Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!mts.rpi.edu!Garance_Drosehn
From: Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu (Garance Drosehn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: The New Macs: Greedy Compromises?
Message-ID: <_M{^JJ&@rpi.edu>
Date: 29 Nov 90 05:40:14 GMT
References: <1990Nov29.005944.17800@scrumpy@.bnr.ca>
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst.
Lines: 87
Nntp-Posting-Host: gilead.its.rpi.edu

In article <1990Nov29.005944.17800@scrumpy@.bnr.ca> 
           eric@bnrmtl.bnr.ca (Eric Brunelle) writes:
> I am puzzled.  I have seen the new Macs, and I appreciate the price cuts.
> But it seems that every one of the three machines has something awkward.
> It seems like Apple has been making strange decisions, and I can't
> understand them.  Can somebody shed light?

Apple is in business to make money.  This isn't all that strange, it 
happens to a lot of companies.

> Take the Classic.  Why does it still have the old 8MHz 68000?  Wasn't it
> possible to give it the same CMOS 16MHz 68000 as the Portable?

I would have thought they'd go with something faster too.  On the other 
hand (from what I understand) they can't manufacture enough classics to 
keep up with the demand for the machine as it is.  To me this sounds like 
they made a smart enough business decision.

> And then the LC.  Why in heaven does it have a 68020?  Is a 68030 that
> much more expensive than a 68020?  Will Motorola continue for long to
> produce that chip, or will it not streamline to fewer models, like Intel
> did?  

Depends on how well the LC does, I imagine.  If Apple is selling thousands 
of LC's per month, I imagine Motorola might be willing to keep the 
production going.  They're in business to make money too, after all.

> Will the cut in material price be worth more than the trouble of
> having to adapt all software to this new, incompatible architecture?

Not quite sure what you're saying here.  The 68020 isn't all that weird an 
architecture (if you're refering to the 68020 here...), there's plenty of 
accelerator boards that use it, for instance.  I've got one.  Nobody 
adapted any programs so I could run them on my 68020 machine.  Some games 
don't work, but then the same games don't work on a 68030 either.

> How much more would it have been to support eight bit color on the 13 
> inch monitor, rather that only on the 12 inch one?  10$? 20$?  And 
> that would have been compatible with the IIsi and the IIci...  And why
> does it have a 16 bit wide RAM bus?  How much did that save?  Is there
> a good reason for not having the same slot as the IIsi?

I'd expect it's more than $20.  Not a lot more, but if you sell enough 
machines then $20-$70 per machine can mean millions of dollars to your 
profit margin.  If they don't sell enough machines, well, then they 
goofed and they will pay for it in lost sales.

> Finally, the IIsi.  Why does it have a 20MHz 68030, and not a 25MHz one?
> Is it only so that it does not cannibalize the IIci, or is there a real
> difference in cost?  How much?  And why that strange new slot?

Why not a 50Mhz one?  Why not 8 Meg in the minimum configuration?  Why not 
sell it for $1500?  Why not give you a case of really great beer with it?  
They could probably do all those things and still make a few bucks per 
machine, and we'd all be thrilled.  Apple is not in business to thrill  
us, it's in business to make money.  The machines, as is, are apparently 
thrilling enough people that Apple is selling them at a pretty rapid rate. 
And Apple is making a good profit per machine.  Sounds like a smart 
business move.

I suppose we could sit here and answer every one of these individual
points (assuming somebody knows the answers), but none of these are 
the real issue.  There's one and only one question you have to answer,
"Is this machine worth enough to me that I want to buy it?".  All other
questions are somewhat meaningless.  If the IIsi, as is, has more value
to you than the $$$ it costs to get one, buy the machine.  If not, don't
buy it.  If the machine, as is, is worth enough to you that you will buy
the machine, as is, then you have answered all the above questions with
the statement "Whatever reason they had, they made the right decision".

The important question is not "why did you build the machine you built?",
it's "will people buy the machine you built?".  If the answer to that is 
"no", then the next question is "why won't they buy it?".  Both of those
important questions are answered by the marketplace.

> ... I will fight that nasty thought crawling to my mind that Apple has
> been either greedy, lazy, or incompetent.

Greedy?  Perhaps (at least with the LC and IIsi).  Lazy?  Incompetent?  
The marketplace at the moment is saying those accusations are wrong
(though it would have agreed with you a year ago, and it may agree with 
you again a year from now...).  Capitalist?  Yes.  Certainly.  Were you 
expecting something else?

Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu
ITS Systems Programmer
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy, NY.  USA