Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!kksys!edgar!saylor!macgate.saylor!Uucp From: Jim.Spencer@macgate.saylor.mn.org (Jim Spencer) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: 32 bit roms Message-ID: <675045984.0@macgate.saylor.mn> Date: 24 May 91 01:12:16 GMT Sender: Uucp@macgate.saylor.mn.org Lines: 66 To: lrm3@ellis.uchicago.edu Lawrence Reed Miller writes in a message to All LRM> This is directly from my Mac IIcx Owner's Guide, Appendix A: LRM> Technical Information, under the heading "Specifications" (page LRM> 88): LRM> Memory: 1MB expandable to 8 MB (expandable to 128 MB when SIMMs LRM> with higher density DRAM chips become available; additional LRM> expandability through NuBus slots. LRM> I have heard that there are similar statements in SE/30 and Mac LRM> II manuals. LRM> Obviously, you have not looked at very much literature. The same quote is in my old Mac II Owners Guide. It is in the tech- nical specifications section and is correct. If you run AUX, you can address 128 MB. At least in my manual (which I concede may not be the same as yours), see nothing which says that my machine will be able to use that much RAM with the Mac OS and in fact pg. 82 which is where RAM configurations are really discussed there is no indica- tion whatsoever that more than 8 megs is possible. Look, don't get me wrong. I truly hope that Apple makes 32 bit clean SIMMs available. My objection is to the tone a lot of people are taking here that somehow they have been lied to by Apple. Can you really say that you bought your cx having read the statement you quote and that you believed when you bought the machine, based on some objective statement by Apple that you saw before you bought the machine, that you would be able to run more than 16 megs under the Mac OS? If so then you have a legitimate beef but I suspect that most of the screaming is post-hoc rationalizing. >> From a different message Lawrence Reed Miller writes in a message to All LRM> My usage of the word defective is consistent with this definition. LRM> If you want to argue semantics, email me; don't bore the rest LRM> of the net with silly flames. LRM> If the machine was designed in a manner consistent with the product LRM> specification, I wouldn't be complaining. However, it lacks an LRM> essential element of the specification, and is therefore defective. LRM> LRM> I don't know how NeXT or Sun would treat me if they sold me a LRM> defective machine. Do you? LRM> Lawrence Miller (rather annoyed) LRM> Handy way of dealing with people like this: ^k ji/Jim.Spencer@p510.f22.n282.z1- .fidonet.org/h:jZZ I'm pretty annoyed too. First regarding the semantics, the original design of the Mac ROM was for 24 bit addressing. It does this correctly. I suppose you can argue that a PC is defective because it doesn't do what a Cray can too, but that doesn't make you right. More importantly, I did nothing but disagree with you. I didn't "flame" anyone, I didn't use foul language, I didn't lower myself to ad hominim attacks. All I did was say things that you don't like. I've had to listen to months of beefing first because the rumors were that Apple was going to make everyone pay for System 7, now that the free distribution isn't fast enough and that Apple hasn't make it possible for everyone to upgrade their machines to the latest specs. When I finally respond, you have to get personally abusive. Now, that's annoying. * Origin: White Mailer Test Point (1.0d6) (1:282/22.510)