Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.misc:11137 comp.sys.mac.system:4501 comp.sys.mac.hardware:10474
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!brolga!uqcspe!cs.uq.oz.au!tonyg
From: tonyg@cs.uq.oz.au (Tony Gedge)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: 32-bit Clean ROM upgrade - list created.
Message-ID: <919@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
Date: 20 Apr 91 01:31:00 GMT
References: <1991Apr16.155525.2416@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> <1949@camex.COM> 	<1991Apr19.150252.26729@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> <17646@venera.isi.edu>
Sender: news@cs.uq.oz.au
Reply-To: tonyg@cs.uq.oz.au
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.misc
Lines: 22

In <17646@venera.isi.edu> jas@ISI.EDU (Jeff Sullivan) writes:
>And yet this list ignores the situation of II (and IIx?) owners,
>seeming to say "screw them, just give *us* the upgrade!"  As a II
>owner, I support this list, but feel that some reasonably priced
>option should exist for II owners to use 32-bit addressing.  I don't
>want a free ride up to IIfx, though a cheaper upgrade wouldn't be
>unwelcome (come on, how much can those chips cost?).

I'd like to add my voice to this.  I own a MacII and if the roms are
socketed, I can't see any reason why a rom upgrade can't be offered
for my lowly II.  Heck, when I was on high school work experience at
TCG, we used to upgrade the roms in every cash register that came
through (they took 4 roms usually) to the latest software revision
without charge.  It isn't so enormously expensive!

Tony Gedge.

--
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Computer Science Department,        | tonyg@cs.uq.oz.au   (Tony Gedge)  |
| University of Queensland, Australia.| "cc stands for Cryptic Crossword" |
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------