Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!dptg!ulysses!andante!mit-eddie!wuarchive!usc!gate.oxy.edu!oxy!wirehead
From: wirehead@oxy.edu (David J. Harr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: New Macintoshes and Apple's Satellite Announcment
Message-ID: <117467@tiger.oxy.edu>
Date: 17 Oct 90 05:39:35 GMT
References: <1990Oct16.063654.2744@isis.cs.du.edu> <9146@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> <1990Oct16.221154.20681@midway.uchicago.edu> <1990Oct17.190632.21576@eng.umd.edu>
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA  90041
Lines: 20

It is interesting to me that everyone seems so upset that the Macintosh line
is moving forward. I bought a Mac II in Oct 87, and it has served me well
ever since. The total cost for my system at the time was $4000 (ed. pricing)
It was a bare bones, dual floppy system, but it had 8-bit color. Over the
years, I have added a PMMU, a cache card (now has 0 wait state on the memory
so it is slightly faster than a IIx/IIcx) more memory, a couple of hard
drives... This is a great system. It is totlally stable, every piece of
software written for the Mac runs beautifully on it, and it is plenty of
machine for what I need. I wouldn't trade this setup for a IIsi. I would be
getting myself in for compatibility headaches out the wazoo, all for the
privilege of a modest increase of < 20% in speed. Now, if someone offered me
a IIfx, that would be another story. But as it is now, I don't think that
the IIsi or the LC are anything to make a II, IIx, or IIcx owner look at and
drool in envy. I reserve that for for a NeXTstation :-).

David

The preceding has been another fine product of the warped mind of

		       wirehead@oxy.edu