Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!darkstar!ucscb.UCSC.EDU!unknown
From: unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu (The Unknown User)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: re: a low blow from Apple
Message-ID: <7405@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Date: 2 Oct 90 05:45:52 GMT
Sender: usenet@darkstar.ucsc.edu
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Open Access Computing
Lines: 44


This very well may be a repeat article from me. I found an old (i.e. a week
or two at most) article in my account, and I see no reason that I'd've kept
it other than it not being posted correctly.. (I also remember no replies
from it since it is replying to a subject debated a fair amount). If it's
a repeat, sorry... Just trying to clean out my account but post my views..
ohwell... here goes:

>Robert MacAusland said:
>>Scott Rothstein said:
>>Apparently, Apple felt that ][ compatibility was more important than making a
>>truly great machine. We could have had a fast machine -- they cut it back to
>>fit the architecture for the older ]['s.
>>scottr@applesauce.bb.ny
>
>I think that about sums it all up.  I would gladly give of ][ compatibility
>in order to make the GS the machine it should have been in the first place.
	There is no way I can understand this mentality.

	If you don't want Apple II compatibility, GET AN AMIGA OR A MAC II
or some other machine.

	You may think I'm not being "faithful" to the Apple II, but that's
JUST what I'm being!  I think I'm one of the people that harp the most about
being fauthful to the Apple II.

	But I see no reason in having a "GS" that's not Apple II compatible.
Are you talking about a machine based on a 65816?  -WHY- if it's not 
II compatible? I am ABSOLUTELY serious. Something, ANYTHING, with hardware
multiply and divide instructions would have a major advantage at least in
that one aspect.. (Anything math related would be faster on an otherwise
similar speed CPU as far as I can tell). Also, it sure wouldn't bode well
for Apple to have -3- different types of machines when they don't seem to 
be supporting two equally as well as it is.

	You mean for a "GS" you want a machine with neat graphics and
good sound? Get an Amiga. (But it doesn't have sound anywhere near as good as
the GS we currently have that's II compatible!)

	I just wish someone could explain this mentality. Jeez, I screamed
a lot in this post too, huh? (heh heh).
-- 
/               Apple II(GS) Forever!    unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu               \
\"If cartoons were meant for adults, they'd be on in prime time."-Lisa Simpson/