Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!toddpw From: toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: A talk with an Apple person............ Message-ID: <1990Nov16.082514.16368@nntp-server.caltech.edu> Date: 16 Nov 90 08:25:14 GMT References: Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena Lines: 50 sk2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Seth D. Kadesh) writes: >I did talk to the guy (he was quite friendly). Let's see....among other >things, he claimed that the //e card for the LC was a real //e, as >opposed to the hacked (my word - I can't recall what he said) //e >EMULATION on the GS. I didn't know the GS EMULATES a //e..... It does. But the CPU and hardware do a lot more than just //e stuff!! The //e card is essentially the most cost-effective reimplementation of the //e that Apple could come up with, given that it had to use the Mac LC as I/O. The IIgs has //e emulation built into its hardware, and as such is not as compatible as it could be, but it ends up being more capable with less total hardware. The LC is a fully functional Mac, and the //e part is simply an independent CPU, RAM, and I/O (disk ][ interface, because the Mac disk port can't work with Apple II formatted 5.25" disks). The LC is literally taken over by the //e emulation, whereas the GS just has a VLSI version of the original circuitry integrated into its motherboard. The GS version of the //e circuitry could be much better implemented, but that is because Apple is to damn wussy to put some real development $$$ into the GS. They have no problems with forcing the LC to match an elementary schools' purchasing requirements -- I agree with those who predict that Laser and Tandy are going to clean up in the school market. >I asked him what the future was for the GS, what with the LC being >priced similarly. He said as long as there's demand, they will continue >to make them - there is no demand for the //c+, so it was discontinued. >//e's make up most of the demand. If Apple would bother to advertise the //c+, then it would sell quite well. Laser has more or less filled the gap left by Apple's failure to push the //c+. >Talking about the //e card for the LC, he said that they (I forget - >marketing? engineers?) wanted the card to have GS capabilities too, but >they decided not to when a survey found only %5 of the GS users use GS >specific software!!!! I find that extremely hard to believe - %95 of >the GS owners only use //e software ?!?!?!? 1. A GS card for the LC would be too expensive. It literally would be cheaper to buy both a GS and an LC and have two computers. 2. The vast majority of the GS's users are (sadly) educators who are barely able to use them as //e's, let alone as GS's. The ROM 03 and System 5.0 have done a lot to change that, but Apple is literally trying to see if they can force educators to go Mac. I don't think it will work, and Apple as a whole will suffer. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu