Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ncr-sd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ncr-sd!stubbs
From: stubbs@ncr-sd.UUCP (Jan Stubbs)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.arch
Subject: Re: Re: What if IBM used a 68000
Message-ID: <382@ncr-sd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 2-Jan-86 16:30:42 EST
Article-I.D.: ncr-sd.382
Posted: Thu Jan  2 16:30:42 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 3-Jan-86 02:03:56 EST
Reply-To: stubbs@ncr-sd.UUCP (0000-Jan Stubbs)
Distribution: net
Organization: NCR Corporation, San Diego
Lines: 17
Xref: watmath net.micro:13348 net.arch:2372

In article <1880@peora.UUCP> jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) writes:
>The Mac is perceived to be slow (by users) because someone (no longer with
>Apple) vehemently insisted on doing disk I/O via old-fashioned timing
>loops, like in the Apple II, rather than using a separate disk controller.

According to several articles I read on the Mac, Steve Wozniak takes credit
for this, it saved the price of a disk controller, and allowed different
rotation speeds controlled by software depending on whether the track being
accessed was inside or outside. This was to equalize the density of information.They called this technique the "Wos Machine". 

Steve, defend yourself if this isn't true!

Jan Stubbs ..sdcsvax!ncr-sd!stubbs

Opinions expressed are those of the author.

Z