Re: IIgs kills ARM-A2 prototype! Film at 11.

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

toddpw@ugcs.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) wrote:

>It is also quite possible that the Archimedes simply had more video memory
>bandwidth than the Amiga, because it had a 2-cycle 32 bit data bus whereas
>the poor 68000 in the A1000 only had a 4-cycle 16 bit data bus. In fact,
>that's probably it right there! The early Amiga sucked vs. the ARM on simple
>memory bandwidth alone, until the 68020 &up Amigas came out.

Assuming your timeline is true (I did not read the "Attack" book you
mentioned so I don't know the validity of your source), picture yourself
in 1985.  The Lisa flopped, so Apple cut it loose.  The Apple II stayed
rock steady.  The Apple III flopped, so Apple cut it loose.  The Apple
II stayed rock steady.  Why did Apple keep trying to KILL the Apple
II dead rather than transition it to something new?  Why the need to
completely sever the old and the new IMMEDIATELY?  The answer
is Mr. Steve Jobs and his ego and his need to do something that Woz
had nothing to do with...

The Mac was not successful in the beginning.  By 1985, it was a
poor seller.  Apple relied on Apple II sales during this time to stay
afloat.  This was the Mac 128 at the time...now along comes an
ARM-A2 prototype.  Look at what you said about the Archimedes
above...floating point or not, an ARM1 is more powerful than a 68k
...much more powerful.  Why not ditch the unsuccessful Mac 128
and go with the ARM-A2?  The computer was more powerful...it
could run Apple II software through emulation much as the PMac
runs 68k Mac software today (in fact, the Archimedes can run
6502 based BBC software)...and it was powerful enough to handle
the Apple "Mac" GUI like OS no problem (the Archimedes had an
GUI OS similar to this).  Answer is again Steve Jobs, his ego, and
his need to make himself look better than his partner, Woz...

To keep this into perspective, realize that cutting the 68k Mac
and restarting from an ARM "Mac" (or ARM-A2 or whatever the
name) would have been easier than the scrapping of Lisa and the
release of 68k Mac...the Mac 128 had been around far less time
than Lisa was...assuming first ARM1 in 1985 as you claim from
your source (I am still suspicious of your dates, but just
assuming)...

Did Steve Jobs decision to sever the old Apple II line from the
later Apple computers hurt Apple?  I think so...I truely think the
shafting of 10-11 million users hurt Apple more than we can ever
know...

A strong continuous ARM-A2 "Mac" line (an ARM based line
continuous from Apple II to "Mac"...in quotes because these Macs
would run on ARMs)...would have sent a clear signal to the
industry that Apple was serious about continuity.  More clones
could have appeared...think fifty to one hundred companies like
Laser...it could have shifted the balance from IBM clone world
domination to one in which Apple and company actually had a
chance...

WHY do you think when asked today, people think the first
personal computer was the IBM PC?  It is because there is
a continuity.  Crack open any PC book even about a Pentium
unit and what do you find?  You find references to the "first"
IBM PC.  Crack open a Mac book and what do you find?  No
reference to Apple II...most people don't know that it was
APPLE that really ignited the personal computer industry...

You keep saying "nobody at the time knew that backward
compatibility was king"...BULL!  The non-Apple PC world
was never so stupid to ignore the obvious...only Steve Jobs
could do this...