the interrupt response during disk access a non-issue though.

The //c+ can be had mail order for $499 and some people have gotten it for $450
(I don't know where).

Except Apple Marketing doesn't seem to think they need to advertise it.

Or the new SCSI card, which dealers haven't reall been informed of either.

> That sounds to me like a lack of support.

It still is. Now that the 20 mhz 65816 is going through debug (heard they got a
few trial chips to work at a paltry 12-13) Apple will have no real excuse not
to make the IIGS into a real Amiga killer. They will need it, because not
everyone is going to want a Low Cost Color Mac. I won't, for example. I want my
Apple //f and I know Apple will build it IF we can convince them there is a
market for it. I think there is and it does not hurt the Low Cost Color Mac one
bit. People who want to run Mac applications buy the Mac; those of us who want
the Apple II software, BASIC, the monitor, and the ensoniq will buy a //f!

The last time a home computer was purposely kept from competing with another
product made by the same company it failed miserably because it was so
stripped down nobody could use it for anything. I'm sure you all remember the
PCjr. Apple needs to realize that the philosophy of non-intersecting product
lines is a mistake and is idealistic. Real markets have many subtle divisions
within them and the low end will embrace both a decent IIGS and a cheap Color
Mac. And when they both sell well, Apple should be pushing them side by side
for what each does best. That's how you take on the low end, by offering many
cost effective solutions to each portion of the market and letting the consumer
decide. You do NOT make only one offering and just expect everyone to buy it.

>I really wish Apple would put out a card that would allow us to run our
>Apple II software on a Mac II, and merge the two lines, but even though
>there would be a hugh market out there, I don't see it happening.

The engineering reality of such a board would mean that the card would
either (a) stink, or (b) be EXPENSIVE. At the price you'd end up paying it's
cheaper to buy two machines and be able to use them both, unless you really
have to save desk space; it would be an luxury option at best.

Why merge the two lines? We already use the same peripherals, many of the same
onboard as well as external. The CPU itself is determined by what you want to
run on it and the two lines differentiate themselves for all but the most
casual users.

I, for one, will never want whole Mac, and I don't feel a major need to emulate
one either though I respect the fact that many people do. I do want to see a
IIGS to nuke the Amiga, because I know it can be done. Read my //f paper if
you're interested (I'll mail it) and mail any comments you like. Many of the
features were really sketchy until I got some comments about the first version
of it, but the latest (third) writing is pretty bulletproof. The stated intent
is to produce the most cost effective general purpose low end machine. Period.

This machine would attract those who want what an Amiga or Clone does but would
rather have the Apple interface. Many of these people will not buy the Low Cost
Color Mac because the price of a full system will still be higher than the
alternatives. The fact that Apple hasn't supported the GS enough has already
lost many of these customers.

Todd Whitesel
toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu