Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!seismo!uunet!mcsun!ukc!icdoc!sot-ecs!rdw89
From: rdw89@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Williams RD)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Bug on si? (apparent mouse-up loss problem)
Message-ID: <6494@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: 31 Jan 91 12:05:22 GMT
References: <664826581@grad15.cs.duke.edu> <3831@uakari.primate.wisc.edu> <1991Jan30.172515.6479@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Lines: 22

In <1991Jan30.172515.6479@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) writes:

>It sounds like you folks have found bad hardware/buggy software.  Goodness
>knows it's not the first time Apple has sacrificed quality in hardware to
>save a few pennies (original Apple III's and original Mac power supplies
>come to mind).

 HA! A few pennies eh? At that price! Well all I can say is that if the
si I've ordered comes up with all the bugs mentioned in the last few weeks,
the best use I'll have for it is as a doorstop.  It's a pity that the bit
in the si advertising leaflet ("The best thing about the si is the knowledge
that it possesses plug-and-go compatibility with all other macintosh
products, giving the user...") isn't legally binding!
 Seriously though, are there really that many problems with the si, or
are the problems described common to all the Mac II range?  I can't
see why it should be a major problem designing a computer based on a
machine that has already been around for some time.  Software that is
32 bit clean should (I would have thought) work as well on the si as
on the ci or fx.  Why then are people getting drastic sounding bombs like
'bus error'?

 Richard.