Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!BRL.MIL!abc
From: abc@BRL.MIL (Brint Cooper)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Apple supporting the Apple // line
Message-ID: <8809141215.aa09913@SMOKE.BRL.MIL>
Date: 14 Sep 88 16:15:08 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 72


	Much discussion has appeared here and elsewhere about Apple's
intention as expressed by Daniel Greenberg, "In fact, from what I know,
if it wasn't for the fact that the Apple // line kept continuing to
raise millions upon millions of dollars for them, they would have just
assumed dropped it alltogether (sic)."  This discussion usually centers
on how much new software Apple, Inc, is willing to develop, on how long
it took to develop a "low priority" Apple II product, what product
dealers should push, and other pieces of "soft" information.

	Here is another viewpoint:

		1. The Apple II is a well-established line with a large
software base, some from Apple, some from other commercial sources, some
from "public domain" or other non-profit sources.  Apple aggressively
marketed its 8-bit machines to the education market from the beginning
of the IIe and perhaps earlier.

		2. IBM has not been terribly successful in pushing Apple
out of the elementary school market.  There are several reasons for
this:

		 a. The Apple machines are there and they do the job.
To reconfigure with IBM machines would cost money that local school
districts and individual PTA organizations do not have.

		 b. The teachers (many of whom are "computer anxious")
have become comfortable with the Apple II environment.

		 c. As stated above, there is a large base of software
from many affordable sources.  The base continues to grow.

		3. Thus, Apple is "here to stay" in the elementary
school systems of the country.  But there are many schools with too few
computers.  There are some schools with no computers yet.  And there are
some schools that would simply like to have more machines.  Who will
make these machines?  Franklin?  No.  Naive users are conscious of brand
names, and there's no contest in their minds between Franklin and Apple.
As the schools obtain the money to buy more computers, they will buy
Apple IIe or IIgs machines -- with virtually no "push" from Apple.
Further, many parents want to give their children an extra head start in
school, so they buy for them a computer.  And they buy the *same*
computer that they will use in school -- an Apple IIe or IIgs.  So,
the near and mid term sales picture for this line is virtually assured
to Apple without an extensive and aggressive marketing effort.  The
investment of an earlier year pays off again and again.

		4. Meanwhile, Apple sees that the IIgs is not the
machine to capture the imagination of the commercial, technical, and
business marketplaces.  Not even a IIgs+ can do that.  Subjectively, in
the mind of the buyer, it is still the computer of the elementary
school. Without a product having an independent product image, Apple
cannot compete with IBM, Compaq, and clones.  Hence, the Mac line.
There seems to be no conflict between the potential customer bases for
the two lines, except for the occasional home buyer or the adult who
wants to buy a computer but doesn't know why or which.  The computer
seller will steer such a user to a machine that will provide maximum
satisfaction to the user and maximum profit to the seller.  What's wrong
with that?  Neither Apple nor IBM are subsidiaries of Consumer's Union.

	There seems to be the feeling around that the Apple II line of
computers should become the be all and end all of computing; that there
should be no need for a more powerful or more capable machine; that
everyone's "professional" needs should be met by an endlessly upward
compatible line of II machines.  This is not realistic.  While I am
quite aware of the fine work that folks like Doug Gwyn and others can do
on an Apple IIe and IIgs, most ordinary mortals can do with a little
more help from a faster machine with larger capacity.  Hence the Mac.

	What's the problem?

_Brint