Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!joyce!sri-unix!hplabs!hp-sdd!ncr-sd!crash!maddie
From: maddie@crash.cts.com (Tom Schenck)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: If the GS meant business...
Message-ID: <3214@crash.cts.com>
Date: 17 Jul 88 17:38:50 GMT
References: <8807131148.aa01449@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA>
Reply-To: maddie@crash.CTS.COM (Tom Schenck)
Organization: Crash TS, El Cajon, CA
Lines: 21

[ Sorry, but that message got me fired up ]

Since the //gs was introduced, the only thing about it that has impressed me
was the fact that it has 15 independant voices for generating very nice sound.

I have never really like the //gs OR the Mac (ANY of them) for any serious
programming work. Why? Because everything you do, even if you write it in
straight machine code, goes through an intepreter. The OS on the //gs and the
mac has just too much overhead, and is to high-level for me to ever consider
it as a serious programming machine.

Right now, the machine of choice for my programming is an IBM PC clone. I would
use an Apple //e (with 1 meg of RAM of course), but I don't have the money for
the rediculously high prices of the Apple //e (even used). The PC clone was
already here, so I used it.

The only thing I really want to say of much importance, is that if Apple was
serious about maintaining the Apple // line, they wouldn't have made the //gs
so much like a Mac.

--