Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.hardware:11311 comp.sys.mac.system:5748
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!milton!gwangung
From: gwangung@milton.u.washington.edu (Just another theatre geek.....)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: A Classic Dead End?
Keywords: Classic,System 7.0
Message-ID: <1991May20.164257.1959@milton.u.washington.edu>
Date: 20 May 91 16:42:57 GMT
References: <24530@oolong.la.locus.com> <53050@apple.Apple.COM> <1991May20.154508.4325@midway.uchicago.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Lines: 32

In article <1991May20.154508.4325@midway.uchicago.edu> jcav@quads.uchicago.edu (john  cavallino) writes:
>>I'm sorry, but I didn't see a shred of reasonability in your argument.
>>The Classic does have room to grow for quite some time. With a fairly
>>inexpensive upgrade, you can put 5 megs in the machine, and run System
>>7 and two or three medium-large apps all at once, and still have room
>>for the Finder, DAs, and background printing.
>I'm glad Apple makes the Classic and sells so many of them.  I was just
>musing about how this could have been an opportunity to move the installed
>base rapidly toward the world of color and 68020+ processors, which is
>where it is going anyway.

	The market aint gonna move anywhere until it wants to.  The reason
why Apple is making the Classic is that the market wants that particular
product.  No amount of prodding by Apple is going to force the market
where it doesn't want to go.

	Otherwise, the lowball winner would have been the LC and not
the Classic.


>I'm sorry, but I still think my arguments contain one or two shreds of
>reasonability.  :-)

	The market doesn't agree with you.




-- 
-----
Roger Tang, gwangung@milton.u.washington.edu
Middle-class weenie, art nerd and all-around evil nasty spermchucker