Re: Apple II Commercials

[volkmar.friauf@koeln.netsurf.de (Volkmar Friauf)]

<pubpc1@library.ucla.edu> wrote:

> That may have been it.  It's been so long ago.  Anyone remember
> other commercials?

I still remember the "Remarkable Apple IIgs" commercial - I've shown it
to Mac users which didn't even know about Apple's history and the Apple
II line, and they agreed that this was one of the best Apple commercials
they had ever seen... and they even got curious about my IIgs :)

This spot showed, on the other hand, where Apple wanted the IIgs to
become stunted... in classrooms... :-/

> The IIc was a best seller back then and it
> was clearly superior to that stupid PC/jr., which had toy-like
> "chicklet" keyboards.  Even Consumer Reports gave the nod to
> the IIc over the PC/jr.  Remember when John Sculley lifted a new
> Apple IIc over his head and proclaimed "Apple II Forever"?

Hey, Sculley proclaimed a lot... ;-)

> In fact, the GS was so
> ahead of its time that even when the Mac LC was released four
> years later, a properly equipped GS could actually outperform
> the Mac LC.  But Apple would not give us a new, modern GS.

I don't really believe into the "outperform" comparisons. Remember, the
IIgs was a "tuned" Apple II - the first Apple II for 9 years to run
faster than 1 Mhz. Apple enhanced nearly everything - speed, sound,
graphics, memory capabilities, slots (more slots available thanks to the
Smartport) and so on.
The Mac, on the other hand, was a completely new machine - Jeff Raskin
(and later Steve Jobs) drew some specifications and then built a machine
that met these specifications. The first Macs were planned to be a
one-in-all-machine for the average home user, not for computer
enthusiasts or for game players. And when Apple started to enhance the
Macintosh line, they had the problem of being compatible with earlier
Macs _and_ to stay in a reasonable price range. This is why it took
years until Macs with similar performance and similar features than a
well-equipped GS came around.

Apple tried to force users to switch from Apple II to Macs, as was
discussed earlier: "Overpricing" the GS, dropping support, offering an
(8-bit!!) Apple II-compatibility card and, finally, the GUS project,
were certain steps to get Apple II users over to the Mac. This didn't
really work, because Apple users in general have memories like elephants
and can't forgive Apple what they've done to the Apple II line - an
Apple II fellow does not inevitably became an Apple-in-general fellow...
;-)

> Imagine had Apple continued to develop the GS.
(lots of imaginations snipped)

Well, there are lots of possibilities... What about a newsgroup
"comp.what-if"? :--) 

They main problem around 88 was that "being IBM compatible" was a _must_
for computers. Apple had two computer lines to market which were not IBM
compatible, so they either had to increase marketing a lot or to allow
clones (which was a no-no at the time Sculley was on the run - he even
cancelled the "System 7 for Intel" project, fearing that this could
damage Apple's own CPU sales). And i doubt that "cleanroom" clones of
the IIgs or the Mac were possible because of the System Software
(Toolbox!) which was included in the ROMs. The only Mac clones around
that time were machines sold without ROM, so you had to get a ROM from a
used Mac, which made the whole thingy quite expensive - so the Mac
clones were not sold to be cheaper than Macs, but to add features Apple
didn't offer, hence the DynaMac laptop of around 1987.

We got a sneak preview of what would happened _if_ Apple had continued
to develop the IIgs. The next relase would habe been the "Mark Twain"
ROM 04 IIgs - no performance gains, just new features added. To
"upgrade" the IIgs, Apple had to have the 65832 built. To upgrade a Mac,
they just had to wait until Motorola presented a new 68K- or PPC chip,
but there was no such thing available for the IIgs except on blueprints.

I think the only chance for the IIgs line would have been if Apple
completely sold it to a small company with enthusiastic ideas (maybe an
Apple spin-off like Claris or the passed-by Newton divison). Then the
Apple IIgs could have evolved in a similar way like the Commodore Amiga
did - a machine for freaks and enthusiasts, tuned to get everything out
of the box, lots of hardware additions available, tons of new software
coded...

But with Apple completely ignoring software and hardware developers and
"freezing" the IIgs at 2.6 Mhz, there is not much room for such
speculations. The IIgs is a technology from the end of the Eighties, and
this will never change, except Apple gave away the rights to another
company. But thinking of the way Apple was non-interested in Apple II
users at the beginning of the Nineties, i doubt they are compassioned
enough to do this step now... :-(

Nowadays, owing and using a IIgs is just like owning and using a
Volkswagen Beetle. Well, on the ever hand, even Volkswagen thinks about
a new Beetle model... so there are always possibilities. But if you
compare the new Beetle with the old one, you can hardly see any
similarity. I think a PowerGS would have nearly nothing in common with a
original IIgs, except that you probably could run 65816 software on it.
So, why not constructing a completely new machine in which the original
IIgs ROM can be plugged in? Or a IIgs compatibility card for the Mac/PC
or even the Amiga?

We IIgs users are a bit schizophrenic (me included ;-) ). On one hand,
we're stuck to our "original" IIgs and dislike any software-based
alternatives such as emulators (because they are not the "real thing").
But noone comes up with an idea for a _hardware_ alternative... (me
included, again :-/ ).

How about a IIgs compatability card in a completely new, PowerPC based
machine?

Regards,
Volkmar

-- 
"Die Staatsanwaltschaft hat nun Anzeige gegen Max Brym von der Muenchner
PDS wegen 'Raedelsfuehrerschaft beim oeffentlichen Vortragen des
Grundgesetzes' erstattet."
n.brauns@link-m.de (Nick Brauns) in <6hf8PVz2QdB@link-m54.link-m.de>