Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!veritas!amdcad!brahms!ching
From: ching@brahms.amd.com (Mike Ching)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: The LC vs. IIsi (CPUs)
Message-ID: <1991Jun10.005233.9464@amd.com>
Date: 10 Jun 91 00:52:33 GMT
References: <1991Jun8.141945.496@otago.ac.nz> <1991Jun9.203402.15701@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1991Jun10.091308.506@otago.ac.nz>
Sender: usenet@amd.com (NNTP Posting)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices; Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 22

In article <1991Jun10.091308.506@otago.ac.nz> michael@otago.ac.nz writes:
>In article <1991Jun9.203402.15701@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies) writes:
>> Actually, I wonder about the economics of the LC design.  In today's
>> world of single-board CPUs, and falling memory prices, I can't see how
>> a 16-bit bus saves much money....
>> How much money would it have cost
>> apple to provide two extra simm sockets and more wires on the PC board
>> of the LC?  Less than $40?
>
>It may be the "more wires" that are the problem, making the board more
>expensive. I find this difficult to believe, though. They manage to get 32 bits
>to the ROMs, so why not to the RAM? I fear we are seeing the dead hand of
>marketing in action, i.e this is a low cost machine ergo it must have lower
>performance...
>


Maybe marketing was considering the target market and that adding memory
in 2Meg increments instead of 4Meg would be very attractive to the cost
sensitive educational market. Just a thought.

Mike Ching