Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!UTCVM.BITNET!MQUINN From: MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: AE Rumors Message-ID: <9103250419.AA09971@apple.com> Date: 25 Mar 91 03:15:35 GMT References: Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 167 On Sun, 24 Mar 91 17:30:30 GMT randy hyde said: >>>>>> >Perhaps it is time for all of us to let AE know what we think of their >current thinking.. including the use of a 900 number at $1.50 per min >(including while you are on hold) for Apple II tech support... ><<<<< > >While I must agree that AE actions are reprehensible, I don't feel that >writing nasty letters is the way to change any opinions at AE. They are Writing letters will certainly do more good than NOT writing letters. If they get enough of them, they just might change. But giving up before you try certainly won't accomplish anything. >in business to make money, not to make people happy. If you really want to but making people happy is a key to making money. >change their attitudes, start buying stuff from them. Get your friends to I -HAVE- bought stuff from them. Total value.... Hold on, lemme get a calculator.... ok... $1108. And THAT's mail order prices. Retail would have been... lemme see... (getting calculator again)... about $1579.. I can't remember the exact retail prices of these things, but It's close. My total price doesn't count the long distance calls to tech support and the cost of shipping all but ONE of the products back because they didn't work when they got here. Also not included in that price is the TIME I was without my stuff while it was being 'repaired'... a.k.a. 'sitting on a shelf' for months. Concidering that my stuff was sitting on a shelf for a long time, indicates that many products were sent back for repair, indicating that many more had been bought, which also indicates that sales were not bad. Also, it's not up to US to spend hundreds (or thousands) of our dollars on their products when they're stabbing us in the backs, to try to turn them in our favor. We've paid a VERY high price for their products and now we're getting nothing for that high price. Not to long ago, we were suggesting that they get a 1-800 number for their tech support, so what do they do? They go 180 degrees in the opposite direction and get a 1-900 number and charge us $1.50 a MINUTE!!! This is COMPLETELY unnacceptable. >buy stuff from them. Alas, blasting them because they are making a reasonable >business decision isn't going to increase their support for the Apple II. Whether it was a reasonable decision or not is debateable, but not letting them know what we think about is DEFINITELY not going to increase their support for the Apple II. >Now you're probably say "Gee, I've already bought everything I want from AE, >why should I spend any more money there?" Good question. OTOH, if you've > already >purchased everything they offer, why would you care if they support the Apple >II >line anymore? I've bought all the stuff I want from them (for NOW), until they come down with their prices on existing stuff or until they improve products they already have or until they come out with completely new products. Also, I care if they support the II even if I were planning on not ever getting anything else from them because I don't feel I should pay $1.50 per MINUTE to be put on hold for 10 minutes to find out something on products I've already paid out the butt from them. If I had known that I had to pay $1.50 per minute for tech support BEFORE I bought this stuff, I'd never have justified paying as much as I did and I certainly would not have bought any of it. (A 10 minute call to tech support would cost me about 2.5 hours at work to pay for.) >The Apple II line is dying a slow death due to economic starvation. Nothing >else. Apple Computer still loves the machine. Why would they still be selling >it today if they didn't? ................................................. If they loved the machine, why aren't they TRYING to sell it? Why are they pushing macs right and left? Why are there NO Apple II advertisements? They don't love the Apple II, they love the money it makes them. If they loved the II, they'd be doing something about it. The reason they still sell it is because of two reasons that I can think of: 1. They make more money selling it than not selling it. 2. It would look PRETTY suspicious if they claimed that they were supporting the Apple II while stopping production of it at the same time. Their actions vs. their words remind of someone who said he definitely would not invade a tiny defenseless country, while making plans to do it at the same time. I'm not saying that they're as bad (or ANYWHERE -NEAR- as bad) as Sodam, but I trust them with their promises just a little more than sodam. >.........................OTOH, economic realities are beginning to set in. >If the Apple IIgs does everything *you* need it to do, great. Don't waste >your money on another computer until this changes. However, the future is >definitely with an architecture other than the Apple II. 1978-1991 may not >be "forever", but no other computer has come close to lasting that long (yet!). No other computer has lasted that long, not because they keep dying off, but because the Apple II was the first (or one of the first) PC's ever made. Sure, it's lasted well over a decade, but it can definitely last MUCH longer if Apple would let it. Look at the IBM PC. It's been here since 1981 and the latest model is still compatible with the first AND it's the most used computer today and shows no signs of letting up and it's also one of the most powerful PC's in production. >The Mac and PC will definitely last longer (as commercial products) than the >Apple II, but nothing else has. And only time will tell if anything ever It doesn't matter how long it's already lasted. What matters is how long it's GOING to last. If Apple says, "Apple II forever" (which I haven't heard in a while), then they should be doing something to make it that way. Instead, they're still saying that, but at the same time, trying to cut it off. If they were saying, "We're going to cut it off", then that would be different. >will. Before you cry too loud about Apple (and others) deserting us, think >about this: TRS-80, Exidy Sorcerer, Commodore PET/VIC-20/64/128, PCjr, >Apple III, Lisa, Atari 400/800, S-100 (pick a brand, any brand), Victor 9000, >Mindset, Apple I (!), and on, and on, and on. All in all, we've done pretty >good. I may be wrong about this, but isn't the PCjr compatible with other IBM PCs? If so, it's no different than the original IBM PC. IBM didn't desert it. They make the same computer, but bigger, better, and faster. (with the exception of the sound capabilities of the PCjr). Also, the reason the Apple ///, Lisa, PCjr, (don't know about the others you listed) were abandoned was because they just didn't sell. It's perfectly reasonable to give up on them. The Apple II is different, it DOES sell. It was sell even MORE if Apple would at least TRY. But they're not. They're are consciously killing the Apple II and all the third party support is goin with it. >Ultimately, we cannot place the blame on Apple for the demise of the Apple II >line. The 65xxx processor technology simply hasn't kept up. The 65832, >if it really exists, is too little too late. 25Mhz Zip chips may make a great >niche product, but you can't get the devices in quantity (in fact, any >quantity) >today. And it's questionable what the system performance would be like when >they get stuck in a machine with 80ns RAM. The technology COULD keep up, if Apple had wanted it too. Apple has a very large influence on which chips get enhanced. The recent CMOS breakthrough is evidence that the '816 (or '832) could still compete. >Now that the Mac and PC have captured the lion's share of the business market, >I couldn't imagine Apple producing a great Apple II computer, even if a great >chip were available. It would cost too much to evangalize the developers to >switch to the new platform. Concidering that there are 7 million Apple II's out there and only 2 million macs, I don't think it would be too hard. >Look at the problems Jobs is having with the >NeXT. That is a great machine, but it isn't selling well at all (indeed, >the last figures I saw show the Apple //gs outselling the NeXT). That's because there's nothing in existence that's NeXT compatible and there is even less software for the NeXT than for the II. The NeXT is also priced WAY too high (the GS is too, but at least it's affordable). The Apple II already has an installed userbase and it's well known. It wouldn't be too too hard to sell it. >Even if you decide to switch to another machine, hang on to your Apple IIs, >in a few years they will probably be collector items. This, I agree with. :) >*** randy Hyde O-) ---------------------------------------- Michael J. Quinn University of Tennessee at Chattanooga BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm <------------send files here pro-line-- mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com