Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!homxb!mtuxo!mtune!rutgers!husc6!hao!ames!sdcsvax!jww
From: jww@sdcsvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Apple Stumbling (was "Apple Hates You and other Misconceptions")
Message-ID: <4205@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU>
Date: Fri, 30-Oct-87 11:18:34 EST
Article-I.D.: sdcsvax.4205
Posted: Fri Oct 30 11:18:34 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Nov-87 08:04:59 EST
References: <549@auscso.UUCP> <76000032@uiucdcsp> <7504@dartvax.UUCP> <6659@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Organization: Palomar Software, Inc., Vista, CA
Lines: 21

In article <6659@ut-ngp.UUCP>, kraut@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) writes:
> oh, and let's not forget to mention the Mac 128k, which was relatively useless
> all things considered (flaky hardware, no software, insufficient power)
> 
> aren't you glad that "just enough" of us bought a 128k Mac in 1984 (and used
> them as doorstoppers) to allow Apple to make it to 1985 (and the arrival of
> cheaper 256k RAM-chips) so that the "rest of you" could get on the bandwagon.

I'd dispute the claim that a Mac 128K was useless.  I used it constantly
throughout 1984 for MacWrite and MacKermit, both of which did a better
job than any software/hardware combination I had available in any
other form.  I still like the 128/Plus/SE form factor, which is not
bad for a transportable computer.

Sure, the 128K was not a serious business computer.  But I found the slowness 
and smallness of the disk drives more serious than 128K (at the time).  
Thanks to MultiFinder, however, today 1 Mb just isn't enough.
-- 
	Joel West  (c/o UCSD)
	Palomar Software, Inc., P.O. Box 2635, Vista, CA  92083
	{ucbvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!jww 	jww@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu