Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpda!hpcupt1!hpindwa!tribby
From: tribby@hpindwa.HP.COM (David Tribby)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: A low blow from Apple
Message-ID: <54240009@hpindwa.HP.COM>
Date: 19 Sep 90 17:37:47 GMT
References: <1990Sep11.000230.23140@mthvax.cs.miami.edu>
Organization: HP Info Networks Div/Cupertino CA
Lines: 53

I read comp.sys.apple2 mainly for technical content, and skip most opinions. 
However, cromwell@acsu.buffalo.edu (mark j cromwell) recently wrote some things 
that seem to capture the feelings of a great number of posters, and with which 
I disagree...

>                                             ...  But actually, I meant 
> Apple wants the series dead. The fact that Apple hasn't put out a significant 
> new Apple II box in 4 years proves they are trying to kill it.
Corporations exist primarially to make profit. If they don't make a profit,
they don't exist for very long. They don't pay a staff of developers and
support engineers in order to kill a product. 

>   In this business where processing power doubles every 5 years, the Apple II
> has languished with performance less than that of any competitor in the same 
> price range. 
The performance of the IIGS doubled when they released system 5.0. The toolbox 
and GS/OS had significant speed improvements, an effort that required a major 
investment of time and effort. For a bit of fun, boot up your original system 
disk and see how fast the Finder runs...or is your original (like mine) old 
enough to contain that funky black & white version. Things HAVE changed!

>              With each passing month that Apple Computer fails to bring out 
> an Apple II with a better price/performance the deader the series gets deader.
The ROM 03 machine wasn't a big change, but it did include an extra meg
of memory at no extra charge. That improved the price/performance ratio.

>    Apple Computer could have easily brought out a machine with double or
> more the speed, competitive graphics and competitive pricing.
"Easily"? Have you ever worked on a project to bring out a computer system
that's both a big improvement and compatible with the existing systems?

>                                                               The fact that
> they have not leads me to one of two conclusions: 1) they are incompetent,
> 2) they want to see the series to die.
How about: Apple is not willing to risk money on new hardware because they
don't believe they can recover their investment.

>    Apple has done nearly everything they could to make the series rot on the
> vine. 
I'm sure they could have done at least a *few* more things :-) ...

Actually, Mark and I agree on a number of topics. Apple II owners have felt 
out of Apple's mainstream since the Apple III came out, followed by emphasis 
on the Lisa and Mac. We'd like to see an improved, faster processor and better 
graphics. We'd like more independent developers to write software for it. 

But I get tired of so many authors assigning evil motives to Apple. I figured
this once Matt D. wouldn't have to be the one to respond!

--Dave "I don't work for Apple, but I once sent them a resume" Tribby

                                   - - - - -
        ARPA: tribby%hpda@hplabs.HP.COM   UUCP: hplabs!hpda!tribby