Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdcc6!sdcc7!ln63wzb
From: ln63wzb@sdcc7.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: 65C816 programming weirdness; is it true?
Message-ID: <856@sdcc7.ucsd.EDU>
Date: Fri, 16-Jan-87 17:43:28 EST
Article-I.D.: sdcc7.856
Posted: Fri Jan 16 17:43:28 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Jan-87 07:25:40 EST
References: <2515@ecsvax.UUCP> <1226@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> <853@sdcc7.ucsd.EDU> <2571@ecsvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: ln63wzb@sdcc7.ucsd.edu.UUCP (Greg Robbins)
Organization: U.C. San Diego
Lines: 45


In article <2571@ecsvax.UUCP> ranger@ecsvax.UUCP (Rick N. Fincher) writes:
>
>... I take exception to your contention that it is not useful
>to extend the life of a processor by Kludgy upgrades.
 [Argument that we cannot ignore the installed base of technology
 just for the sake of using the newest hardware, and that great
 things can still be derived from existing equipment.]
>As machines get better and faster current technology can be modified to
>at least stay in the ball park.  Of course all technology will eventually be
>be replaced with something better, ... but it won't happen overnight.
>Until then the old stuff with a new twist will still be competitive to
>the consumer, who is only concerned with end results.


I hold my philosophical head in shame. I renounce my previous
posting as having ignored the realities of the marketplace, and I
concede your points on practical matters.  Save for two:

>[Unlike the IIGS, the Amiga suffers from lack of] cheap easy expandability,
>lack of a wide selection of software, lack of built in networking and
>perhaps most important, lack of an installed base large enough to make
>developers risk money writing software for the machine. 

The IIGS doesn't have a big installed base, the II..//c do.  How
many developers want to use the new features of the IIGS and give up
sales to the enormous number of II users?  You'd get the same
installed base attractiveness by giving the Amiga emulation ability.
I'm bothered less by Apple's decision to continue the II line
than by the small (considering the state of the art, and the
machine's price range) step forward they took with it (sound
capability excepted), and by their failure to provide a design
intended to carry it into the future, beyond just bringing it up to
date.  (I hope to be proven wrong, but don't expect to be.)

And the other thing...

>something like the Cosby Show will be a hit on any TV set, and probably
>Radio too, if that were all that we had to receive the show on.

Cosby is a hit, but on radio it'd been seen as a notch below Cheers.  (:-)


Grobbins
...sdcsvax!sdcc7!ln63wzb