Re: Apple ///?

[bjbear@ibm.net (B.J. Major & Dennis J. Gorin)]

In article <5hv3nk$370$1@news.vanderbilt.edu>,
NOleshSPAMerjtHERE@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Tilghman Lesher) wrote:

> In article <bjbear-ya023680000104971052130001@news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net>, 
> B.J. Major & Dennis J. Gorin (bjbear@ibm.net) wrote:
> : No, I never said that.  But there is a *complete* set of  System 6.0.1
> : software there on Apple's FTP sites (formerly for which you had to pay),
> : Appleshare set up for //gs & Mac, SCSI utilities, CD ROM utilities, Copy
> : utilities, etc.  As a -new-to-gs-but-not-new-to-Apple //-user, I've taken
> : advantage of almost everything they have there.
> 
> Heh.  I've got the complete set of the first OS for the Apple I on my
> ftp site.  Considering there wasn't any, that's not much to say.

So what's your point?  That there is NOTHING at the Apple FTP site?  I've
just listed otherwise.

> 
> : I guess you would rather they offer *nothing* for Apple // at their FTP
> : sites at this point.  I disagree.  And if they offered nothing at this
> : point, you'd have THAT to bitch & complain about.  No matter what they did
> : now, they couldn't please people like yourself.
> 
> No, because, you see, it's not what they're trying to do now which upsets
> me.  Primarily, it's the rotten decisions they've made in the PAST which
> gets the people on this newsgroup upset.

When are you people going to let this go????   The decision has been made,
a long time ago now.  It was a corporate decision, like it or not.  Every
other company I know of makes and discontinues models of items they make on
a very regular basis.  It's disappointing at first, sure.  But I don't see
any other group griping and picketing at their doorstep.  You have to move
on from here.

> 
> Apple may be perfectly wonderful now (it's not, but that's another
> argument), but that STILL does not excuse the really stupid decisions
> they've made in the past.

Holding permanent grudges the way you are doing benefits NO ONE.

> 
> : > And I suppose if they stuck with the Apple II and supported it actively,
> : > they would still have this problem?  During the 80s, most schools were
> : > Apple II-based, at least in the classrooms with the kids.  When the Apple
> : > II was axed, a lot of schools switched over to PC clones.
> 
> : Regardless of whatever Apple decided to do with the // line, I can assure
> : you that Apple // would no longer be the standard in schools now.  Not with
> : 32 and 64 bit machines reigning as king.  It's the *90s*, not the 80's
> : anymore!  Schools would have had to switch to something else eventually
> : when the 8/16 bit computer revolution was over.  Most of them I'm aware of
> : switched to Macintosh and are only now buying PC clones to supplement their
> : computer labs.
> 
> The x86 is still the x86, which was around in the 70s.  The 65xxx is no
> longer a supported machine.

And pray tell, just who is making stuff for the x86 OR supporting it?  No
one I know of.
 
> But people could trust the Apple II, which is why it retained market
> share.  The Mac was a completely new machine, which had no public record.
> Let's face it, when you're a school administrator, and the current
> computers are no longer supported, and you've got a choice whether to
> go to something completely new or something which has a reputation, which
> would you choose?  Obviously, the old standard IBM.

"Old standard"????????????  IBMs didn't debut until the very early 1980s. 
The 128K first Mac came out in 1984.  IBMs didn't have any "long standing
tradition" here!


> The software which runs on the 8086 will still run on the 80686.  Why not
> Apple?

It will.  There are plenty of Apple // emulators on the Mac for those who
want to do that kind of thing.

--bj
Apple //--///--Macintosh user/supporter/collector