Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!toddpw
From: toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: New Apple II generation
Message-ID: <1990Nov20.012810.24936@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Date: 20 Nov 90 01:28:10 GMT
References: <9011182054.AA29954@apple.com>
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 89

ST102272@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU (Apple Defender) writes:

>Would it be possible to create a machine (like the IIGS) without too many
>legal complications (no copyright/patent law suits)?

It would be possible, the question is whether or not you have the resources to
go to the trouble of figuring out all the things that Apple did. Too many
programs do not use tools, and a good number of the best demos use totally
undocumented information that would be a significant pain in the rear to
reproduce UNLESS you have Apple's proprietary notes to work from.

I maintain that Apple could easily make a GS for the 90's -- I've talked to the
engineers and they know exactly what to do. The problem is that too many of
them have been shuffled off to Mac projects (which don't get cancelled half as
often, according to one of them) -- I can't be more specific because I was
under non-disclosure, but I can say that I think Apple is going to make some
very stupid product decisions in the next few years unless they get their
heads out of the clouds and start revving up the Apple // groups.

>If this is possible, I might assemble a groups of programmers and developers
>to create and market this new machine.  It would basically be a IIGS upgraded
>to modern standards.

I'm all for it, but beware of the resource investment you may be looking at.
I'd look into licensing technology from Zip and maybe CVT, and especially the
ASIC Technologies guys -- you will also need a VLSI ASIC service and a system
to design the custom chips on. This can cost $$$ rapidly.

Also read The Apple //f: A Possible Future for the Apple //, a paper I wrote,
revised, sent to Sculley (he forwarded it to Ed Birss, who sent me a letter
which didn't say much), revised again, and almost revised a fourth time
(version 4 was beta released to about ten people; I then decided that it
had done enough damage and decided to put it on hold). This paper addresses
just about everything that needs to be done to the existing design, and
suggests what I consider to be the most necessary enhancements. I can mail
you copies if you haven't already seen them.

>The compatiblity with the IIE would be improved.

Yeah, for instance displaying the HR/DHR colors correctly (like the LC's //e
card does) and effortlessly (like the LC's //e card DOESN'T).

> SCSI,

This could be an issue because getting both SCSI and performance on the mother
board has a lot to do with the overall design. I'll explain if anyone wants
to hear a lecture on cost-effective high performance system design :)

>4 Meg memory,

better yet just put SIMM sockets on the motherboard, or include a slot that
is more or less compatible with the existing memory slot (it might require
faster RAM though). Support up to 12 megs w/ DMA compatibility, etc.

>ENSONIQ sound,

with at least stereo decoding on the motherboard. there are a lot of things
that could be done here but I'll save them.

>15-25 Megahertz microprocessor would be built in.

whoa there. this sort of relies on the completion of the ASIC 65816 clone,
which is chugging along but isn't available yet.

> Also, it would have an improved tool box and more efficient software, which
>would run all the goodies currently available (like Pagemaker).

tool box we can do. porting Pagemaker is up to Aldus and getting their support
would be a truly formidable task.

> Basically, I'd like to built a II with the power and flexibility of a Mac,
>for about 1000 or so, everything included (printer, monitor, hard drive, etc.)

Don't even try to do it with everything included, unless the thing is extremely
closed (yuck). I'd shoot for a bare minimum system (floppy, cheap mono, 1 meg)
at $1000 (like the Mac Classic) but make the thing eminently expandable out
of the box.

>Do you think this is possible, or would Apple let me do it?

I think it bears further research, but be warned that Apple might take legal
action over the ROMs -- GS/OS currently checksums the ROMs extensively (or so
I'm told), a very antisocial thing to do. I don't know how much Apple would
care, because they've been trying to keep their options open (last scuttlebutt
I heard was that if the LC doesn't kill the // in schools then the // will
finally get the attention it deserves).

Todd Whitesel
toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu