Re: PLEASE STOP THE MAC AND MICROSOFT MESSAGES

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

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

: >One doesn't need to have the absolute latest product from a company
: >to be interested in what the company's up to.

:     I am interested in the Apple II computer, and so long as Apple
: Computer no longer has any relation to the machine anymore, I have
: zero interest in the company. When Apple dropped the Apple II, I
: lost all interest in the company. I think you see the situation as
: if Apple Computer is my parent, and now that they've had another
: child and focusing all their attention on him/her (Macintosh)--and
: I've moved out and supporting myself--I should still love them
: and keep in touch because we're all still one big family.

Don't pull a Nathan and say that just because you have no interest, there
is no place for Apple Inc news.

:     Well just talking about what kind of person Steve Jobs is, or
: bashing Apple Computer out of the blue, has no place on this group,
: I agree. However, how the company abandoned the Apple II has plenty
: of relevance simply because it is part of its history (and stating
: plain fact, not opinion or view). There are a lot of negative issues
: which come up when you mix "Apple II and Apple Computer" in the same
: sentence, but not because people like to just arbitrarily insult the
: company.

Saying they abandoned Apple IIs is a matter of opinion though. I've bought
and used Apple IIs, and I've bought and used 68K Macs. Support for the former
is all but gone, and for the latter it is going fast. Using a 68K Mac to get
things done is getting more and more difficult. Do I feel abandoned? Not
at all.

:     It's not a matter of people reacting to your saying good or bad
: things about Apple, it is just people reacting to your talking about
: Apple's CURRENT HAPPENINGS. Care to name some bits of news out of
: Apple in the last 5 years that would interest someone who only uses
: Apple II's? (Keep in mind that just because someone likes Apple II's,
: doesn't mean they have a fondness for everything that comes from Apple).

Without going to the trouble to fine a specific article, I've seen Apple II
related stuff in the TIL more recent than that. That resource would certainly
evaporate if Apple bit it.

:     I don't mind hearing positive things about Apple Computer in
: this group, so long as it has relevance to the Apple II. Talking
: about Apple's stock value going up has no relevance since they
: cut off ALL TIES to the Apple II (their stock going up has about
: as much meaning to me as if General Motors or Fisher Price stock
: prices changed, or for that matter, if GM or FP introduced new
: toys or cars. Those companies products, just like Apple's, has
: no relevance to my Apple II).

Um, You can still get Apple IIs repaired at authorized dealers, download
software updates, search the TIL for Apple II info, etc. I'd say those
are ties. Plus read the last paragraph of any Apple press release.

:     Okay, tell me how current news about Apple has any more relevance
: than news about Compaq. Both make computers that can't run Apple II
: software or use Apple II hardware. So what makes Apple different?
: Do you think Amiga users care what's up with (what little remains)
: of Commodore or Escom? No, they're only interested in Gateway now.
: If Gateway bought the rights to the Apple II and started producing
: it again, then news about Gateway would be relevant here. Apple has
: dropped the ball, and we, as Apple II users, only care about who is
: currently holding it.

I'll overlook your Nathanesque use of the pronoun we. Here's a thought:
AE, AST, Chinook, Checkmate, and many other companies once made Apple II
products but no longer do. Is discussing them in the scope of this group?

: >But if people who know about Bose brand frozen dinners mention Bose Inc
: >in the Bose speaker group, there's no problem right?

:     Those people who'd buy and eat Bose brand frozen dinners would
: be more than welcome in the group, so long as they discussed Bose
: speakers and _not_ frozen dinners. They could also discuss company
: news about sound and speaker technology, but I'd imagine people
: would get irrate if discussions began about the excitement surrounding
: a new fried chicken dinner from Bose. (Heh, people looking up the
: word "Bose" in Dejanews probably find this a bit curious ;).

Now's a good time to point out that news is typically a one time reference
to an event, not a discussion.

:     I'm interested in the product, not the company. Sure, at first
: I was curious about the Macintosh since I liked the Apple II that
: the same company made (it's kind of like an artist, if you like one
: their paintings, chances are good you'll like most of their other
: works). I checked out the Mac -- I've looked at them, read up about
: them and even used them extensively for hours on end. The end result
: is they're not may taste. Of course even if they were my taste and
: I liked them every bit as much as I liked Apple II's, that still
: would not make it right for me to post Mac stuff here (and the company
: is 100% devoted to making and selling Macs today. So if the Mac is off
: topic, and all Apple does now is Macs, how can discussing Apple's
: current affairs be on topic?).

This is again overlooking the fact that you can talk about a company without
mentioning any of its products. And besides, Apple does make other products.
If someone posted here about a new Apple printer, is this topical or not?

:     There is no ban on discussing Apple Computer here, as long as
: it has something to do with the Apple II (and in order for that
: to work, you have to discuss the company between 1976 and 1993;
: unless of course they reintroduced the II or came out with
: something along the lines of the IIe PDS card again).

Hopefully no "ban" exists on anything. When that happens, I'm off usenet.

:     Yeah, but even though your Mac's are no longer current, news
: coming out of Apple is still relevant to *you* since your a Mac
: owner (if you bought a G3, you'd still have backwards compatibility
: with your software and hardware). I know it sounds biased to say
: stuff about Apple suddenly no longer belongs here, but it makes
: sense when you think about it. The only announcements coming out
: of them these days are about Macs. I'm not saying G3 Notebooks
: and the iMac are unnewsworthy (I thought the iMac looked rather
: unusual and read up about it myself) but there are groups where
: that news belongs and groups where it doesn't belong. Csa2 is of
: course the latter.

While we're talking about old boxes, recall how software emulation didn't
count in your estimation. However, as you're doubtless aware, Pmacs use
software emulation to remain compatible with Macs like my Quadra. Now if
68K software emulation is good enough to say that Pmacs are compatible
with 68Ks, why doesn't it work to say they're compatible with Apple IIs?
Before you say that the hardware is compatible, bear in mind that a nubus
Mac has about as much G3 compatible hardware inside it as your average 
IIgs has on it.

I've trimmed large chunks out of this article in the hope of winding this
thread down. I think the solution is to not complain too much about content,
especially when it's so easy to avoid reading stuff which doesn't interest 
you. It's not like this group has a suffocating amount of traffic or anything
like that. I let stuff that bores the snot out of me, like those endless 
threads about how Apple should have used ARMs in Apple IIs, the current
boycott Microsoft junk, yada yada pass on without complaint. To complain
only serves to increase the useless newsgroup traffic. I think using my
email method with people who post off topic stuff will work better.
--
Offsite mail to this host gets nuked.