Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!wuarchive!psuvax1!news
From: melling@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: A low-end Mac
Message-ID: <C1-dg_2@cs.psu.edu>
Date: 12 Feb 90 08:00:19 GMT
References: <11221@thor.acc.stolaf.edu> <2529@leah.Albany.Edu>
Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
Organization: Penn State University Computer Science
Lines: 23
In-Reply-To: jh0576@leah.Albany.Edu's message of 12 Feb 90 04:25:43 GMT

In article <2529@leah.Albany.Edu> jh0576@leah.Albany.Edu (Joe Houghtaling) writes:

   It would seem to me that one of apple's primary considerations in 
   building their new low-end mac would be its ability to perhaps
   eventually replace the apple II.  An ability to run Apple II software
   plus some kind of color capability would be necessary.  Fully integrating
   their product line must be a big worry to apple.

   Any comments?

I read in a recent issue of InfoWorld that a new Apple IIgs is due out in
the fall.  The main difference b/w the old machine and the new machine will
be that the newer one will be faster.  But I wouldn't count on it being too
much faster.  Can't have the II series cutting into the sales of low end
Macs; machines that should have been upgraded a year ago!

Which is going to happen first:  Apple finally decides to give more bang for
the buck (faster processor, graphics support), or Sun gets some major software
companies to port their Mac and IBM software to their machines?  The PC and
workstation markets are colliding.  Which group is going to be first to get
what the other has now?

-Mike