Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!TRINCC.BITNET!REWING
From: REWING@TRINCC.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Apple II Future
Message-ID: <8812212213.aa00649@SMOKE.BRL.MIL>
Date: 22 Dec 88 03:14:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 16

Hi Murph,

I dunno about any decision to delay the introduction of a faster IIgs
for marketing reasons (although in many ways it seems blatently
obvious), but I question the delay of any 68030 based Macs just
because "Sculley says we can't have any in 1988.  Poppycock.
The 68030 Mac II isn't that far behind other workstations inthe introduction
of the new chip in a system.  And besides, I seriously doubt if
Gassee would delay any development of anything, regardless of what
Sculley said, unless it was prohibitively expensive.  Gassee isn't the
man I'd want to tell something silly like (hold back 68030 mac development
because it looks bad for me).  Gassee and develpment will do whatever
they damn well please because they're product based people, not business
types.  Whether a development machine makes it to market...is another story.

--Rick Ewing
  Apple Atlanta