Re: Slow GS video thanks to: Apple sucks

[pubpc1@library.ucla.edu]

gjb_remove@wavetech.net (Greg Buchner) wrote:
>nathan@visi.com (Nathan Mates) wrote:
>>And actually, for another management-killed feature of the GS, the
>>engineers originally wanted 10Mhz 65816s under the hood. Making that
>>the default with a 10Mhz bus to video would have made the original GS
>>actually useful. However, those who'd rather whitewash and suck up to
>>Macintosh, Inc would rather just deny that and all other backstabbings
>>of the Apple II line.
>
>And just were would they have gotten 10MHz 65c816's?  It seems to me
>that Applied Engineering had problems getting 7MHz versions when they
>were first coming out with the TransWarp GS.

Nate is right, 10MHz 65C816's were available.  They were available
from the start.  While doing some research first for upgrading my Zip
accelerator and then for writing my "Illustrated Guide to Upgrading
the Zip GS" HyperCard IIGS stack, I contacted Western Design Center
both through their web site and through snail mail.  There has been
only one major redesign of the '816 from 1986 to present, and that
is the '816S that is generally known to WDC fans as the "14MHz" chip.

The initial design resulted in chips that come off the assembly line
capable of anything from 3MHz to 10MHz.  In order to guarantee being
able to run at a higher speed, WDC has to test the chip, which is
where cost is going to be incurred.  Initially, WDC only tested the
chips for 3MHz capability.  The majority could go faster, but WDC
did not have the testing rig needed to test the higher speeds.  Had
Apple backed WDC, they could have invested in such equipment and
generated a steady supply of 10MHz tested chips (even if only 15-20%
could muster 10MHz, Apple's volume sales would have made large
production worthwhile).

The redesigned '816S chip that is currently available can go anywhere
from 14MHz to 20MHz (and possibly more), but WDC does not have the
equipment to test above 14MHz.  That's why they are called 14MHz
chips by WDC.  The makers of the SuperCPU for the Commodore makes
an accelerator for the Commodore 64/128 based on a 65C816 clocked to
20MHz.  WDC contracts an outside testing facility to verify 20MHz
operation.

The point is that if a little company making an accelerator for the
C64 (which has been out of production _much_ longer than the A2) can
get WDC to seek help outside and thus get 20MHz chips when supposedly
only 14MHz varieties are available, think of what a little commitment
from Apple could do?


>Apple Computer never would have designed a GS using parts that were
>not readily available in stock...this was not just an Apple thing,
>it was standard business practice.  Until Western Design Center
>could produce the 10MHz versions and have mass quantities in
>stock, Apple wouldn't design a system using those chips.  And,
>Western Design Center probably wasn't going to put too much work
>into making a faster version unless Apple was going to be using
>them.
>
>We were sort of stuck in a Catch-22.
>
>Greg B.

Greg, I am not an Apple hater.  I believe that many people do not
understand the Mac just as many people did not understand the Apple
II and lashed out against it.  However, did Apple deliberately try
to hold back the development of the GS so that it would not compete
against the Mac?  I'd have to say they are guilty as charged.

-Scott G.