Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!ucbvax!PISCES.RUTGERS.EDU!PECHEN
From: PECHEN@PISCES.RUTGERS.EDU (Peter Chen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Future of Apple II
Message-ID: <8812081209.aa21799@SMOKE.BRL.MIL>
Date: 8 Dec 88 17:06:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 51

From Seth Kadesh's recent article:

       >- since production of the 65832 is still off by about a year,    <
       >  I think its highly feasible that if the GS is not abandoned,   <
       >  we can only expect a faster GS (already feasible, according    <
       >  to Mensch).  kinda like the IIC+			         <
     
       >- remember how Apple helped people jump from the LISA boat to	 <
       >  the Macintosh boat?  if the Golden Gate rumor is true (a Mac/II<
       >  hybrid), this could be Apple's way of dumping the II series.   <
     
	I couldn't agree more.  It's good to hear some fellow Apple users
speaking up instead of tacitly waiting for what's coming to them as a bunch
of death-sentenced prisoners stretching their necks waiting to be hanged.
It is encouraging to see that more powerful chips are coming to Apple,
but, still, technology doesn't dictate Apple's policy.  The way Apple IIgs
resembles Mac in its so called human user interface, or rather, the Mac user
interface, dreadfully sounds like the shaping and gradual desensitization
method used to treat mental patients.

	First Apple introduced the mouse for IIe's and IIc's, then 3 1/2"
disk drives(I am not sure which one comes first, the 3 1/2" disk drive or
the mouse for Apple II's, but that's beside the point), now the IIgs with
Mac user interface(we all know they have other terms for it, but a fact is
a fact).  The mouse is great and so are the 3 1/2" disks.  I am not against
improvements for Apple II's, in fact, I strongly support it, but why does
it have to imitate Macs?  Why can't Apple II's have a path of its own?
Because Apple II and Mac both belongs to the same company?  Now we are
getting to the heart of the matter.
	
	As Mr. Kadesh pointed out before, there is no company except Apple
that is investing on two different types of products simultaneously.
Apparently, Apple is attempting to amend the situation by gradually changing
the identity of Apple II's.  Many people now regard IIgs as a low-power 
color Mac and that's exactly what Apple wants us to do.  They want us to
accept that image, so eventually they can merge Apple II and Mac together.
In this light, we can well predict that the new Apple II's will be more and
more Mac-compatible and the IIgs is only the first step.  In other words,
Apple II's are getting "dumped!"  

	From Apple's perspective, this is probably the most elegant solution
for both problems of discord between Apple II and Mac, and "improving" Apple 
II's.  But who asked for this?  I have never heard of any market research
that indicates that Apple II users want Apple II's to become Macs(sounds 
ridiculous, doesn't it?  Well, that's exactly what Apple is leading us to).
But then again, business is business.

	It is ironic that all these are happening while Apple is shouting
the slogan of "Apple II forever!"

P.S. Just one small problem: Where does IIc+ fit in to the picture?