Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!sab121 From: SAB121@psuvm.psu.edu Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: An open letter to all Apple II lovers/Apple Bashers Message-ID: <90122.090654SAB121@psuvm.psu.edu> Date: 2 May 90 13:06:54 GMT References: <9005020758.AA27657@apple.com> Organization: Penn State University Lines: 230 In article <9005020758.AA27657@apple.com>, VS83F8@UMKCVAX3.BITNET says: > >>>... For example, say you owned a Chrysler >>>Imperial. Are you necessarily upset that Chrysler stopped making >>>that car? Were you upset when news got out that they were going to >>>replace it? By forcing Apple to make such an old machine, with sales going >>>down, we might all be the cause of Apple's downfall as a company, which in >my >>>opinion, makes the best personal computers around. It might be time to move >>>on. >> A Chrysler Imperial doesn't have 5 Million owners who collectively have >>25,000 programs that run ONLY on a Chrysler Imperial. Also take into account >>people who don't want to pay a fortune to buy a Mercedes when they can get >>by with a revamped Imperial (the Fury, perhaps?) I think you see my point. >> The apple II made Apple the profit it needed to develop the Macintosh. >>It can still make money. There are over 50 million households that could >>conceivably buy personal computers. If Apple wants to make some REAL money, >>they should hit THAT market. > >Comment then Question: > >Comment:Give me, yourself, and Apple a break and let's talk economics. > Now, as I understand it, Apple currently has the highest margins > on its products in the industry, about 50%. That means that on > each $10,000 mac fx apple sells they get $5,000 *profit*. Let us Well, here is an interesting fact. No wonder no one can afford a Mac and IBM Clones get all of the market. Maybe, JUST MAYBE if Apple wasn't so money grubbing and was more interested in helping the LOYAL base that has already been built up (After all, the II line has been around for over 12 years now, I would assume that quite a few people know how to run standard Apple software...), they could make some money even on the "obselete technology. As IBM is learning now, the so called obselete technology often sells just as good if not better than "state of the art" merely because it is what everyone is most familiar with. If Apple is so concerned about the profit margin, sell out to a company that will give the II some push and let the people who are faithful to the II keep what they are used too. After all, since Apple is so intent on following an IBM type marketing scheme (The bigger and more expensive, the better), why don't they take a page from IBM and start letting clone makers handle their "obselete" technology while still keeping the patents and making some cash off royalties? > suppose for a second that a II product with a 386 power, multitasking > operating system, fast peripherials, etc as well as compatiblity > mode with 8bit and gs machines (similar to the dos compatibility > in os/2) could be built. Let us further suppose that apple could > market this in a world that is either dos, unix, mac, or mainframe > oriented. okay. No way could apple maintain a 50% margin, maybe > 10% which is typical in the clone wars. Have you priced cpu's lately? > High end cpu's, and let us not forget that to remain compatible with > 15 year old technology, Apple would have to custom design the chips, > are VERY expensive. Let us say apple could put the whole package Custom chips are that expensive huh? Tell that to Commodore. Apparently according to your estimates the Amiga 3000 should sell for around $15000 easy! After all, they are running a 68030 (JUST LIKE THE MAC IIs), with ALL SORTS of custom chips for blitter control and screen displays, color pallettes, sound, and a couple of others. Also it has an 68882 math co-processor, mega memory, hard disk, 880K drives, COLOR, and last but certainly not least, UNIX! Can you say that your Mac gives you all that for $3000? Why doesn't Apple get their head out of their behinds and realize that it isn't THAT hard to make a cheap but powerful computer! > together in a IIc type box, and people could use their tvs for > monitors, and could sell them to compete with the nintendo market > at say $200. A ten percent margin would be $20. You'd have to > sell about 250 of them for every mac II they sell now to make the WHO IS ASKING FOR A $200 COMPUTER? GET REAL JERK! We are willing to pay a fair and decent price for our computer. After all, we paid $2000 for the machines we have now! Hell, if we want to get anything from Apple, we know better than to ask for a really cheap price. WE DON'T WANT NINTENDO! We want a nice, decently powered little machine, for a pretty agressive price, perferrably with some good support for compilers and a half decent platform for development because, after all, the II started out as a developers machine. The other thing we want is a HOME Computer! I'm not asking to have a company buy 500 IIgs machines, but I would like compatibility with what I'm working with in the office, as well as a computer that my children can understand. It would be VERY nice to have a computer with tons of educational software, as well as a pretty agressive business software, games, and graphics, all at a price that the average man can afford. After all, that was what the original II was, a machine that you didn't need a PhD to program, that could have fun games, do wordprocessing, and all for a price that you couldn't resist. > same kind of money. Go jump off a ledge, people. That would be ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ My my my, aren't we getting just a little nasty. How would you feel if Apple announced tomorrow that the Mac line had been discontinued and a new machine was being released that only cost 8 times as much if you wanted any kind of speed, color, or graphics. > stupid. On the other hand, there is an established market for > apple IIs that apple has not left out in the dark. For a few > moments people consider what it costs Apple to support the II > market!!! They hardly have to; you guys haven't been the profit > center for years. That they choose to speaks highly of Apple, but Perhaps if Apple would spend a little more on development, as well as more time and money on promoting the Apple II instead of breaking their arms patting themselves on the back over killing the Apple II, we COULD be at the center of the profit. Oh, and as for what you have said earlier about new II machines