Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!ucbvax!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL From: SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: Golden Gate Message-ID: <8810301510.aa20947@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> Date: 30 Oct 88 19:45:01 GMT Article-I.D.: SMOKE.8810301510.aa20947 References: Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 66 >Moving onto the latest IIgs rumors, one set of people who were really >surprised was our office, particularly the regional manager. And if >he knows nothing, well, you get the picture. If he DID know something about it, he wouldn't be able to even wink, now would he? Vaporware is vaporware whether it's due to a completely unfounded story someone planted because it sounded "cute" or an "announced" product that doesn't exist yet (Lotus Release 3.0 for example). Apple has been accused in the past of protecting their actual developments by planting a host of spurious rumors so that it would be very difficult to discern the real from the fantasy (Apple is allowed to have fun too :-). Apple executives have been quoted as saying 1) there WILL be a follow-on to the IIgs (however, a IIgs+ specifically hasn't been promised so far as I know), and 2) by the end of 1989 there will be a Mac (or Mac-a-like) from Apple especially suited to the needs of the K-12 market (which, among other things NEEDS to protect their investment in an existing Apple II software base). In spite of the sight-unseen demur posted earlier objecting to the idea of a single machine running Mac and IIgs software (on the suspicion that the IIgs emulation would be too slow), it seems to me that such a computer could make a LOT of sense in the long-term. I'd just as soon see what the IIgs emulation behaves like (and the extent to which it supports expansion boards of various kinds) before concluding that Apple is embarked on a less than brilliant path. The fact that regional offices haven't heard about it doesn't necessarily mean that the project isn't humming along in some (secret) development lab in Cupertino ("Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead"). NOTE: I did NOT originate the Golden Gate rumor; I simply read InfoWorld with an eye open for the interesting paragraph here and there. I do embellish - I simply ASSUMED that either the PC Transporter or the AST MS-DOS card would work in the thing (seems plausible doesn't it?). >of a machine that we're not even ready to produce yet to throw >Christmas sales in the toilet. Oh well... I should think that most of the World has already discovered that waiting for the "great machine that will be available in only a few more months" is like "Waiting for Godot" (endless). The Golden Gate (IF it even exists) is a 1989 product; Lotus Release 3.0 was SUPPOSED to be a 1987 product (looks like it might actually arrive in 1989). The Apple IIx, which became the IIgs was first rumored in May 1983; there was ample time to wear out a //e between then and the IIgs's actual appearance. >(And to top it off, somebodyu out there will probably flame me again) Who US? Seriously, we appreciate your willingness to tread on the edge of your nondisclosure agreement to provide us with whatever hard information you can. [The Far Side shall return (I hope)] Murph Sewall Sewall@UCONNVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {rutgers psuvax1 ucbvax & in Europe - mcvax} !UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] -+- My employer isn't responsible for my mistakes AND vice-versa! (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited) "Close enough for government work" - source unknown (naturally ;-)