Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ogicse!milton!hardy!cyliao From: cyliao@hardy.u.washington.edu (Chun-Yao Liao) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: A low blow from Apple Message-ID: <8004@milton.u.washington.edu> Date: 23 Sep 90 21:46:31 GMT References: <9009230630.AA24367@apple.com> Sender: news@milton.u.washington.edu Reply-To: cyliao@hardy.acs.washington.edu (Chun-Yao Liao) Organization: University of Washington, Seattle Lines: 71 In article <9009230630.AA24367@apple.com> MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET writes: >> The GS's OS is just great. > >Well, it's not bad, but I wouldn't call it great... but I don't like the >graphical interface (actually, I don't like not having the choice of a text >or graphic interface with GS/OS). IMO, it is GREAT compared to almost any other micro computer OS. Just if the GS is fast enough to handle all that graphic stuff... >> I use and like the Mac. >I use and dislike the Mac. Although, I like it's speed. Mac has it's own "field" of attraction, I myself got more attracted by the GS (The only Macs I use are Mac IIx and up, SEs are not so usable) >Yeah, but it has VGA and a 10Mhz 286! AAAAAND for about the same (or less) >than the GS! I don't think GS/OS is an excuse for it being slow OR expensive. In my knowledge, not many ms-dos users satisfied with 12 MHz 286! VGA is nice though...16 bit color (possible) on screen. 12MHz 286 is really not much faster than a GS. > >'excellent OS' is an opinion. There are other people (I'm not one of them) >that believe that MS-DOS is an 'excellent OS'. The PS/1 can be networked to Very true... >other PC's (to the best of my knowledge), an internal HD (SCSI not needed) >and connections to the PS/2. uh... you have to be careful here. Many of today's PC disk controller card supports up to 2 harddrive, 2 to 4 floppies (1.44 3.5 and 1.2 5.25, 720k 3.5 and 360k 5.25 format included) BTW, SCSI is better than the one used by most IBMs (It is called something like EDSI, I don't remember it well) ONLY UNDER CERTAIN situations. The SCSI is much suitable to be used with multitasking OS such as Mach, Unix, etc. It is because of the way SCSI works. A SCSI device can close communication with its host when it is working on some internal jobs such as moving the read/write head, seek, etc, and reopen the connection with host when it is readly to transfer the data requested by the host. During the time that the connection is closed, the data line lis freed to OS so OS can access other SCSI device daisy chained in the same chain thus to improve disk access performace. This way, it also improve the performanced of an OS if its' disk based. However, because of this special feature of SCSI, it takes a few cycle to communicate between SCSI device and it's host. Therefore, when a SCSI with same characteristics of a EDxx drive hooked to a single process computer, theoretically the EDxx drive should perform better than SCSI although the difference is not very noticeable. I personally prefer SCSI because it is more flexible than must other types of harddrive, plus it's kind of "smart" >Also, I don't want to network my GS to a Mac. I don't want to network my GS >at all. The GS doesn't NOT have 'well defined SCSI'. That's EXTRA! You >have to pay for it. It doesn't come with the $1000 GS, so that doesn't >justify the price. Also, so what if it has connections to the Mac? I don't >have a Mac and I don't want a Mac and MINE isn't connected to a Mac, so, again, net work to a Mac via Apple talk is much easier, but what's the point? share a laser printer? a CD-ROM that is already connected to Mac? well, then yes, but otherwise, why bother? cyliao@wam.umd.edu o NeXT : I put main frame power on two chips. @epsl.umd.edu o people: We put main flame power on two guys. @bagend.eng.umd.edu o :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: xxxxx@xxxxx.xxx.xxx (reserved) o RC + Apple // + Classic Music + NeXT = cyliao