Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.hardware:7954 comp.sys.mac.system:2896
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!bionet!agate!shelby!neon!torrie
From: torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan J Torrie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: IIcx ROM Question
Message-ID: <1991Jan18.211624.7178@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 18 Jan 91 21:16:24 GMT
References: <}^1|F&@linac.fnal.gov>
Sender: torrie@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Evan James Torrie)
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Lines: 25

yossie@fnal.fnal.gov (Yossie Silverman) writes:

>My impression, from having worked with a few MacIIci's, is that the main 
>difference between those that run most anything (without any problems) and 
>those that run with lots of problems, is the video board/internal.  I plan 
>on buying a board for my home machine very soon, to use instead of the 
>internal circuitry.  I am thinking of a RasterOps 386 ($799 at one place I 
                                                   ^^^

  Urrrghh!  Please, it's the RasterOps 364.  386 brings up 
memories of some horrible chip architecture from some "other" company,
which fortunately has little to do with the Mac world.

  By the way, isn't the 364 likely to get cheaper and cheaper now that
the RasterOps STV? has superceded it?  





-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evan Torrie.  Stanford University, Class of 199?       torrie@cs.stanford.edu   
"She's got a tongue like an electric eel, and she likes the taste of a 
 man's tonsils!"  - Rik Flashheart