Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!UTCVM.BITNET!MQUINN From: MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: re: a low blow from Apple Message-ID: <9009241623.AA09635@apple.com> Date: 24 Sep 90 15:59:44 GMT References: Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 18 >I meant that Apple tried so much for II compatibility, but only partially >succeeded, so they lost on both accounts. > >scottr@applesauce.bb.ny HUH? only PARTIALLY? I'm not really denying, this, I'm just wondering on what didn't they succeed in compatibillity. I haven't run into ANY compatibility problems and I haven't heard a single word about it either, until now. I know that chip accellerators for the //e aren't compatible, but, of course, that's reasonable. Don't get me wrong... I'm not 'flaming' you... just curious. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | This is your brain... | BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm | | This is your brain on drugs... | pro-line: | | This is your brain on whole wheat.| mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com | |____________________________________|_______________________________|