Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!ukma!wuarchive!decwrl!ucbvax!pro-generic.cts.com!sb
From: sb@pro-generic.cts.com (Stephen Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: rom 03 upgrade (or lack thereof)
Message-ID: <10599.infoapple.net@pro-generic>
Date: 13 Feb 90 08:32:58 GMT
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 39

In-Reply-To: message from dale@pro-colony.cts.com

> Re:  Apple should have released a faster machine 3 years ago.
>
> Well, folks, where would Apple have gotten the chips? Since WDC seems to

Hold on for a moment. Take the lid off your IIgs. You'll see a GTE 65816-part
rated at 4 Mhz.  Why couldn't the IIgs have been at some 'nice' frequency
(more than 2.8 Mhz).. say 3.58 Mhz. I don't think that would be too hard to
syncronize with the FPI.

No, we got 2.8.  And I'm impressed. Actually, closer to 2.5 Mhz.

I don't expect to run UNIX on my Apple IIgs. I don't expect to have 12 Apple
IIe's with Workstation cards all using my IIgs as a fileserver. And finally,
I don't expect instant fractals, lightning ray tracing, or favourable
benchmarks against a Mac IIcx+++2+e/gsi or whatever new flavour of Mac they
will bring out tomorrow.

I do expect reasonable 'bang' for the buck. And frankly I don't think we got
it with the IIgs. I love my IIgs and its relatives. But not too many people
(other than in schools) will find out about the IIgs because they're just not
worth it.

Apple: Make my day: prove me wrong! (I dare you!!)

------------------------------------------
ProLine: sb@pro-generic
ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-generic!sb@nosc.mil
INET: sb@pro-generic.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pnet01!pro-generic!sb
------------------------------------------

I can't stop you from flaming me. But don't expect me to stand idle and not
flame back.

UUCP: crash!pro-generic!sb
ARPA: crash!pro-generic!sb@nosc.mil
INET: sb@pro-generic.cts.com