Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!ux.acs.umn.edu!oleary
From: oleary@ux.acs.umn.edu (Doc O'Leary)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: 32-bit clean ROM upgrades (was Max memory for SE/30 & 512K ROM SIMM)
Message-ID: <3707@ux.acs.umn.edu>
Date: 5 Apr 91 18:33:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: ux.3707
References: <13193@ur-cc.UUCP> <7164@mace.cc.purdue.edu>
Organization: University of Minnesota, Academic Computing Services
Lines: 24

In article <7164@mace.cc.purdue.edu> omalley@mace.cc.purdue.edu (John O'Malley) writes:

>Here's what I heard about 32-bit clean ROMs for Macs without them:  Apple
>has no plans to market a ROM upgrade solely for the purpose of providing
>32-bit cleanliness.

I have no opinion on whether Apple should offer upgrades solely for 32-bit
clean ROMs, but why don't they put 32-bit clean ROMs in, say, the SE->SE/30
upgrade?  I know it would make the option for an upgrade (rather than an
accelerator) much more attractive.  Right now I'm trying to make the
accelerator/upgrade decision and that just might sway me.

Apple, are you listening?

         ---------   Doc


**********************   Signature Block : Version 2.4  *********************
*                                     |  "Please put litter in its place"   *
* "Was it love, or was it the idea    |           ---McDonald's packaging   *
*  of being in love?" -- PF           |   Wouldn't that be on the ground?   *
*    (BTW, which one *is* Pink?)      |                                     *
*                                     |   --->oleary@ux.acs.umn.edu<---     *
******************   Copyright (c) 1991 by Doc O'Leary   ********************