Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!wb3ffv!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake From: shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) Newsgroups: comp.sys.m88k Subject: Re: 88k Macintoshes? / New 88k family member Message-ID: <125@raysnec.UUCP> Date: 30 Oct 90 22:09:45 GMT References: <13028@encore.Encore.COM> <1088@dg.dg.com> Organization: IRS/CI - Technical Solutions Branch Lines: 15 jkenton@pinocchio.encore.com (Jeff Kenton) writes: >Apple hasn't even announced an 88k product and you're already pissing on >them. If they decide to make an 88110 MacIntosh (and not just another Unix >box with an Apple logo on it) a lot of the BCS/OCS specifications would >be irrelevant. But, an 88110 MacIntosh would be a *VERY* nice machine. Agreed! Posters should at least *try* not to let current prejudices lead them to lambast others for what they *might* do in the future. That said, given that Apple is already a member of both OSF and UI, and given the fine work of 88/Open in establishing BCS/OCS specifications - and getting vendors to follow them - and given that application software should be widely available if and when Apple should chose to release an 88k box, Apple would be foolish NOT to conform.