Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!mintaka!dcw From: dcw@lcs.mit.edu (David C. Whitney) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: New (Still Unofficial but Everyone Knows They Exist) Macs Message-ID: <1990Oct1.195457.24180@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Date: 1 Oct 90 19:54:57 GMT References: <9009290715.aa09290@generic.UUCP> Sender: daemon@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (Lucifer Maleficius) Organization: MIT Spoken Language Systems Group Lines: 95 In article <9009290715.aa09290@generic.UUCP> sb@pnet91.UUCP (Stephen Brown) writes: >Isn't it funny that Apple is bringing out a low cost Macintosh. And its colour >too. And its rumoured that they're bringing out AppleWorks for the Mac. And if >I recall, the low cost Mac will have Apple II compatibility... on a card. > >Well, isn't that sweet. I think it is. >There are a number of interpetations one can make. But it looks like they are >trying to give the Macintosh everything that has made the Apple IIGS >successful: low cost, colour, Apple II compatibility, and the best selling >integrated software. But what does that mean??? It just might mean that Apple // folks will have Mac compatability. It really depends on what sort of machine you want to call an Apple //. If thing can boot my GS/OS disk, then I'd call it a useable Apple // (GS). The whole idea of the Mac is to have a computer where one does not need to know about the guts of the machine. GS/OS is an OS that abstracts the filing system away from the user. How would have felt if the GS was released ONLY with an HFS fst? We would all be yelping about it because the damn thing could only read Mac disks...what was apple thinking, etc. If I have a machine in front of me that can run Apple // stuff, then I'm happy. I have Apple // stuff. I've written Apple // stuff (although no GS stuff). I use a Mac IIfx and Sun SPARC 1s at work and they're nice. I'd be very happy if the // had some of what the Mac has (in terms of display and other hardware niceties). A combo machine is not something to have a stroke over, it just might mean the revival of the //. Look at it this way. Apple is pricing these things to sell (or at least, that's the idea). The publishing houses are going to take note that a large segment of the population owns one os these babies. They will also know that they are capable of running // software. Who knows? The machine may even be able to dynamically switch. One could use the // end for certain things and the Mac end for others. The point of the GS was to have a // machine with toolbox support, like the Mac. This makes it possible for Apple to make wholesale changes in the machine and maintain compatability. What the hell difference does it make what the hardware is made of if it can run your software? That was the whole point. Apple has the freedom to do this with the Mac (and did right from the start) because of a well thought out interface between the software and the hardware. If Apple stopped supporting 680x0 machines and popped right over to 88000 (as most speculate they will do in a year or 2), then it won't matter worth a damn to anyone, as the new machine will still run old software. Emulating a 680x0 on an 88000 will be a piece of cake, and because of the toolbox, everything should port silky smoothly. You won't see any revolts from the Mac crowd. So now, you're whining that all this great Apple // hardware won't work in the new machine. Well, I have 3MB ram and a SCSI card in my machine. What sort of cards do most people have? RAM cards, disk cards (SCSI) and speed cards. Big deal. The new thing will already go fast, have slots for RAM expansion, have a SCSI, sound, etc. You'll still be able to buy cheap Apple // software for it. I just don't see the point of the whining. I see Apple making a good (and correct) attempt to merge the // with the Mac. All of you with //e's shouldn't be whining, as you've already got a machine that works great, and you obviously showed no intention of upgrading (you had the chance and passed it up with the GS - and don't whine about price, why should it be free?). //c owners shouldn't complain, as they haven't got all that specialized hardware that would otherwise prevent an upgrade. At best, you've stuck some RAM in your machine. All you've got is software, which should run just fine on the new machine. GS owners should cry the least, as one could view this new machine as the ultimate GS upgrade - it now runs Mac stuff. Not just reads the disks, but runs its software. It has the standardized graphics modes (I HATE dithering! It's a cheat - they call it higher spacial resolution and higher color resolution, but it's not! Only one or the other!) The Mac has nice high spacial and color resolution because the hardware really can do it. And, I can pop in a different video card if I want more - I don't have to beg the company to produce Yet Another Computer. I'm waiting to see what Apple produces before I scream bloody murder. In fact, it just might be the machine I want. It'll allow me a smooth transition into the Mac world (something I've wanted to do for about 4 years). I can still run my old stuff and have the new machine too. Sounds like a damn good deal to me. (whew) -- Dave Whitney | I wrote Z-Link and BinSCII. Send me bug Computer Science MIT 1990 | reports. I need a job. Send me an offer. dcw@goldilocks.lcs.mit.edu | My opinions, you hear? MINE! dcw@athena.mit.edu | "...we came in?"