Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: IIgs ROM revisions -- Esoniq
Message-ID: <15655@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 1 Apr 91 07:33:34 GMT
References: <8311@crash.cts.com>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 42

In article <8311@crash.cts.com> aford@pro-mansion.cts.com (Adam Ford) writes:
>Couldn't the ROM just have an extra card like a ZIP Chip or Transwarp in a
>slot or something?

Please look up "ROM" in any dictionary of computerese.

If you mean, couldn't an enhanged IIGS have a card..., well, yes, that's
what we CURRENTLY have to do for both stereo output and processor speed.
The main problem with speeds much beyond the 10MHz or so that is already
attainable through accelerators is that there is a serious bottleneck in
the mother board, which limits access to main and display RAM to speeds
MUCH slower than the 25MHz that was being bandied about.  There is only
so much that RAM caching on the accelerator itself can do about this.

>As far as Stereo, the IIgs has LEFT & RIGHT speakers.  Yes, a built-in
>Audio input and output would be nice, for home Stereo's and for digitizing.

What in the world are you talking about?  I don't think even the 1Mbyte
(so-called "ROM 3") Apple IIGS provides stereo output without the use of
an add-on third-party gizmo (some of which support audio digitizing).
There IS a built-in audio output, but it's monaural!

>But, by having third-party companies make them, it leaves more for
>compatibility.  If you buy a Sonic Blaster from AE, you get software for
>THAT and it uses ALL it's features.  If apple made one, software companies
>may not be as good..

My experience has been quite the opposite -- software companies have
said in the past that they wouldn't ship products that require anything
other than what Apple provides with the computer.  A few have relaxed
that to require more than the basic 256Kbytes of RAM, because no useful
program for the IIGS desktop environment could live with so little
memory.  (I don't think even GS/OS itself can, these days.)  Sierra
said that they had conducted a survey to determine what interest there
might be in a special offer for TWGSes in conjunction with their SCI-
based games, because they deemed that without a TWGS their customers
would be dissatisfied with the performance of their software.  However,
nothing seems to have come from that.  Many of us don't think Sierra
was serious about finding ways to support the IIGS in recent years; my
own guess is that Ken Williams had decided against it and all the rest
was just to convey the impression that they had good reasons instead of
arbitrary ones.