and the expense. Isn't that just what IBM has done? They all have compatibility with the earlier machine. > doesn't suprise me. I have always loved Apple; its the spirit of > the machines they build --> for me (yes even at 10,000 the mac fx > is "for me;" give me an fx under A/UX over a sun /apollo/ decStation ^^^^ Sure, if someone GAVE one to me, you wouldn't have to twist my arm. But when it came down to buying it, I think I'd have to seriously look at an Amiga, so that I might have a LITTLE money left over to buy software, accessories, a car, a stereo, pay the rent, put in a swimming pool, etc. > *ANY* time.) I think it is great that apple is continuing to > offer support for the II even though I've not touched mine in > years. That the product might be a board level II in a mac is > hardly surprising; the technology has been exploited for a couple Yeah, but it is dissappointing to those of us who bought GSs on the assurance that the machine would be around for years and would have LOADS of support from Apple. To see this dry up has been one of the major disappointments that I have had with the company, and have made me regret more than once that I let nostalgia push me into buying an Apple (either a GS or a MAC, either way it was all because of the company), instead of getting a machine that has the power and support that I want and need. > of years: there are PC/AT boards to run in your macs two. (In fact > if this works out, one could theoretically run windows, II software Seems kinda funny, a while back you were discussing obselete technology. This is about as obselete as it gets yet you are cheering. That doesn't make much sense. If it is stupid to put out another machine based on this design, it is stupid to put out cards, etc that go into the "state of the art machines" that all seem to have very little of the "soul" that the Apple II has had since day one. Maybe going from a garage to a huge corporation has hurt Apple more than anything else. It seems that in the days it was in the garage, Apple CARED about the user. Somehow, that caring feeling seems to be fading fast. > [I hope gs compatiblitiy but won't hold my breath], and mac stuff > at the same time; a gaming platform to kill for). > >Question: > Why do you people have such hangups about the mac? > > I've been subscribing to the II list here for a little while > and I get several distinct impressions: > a) You ("generic internet users") consider the II a > "hacker's machine," that is, one in which the > average joe/joette can program. > b) You (joe/joette) think the mac is a confining > environment dictated by the programmers at > Apple/Claris/MicroSoft/etc. > > Guys (no gender reference): Catch a clue! When my mac boots > about ten million inits boot; My control panel is full to scrolling > of the screen; my hard disk is crammed. Freeware, shareware all of > it. This before you consider Desk accesories, and full length > applications, and most especially HyperCard. And I've heard your > opinions that hyperCard is a joke compared to applesoft. Come on > guys (ngr): I've seen grown men/women spend hours programming > supurb,complex applications in hypercard --> these are people > who would never ever touch a computer before. The mac is the > most extensible machine on the market. Please read extensible > as flexible as hackable. > > Okay, I can see your reluctance to the price. But again guys > (ngr) you are being blind! I work on a mac Plus, 2.5 meg ram > and a sixty meg harddrive. $1800. Okay, I don't have color, but > but I *do* have the best graphics on the market. Hopefully > Apple will ship a low end color mac by years end and I'll upgrade > Think about it guys. For you IIc'ers this is not much more; for > you GS'ers, *this is cheaper!* And further, Apple is coming > out with a card to save your investment in II software. > OK, why I don't like the Mac (NOTE: This is the short summary. For the whole novel, which will be about 487 pages when it is finished, send $1,999.95 [ after all, this is about APPLE, we should keep the prices about in the same inflation rate] to Apple II Forever Fund, Box 488, Espyville, PA 16424. All envelopes without money orders (no personal checks please) will be deposited in the circular file.) is a very complex argument. 1) COST: You state the cost of a Mac+. The Mac+ is a dog. To compare it to the GS or any high end Mac is to compare the II (note: NOTE THE II+ even, just the original 48K Apple II) to a GS or a MAC SE/30 with math co-processor. The + is slow, in black and white, and it can be argued that the Amiga has the best graphics on the market. At least the ones I've seen blow away the disgusting grainy look of the Mac+. 2) No color. This is a BIG minus, as color is not THAT expensive to add in. RGB video should be standard on EVERY mac, not an expensive option. Who can take a Macintosh seriously when it has a dinky little screen that isn't even color? 3) The dinky little screen: Makes the Mac+, SE, and SE/30 a bitch to work with if you have poor eyesight (I do), and also makes it look like a toy. How can a big business justify a Mac when the IBM LOOKS professional, not like an art deco sculpture! After all, my GS looks better than a Mac+,SE,SE/30. 4)Apple has screwed me over once, what is to stop them from doing it again? I probably won't ever buy a Mac just for the shoddy way that I have been treated as an owner of the Apple II. > God (apologies to faithful)! You people need to count your blessings ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Apology accepted. > you didn't get hooked into loving your sinclairs, or SOLs, or > pc jrs, or (ad infinitum). Apple knows you exist; Apple cares; > Apple is trying to keep you in the fold; Give a listen sometime. > I have yet to be shown that Apple cares. I see that people AT Apple care, but I haven't seen a glimmer of support from Apple the company. Maybe if they would PAY people to listen to us, as well as making it easier to voice our concerns (EMAIL addresses, etc.), it would help. Maybe, just maybe, I might be interested in another Apple. Until then, forget about it. > >Jonathan. Entropy: Fight the real enemy before it's too late. Oh, to Apple II DTS, this was not directed at you. You are about the only people that I have seen at Apple that are interested in helping out the II. Anyway we can vote you people onto the board of directors???? ...Sal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Salvatore A. Buttice Before ^^^^^\_ Box 488 May 4 _____/ Espyville, PA 16424 After May 4-->