Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!rochester!rutgers!psuvax1!psuvm.bitnet!ncsuvm.bitnet!netoprhm
From: NETOPRHM@NCSUVM.BITNET (Hal Meeks)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Another GS+ rumor..
Message-ID: <640NETOPRHM@NCSUVM>
Date: 7 Apr 89 02:04:58 GMT
References: <8904040536.AA27577@crash.cts.com>
Organization: North Carolina State University - Computing Center
Lines: 39

While all of this sounds really nice for apple II users, look at the
state of things now, and try to make the two jibe:

Apple really has committed a great deal of it's resources to the Mac,
and much less to the GS. Now the rumors are flying that there finally
will be a competitive GS configuration available from apple. Add to this
the announced genlock board. It's almost as if the right hand doesn't
know what the left hand is doing.

Why would apple start thinking of improving the GS when it's
obvious where their road is carrying them. The last two years of show a
slow withdrawal from innovation on the apple II front as far as Apple is
concerned. It's been the 3rd party folks that have brought it along.

Why would you put more money into a system that you know you will be
abandoning in the next 5 years? And I don't mean a little money; I mean
the considerable resources of Apple plugging away to shape the GS into the
machine it ought to have been?

I've heard about the Golden Gate project; when I first heard of it over
a year ago, it made a lot of sense. Now, looking at the state of affairs,
I'm not so sure.

Sorry to ramble, but these current rumors have made me do a little thinking.

Apple isn't the benevolent "hacker's" company it was 2-3 years ago. It's
a corporation. And the bottom line is money, not if you are going to hurt
someone's feelings. Why in the world would Apple sell you a color system
that would emulate a mac, and run at about the same speed, when they can
sell you a color mac system and make more money (a _lot_ more money).
Price isn't necessarily a factor here: The value of something is what someone
is prepared to pay for that item. Apple learned this lesson the hard way
a few months ago with the panic-fueled price jump of the entire line.

I'm not trying to make anyone angry here. I've posed a few questions, and
haven't answered them because I don't know the answer. It just seems so
strange.

--hal