Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!tybalt.caltech.edu!toddpw From: toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: An open letter to all Apple II lovers/Apple Bashers Message-ID: <1990May5.064205.9847@laguna.ccsf.caltech.edu> Date: 5 May 90 06:42:05 GMT References: <9005020758.AA27657@apple.com>, Sender: news@laguna.ccsf.caltech.edu Organization: California Institute of Technology Lines: 66 jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremy G. Mereness) writes: [ comments on the original post, all of which I agree with, deleted ] >... The reason I and most other Apple users are so frustrated at >Apple is that a Super Apple // would not be a difficult task. Faster >chips exist, ASIC promises more, third party companies on limited >budgets continue to make miracles, and the hardware glitches are not >undefeatable challenges. Apple has the resources, but they squander it >on lousy marketing on the Macintosh and executive feuding. And then >they pass along the excuse that the Apple // is obsolete. This single paragraph says it all. >Meanwhile, Commodore marches steadily toward credibility with a >faster, more capable machine built with an ambitious attitude. I want >a // that has Apple's software and reliability and the power rivaling >the Amiga. Exactly. When I got a good look at the Amiga hardware manuals I instantly realized that Apple could be grinding them into the dirt... but because of the internal politics Apple is fighting itself and the awesome manufacturing capability they have acquired for themselves sit around doing nothing when they could be making the Apple // into a powerful low end force. Look at what the PC clones (and the Amiga) have been able to accomplish -- their hardware compatibility issues make the Apple //'s look like a description of XMODEM. >It is a crime that the Amiga is known for its music >capabilities when the //gs has a much more powerful sound chip. But >Apple let it slide. Hopefully Apple will have the balls to let the MIDI synth tools fix that. >The bottom line is that Apple doesn't give the // its due. They don't >even give it a fair share. Then they (and you) bitch that it is not a >worthwhile machine. They dig their own grave and we sink with them. And now that top management has had its enema, we need to give them as many hints as possible. There are Apple II champions in Apple; at the internal product fair for the Mac IIfx there were a bunch of GS's running our standard list of demos and the MIDI synth tools -- a lot of managers went home impressed with new knowledge about what the Apple // is capable of. The more help we give Apple, the better. The up & coming low cost macs sound like they are going to be real dogs, and Apple had better realize that a dual product strategy can be made to work, because the GS makes a better "educator's Mac" than any Mac could. 'Golden Gate' machines are not cost effective, because a SOFTWARE bridge is already in place and is getting better all the time. Complaining on the net is fine, but paper letters to Apple carry much more weight. Everyone who complains on the net should write a letter to Apple, seriously. The II infinitum letter campaign had quite an effect, and my //f paper made it to the right people so fast that one of the Apple II champions (who told me about it) said "it did really well -- for conventional channels." The Apple //'s only REAL enemy is its bad reputation, and this is due primarily to Apple as company failing to realize its potential (and management botching various attempts -- VOC, ROM 03 come to mind). People who really know what they are talking about will tell you that the Apple // _can_ be fixed, but they have differing opinions as to whether or not it _should_ be fixed. However, if the low cost macs are as bad as rumors indicate then the Apple // may be Apple's only real hope in the low end. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu