Re: PLEASE STOP THE MAC AND MICROSOFT MESSAGES

[shack@onyx.southwind.net (Randy Shackelford)]

Mitchell Spector (spec@vax2.concordia.ca) wrote:

: >:     The dictionary defines the word abandoned as: "To give up,
: >: forsake, desert". Those words sound very much like what Apple
: >: did with the machine, unless you have another definition for
: >: the same word. ;-)
: >
: >OK, that applies to 68Ks as much as to Apple IIs. Apple gives lip service
: >to them still but in practical terms they've left them behind. Try OS 8
: >and Quicktime 3.0 on a 68K if you don't buy that.

:     In practical terms they have not. Apple was very careful about
: making sure all the 68K software could run on PowerMacintoshes, so
: to avoid a repeat of what happened with the Apple II. Back in 1994
: (right up until the present) Mac users have been able to migrate
: to the new system without losing anything. Compare that to Apple II
: and IIgs users migrating to the Macintosh.

You're talking about a different kind of support. In my opinion 68Ks are
being pushed into premature obsolescence because Apple and everyone else
has quit making software for them. MS Office 98 is native only for example,
even though Quadras are perfectly capable of doing word processing and the
like. So my Macs are high and dry when it comes to new software for the most
part.

Also, there was a migration path offered to Apple II users in '90, namely
the //e card. That card works in a lot of machines, up to the Performa 575-8,
which are quite capable '040 boxes. Now before the "it should have been a
IIgs card" chant breaks out, keep in mind that there was (and still is) little
native software worth using, all of which has a Mac equivalent. Having a //e
card is a perfectly viable way to move from Apple II to Mac.

: >I don't imagine that IIgses were outselling all Mac models combind in '89
: >to '90, when most people would say that Apple II support was tailing off.

:     Nor do I, but it is not at all surprising when you consider
: the Apple IIgs selling in 1990, was the same machine they were
: selling back in 1986. Add to that the price remained relatively
: untouched in those 4 years, making it look utterely ridiculous
: to consider when for the same price or less, you could purchase
: a Macintosh with state-of-the-art technology (and equipped with
: more memory, a hardrive and high-density floppy drive, superior
: video, etc).

In '90, Apple decided to come out with low cost Macs, which made the Apple
II market superfluous (to their thinking at least.)

:     Apple II support began tailing off soon after the GS was
: introduced (I cannot think of very much offered beyond that
: point, except for some software updates and the occasional
: bone thrown at users--like the ROM 3, HS SCSI, VOC, FDHD).

There weren't many updates which could be done in those days without raising
the price to a prohibitive amount. Recall what an SE with a 20 mb internal
hard disk cost back then?

: >Coupla points: first, NO Mac hardware I own will work in a G3. Unless you
: >a Plaintalk mic I suppose. I'm not counting external hard disks and the like
: >since my IIgs can use them as well. Second, less and less software coming out
: >runs on 68Ks. Take a look in CompUSA or wherever you see Mac software and see
: >how much isn't native only. You won't find much. 68Ks are getting left behind
: >in the sense of not having new software since everything requires a Pmac now
: >and zero new hardware is coming out. When's the last time you saw a new nubus
: >card hyped? But that's progress and a fellow either keeps up or gets left
: >behind. I'm planning to make do a little longer until it gets settled whether
: >Mac OS X will run on 603/604 Pmacs. I was gonna get one of the sub $1000 8500s
: >out there nowadays but I want to make sure it's not a dead end.
: >
: >You could replace "68K" with "IIgs" in your paragraph up there given an
: >emulator. But as for continuing support, 68K Macs and Apple IIs are in
: >the same boat now.

:     Granted they may be in the same boat, 68K Macintosh users can
: easily migrate to the PowerMacintosh and maintain full backwards
: compatibility. Apple II users are stuck in the boat, and if they
: want to get out, they're going to have to jump in the water and
: get wet for awhile (and all traces of their past will get washed
: away in the water).

I can't reuse any of my hardware such as nubus cards in a new Pmac. And
again, I'm talking continuing support of my existing equipment. There is
very little difference between a IIgs and a 68K Mac there.

:     I think the 68K Mac/PowerMac is akin to the Apple IIe/IIGS.
: Support for the Apple IIe started winding down when the GS was
: introduced, but you could upgrade to the newer machine and have
: full backwards software and hardware compatibility (there was
: even a motherboard swap made available for IIe users, just as
: Apple has offered motherboard swaps for certain 68K Macintoshes).
: There never was a step to take after the GS, you were just left
: hanging with no place to go (except start all over again, fresh,
: with a Mac, PC, Amiga or some other platform).

Many Mac models were dead ends upgrade wise too, e.g. IIfx, Q700. Logic
board upgrades were never cost effective versus the sell-n-buy approach
either. As I mentioned, the advent of low cost Macs plus the arrival of
the //e card in '90 ended the Apple II's market viability. Not for those
with old Apple IIs of course, but to the average Joe wandering into an
Apple dealer, they were a better deal.

: >:     Well the thing is there are key things about the 68K built-in
: >: to the PowerMac, like the Macintosh Toolbox for example. The only
: >: major thing being emulated in those newer boxes are the 68K CPU.
: >: A PowerMac running 68K Mac software is very different from F.E.'s
: >: Bernie ][ The Rescue running IIgs software.
: >
: >There isn't much difference on the surface though.

:     Yes there is, since your emulating virtually everything in
: software, certain types of programs will cause differences in
: performance. Take programs that have to emulate sound, that
: is going to take a speed hit. Also, a 6100/60 PowerMac is
: going to do perfect emulation of a 68K Mac, the same is not
: so when you run BTTR on it for IIgs emulation.

On the surface, you don't see how much is emulated, be it entire system or
just a different processor. I wishI could see for myself. IIgs emulation is
yet another thing in the native only arena.
--
Offsite mail to this host gets nuked.