Re: _Infinite Loop_ by Michael S. Malone

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Dennis Doms writes ...
> 
> I thought some might like this quote from the book:
>
> --- start quote
> For them, the first generation of true Apple II loyalists, the Apple
> II line was allowed a swan song. And it was a doozy: the 1986 Apple
> IIGS (for "graphics and sound"), perhaps the high-water mark of the
> computer maker's art and, in terms of quality, price, and performance,
> the best computer Apple ever built.

     A more valid basis for comparison is quality & performance given available
technology. In terms of 'what you have to work with', the best computer Apple
ever built would be the II+.



> It featured an elegant box

     The IIgs is, easily, the best looking Apple. The first Mac and the iMac
are close seconds.



> filled with the simplest componentry imaginable -- all superfluity having
> been winnowed out over the previous nine years

     Pure nonsense. The IIgs is the most complex, least simple personal
computer ever built.



> -- a color display and stereo sound.

    "Stereo" sound output _should_ have been included; but, it was just
enabled-- users have to build or buy a 'stereo board'.



> It was a computer designed from the start to the finish
> to appeal to schools, which needed a reliable computer of considerable
> power at a reasonable price...

     A good joke! There was nothing "reasonable" about the price of the IIgs.



> yet so inexensive to build that it was
> like a license to print money.

     Exactly-- which pretty well smashes the BS about "reasonable" pricing.



> Plus the IIGS actually outperformed the
> Macintosh on the Mac's own turf.
 ....

     Not really; the IIgs was never allowed on Mac's turf.


> --- end quote
> 
> An interesting book.

     Sounds like it. Malone makes nice clear statements which provoke
discussion.




> It makes some analyses that I'm not sure I agree
> with in context (for example, asserting a lack of technical expertise
> in Apple's highest level decision-making management as being a unique
> situation for a technology company at the time, but I think I remember
> Adam Osborne made the same complaint about Osborne Computer in
> _Hypergrowth_) but there's some stories here that sound all too
> familiar.

     When you get into 'technical expertise', the biggest surprise is the
weakness of firmware. For example, the Tape I/O can easily be made faster and
more reliable. Still, Apple comes out way ahead of Intel.

     Hardware is a different ball game. The II/II+ looks like a machine
produced by a 'hardware person'. There are a few significant flaws-- assignment
of I/O addresses, fixed location of graphics pages in the middle of program
space, and failure to build in provisions for simple 64k bank switching. Still,
overall, the design is fairly straight forward and not all that difficult to
expand upon.

     On the other hand, the IIgs is a machine no true hardware person would
come up with except under constraints mandated by a greedy and/or confused
management. Basically, the machine should have been designed to maximize the
benefits of the '816 in native mode-- so, for example, it would be easy to
expand to at least 12MB RAM. Old-II compatibility should have been a plug-in
option.

     The hard-wired limitations of IIgs design more or less force going to a
new motherboard in order to optain needed upgrades in memory and display. Since
a new motherboard seems unlikely, we are left with a 'separate box' add-on
approach in order to move onward to the next series of significant upgrades.



Rubywand