Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!usenet From: gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu (Garance A. Drosehn) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: 32 bit roms Message-ID: Date: 25 May 91 02:56:08 GMT References: <675045984.0@macgate.saylor.mn> Lines: 38 Nntp-Posting-Host: eclipse.its.rpi.edu In article <675045984.0@macgate.saylor.mn> Jim.Spencer@macgate.saylor.mn.org (Jim Spencer) writes: [skipping along] > 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. Given the comments made by Apple when they released the machines, I think it is reasonable for anyone to assume that (1) They put a capability to upgrade ROMs, and that this was a "Good Thing(TM)" (otherwise known as a selling point). It is quite reasonable to assume that if they did it and if they presented it as a selling point then someday they might actually use the capability. (2) That the Mac OS on the machines in question would access more memory once 32-bit addressing was supported in the Mac OS. Reaonable people may differ on these points. Offhand I expect we've beaten to death by now, but I'm sure we'll continue to argue over it for a few hundred more articles. The end result will probably be just as pointless as my typing up this article. All of us already have our opinions decided upon, and neither group is going to convince the other group to change their minds. I would note, however, that my opinion of this was formed back when Apple first discussed the machines. It is not post-hoc rationalizing. I don't even own any of the machines being discussed, so I have no vested interest in the final outcome of the great ROM upgrade debate. - - - - - - - - Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@rpi.edu or gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu ITS Systems Programmer Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy NY USA