Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site wateng.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!vaxine!wjh12!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!watmath!wateng!broehl
From: broehl@wateng.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: Benchmarks on ][e, Mac, "PC", & 2000
Message-ID: <1016@wateng.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 23-May-84 10:23:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: wateng.1016
Posted: Wed May 23 10:23:38 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 25-May-84 01:01:04 EDT
References: <516@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 17

That observation surprises me.  (This is in reference to the
comment "I would *never* by such-and-such a computer, no matter
how good it is, I'd rather stick with my Apple II", or words to
that effect).

The Apple wasn't necessarily a *bad* machine (in its time) but to
stick to it rather than upgrade to a better system seems silly.

Granted I wouldn't by a Tandy 2000 either (it's *expensive*), but
there's no question that it's an outstanding machine.  The reviews
(both print media and personal contact) have been overwhelmingly
positive.  To ignore this just because of the company that's selling
it (note: not making it, *selling* it) is to ignore a good system in
favor of an antique.

-- 
        -Bernie Roehl    (University of Waterloo)