Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken!ames!uhccux!goldader
From: goldader@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Jeff Goldader)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Low-Cost Macintosh
Summary: but maybe a *bit* more oomph?
Message-ID: <6457@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Date: 2 Feb 90 02:12:21 GMT
References: <126900165@p.cs.uiuc.edu> <25c8e25c.62bb@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>
Reply-To: goldader@uhccux.UUCP (Jeff Goldader)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Hawaii
Lines: 29

In article <25c8e25c.62bb@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> rcfische@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Raymond C. Fischer) writes:
>
>In article <126900165@p.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>>MacWorld last week said that the low-cost macintosh will have the same
>>8Mhz 68000 as the original Mac 128k.  It will have enhanced ROMs
>>(compared to the SE).
>>
>>The time has come to bury the 8Mhz 68000.  
>>
>This appears to be another one of those poorly thought out complaints
>along the lines of "I want a 30MHz 68040 and 4 mbytes of RAM with color
>for $1000".  You get what you pay for!

Agreed; but why, oh why, are they using the old 68000?  Why not the
CMOS 68000 developed for the portable, which runs much faster?  I'm
not an EE, but I figure (probably wrongly) that they could use much of
the same basic circuitry, etc.  I was hoping for something with the
capabilities of the Portable.  Being a perenially broke student, I was
going to buy one of the new cheapo-macs because I could afford one.
If the performance is only that of the Mac+.... But I'll wait and see what
materializes from the world of vapor.

Jeff Goldader                        University of Hawaii
goldader@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu      Institute for Astronomy

"It was the Biker of the Apocalypse..."

Disclaimer: They don't support what I say, I don't care what they think,
and we're happy that way.