Re: Battle of the Nostalgics

["Phil Abel" <phil_nospam_abel@prodigy.nospam.net>]

After spending a half hour getting the case open on a Quadra last night, and
another half hour getting it back on, I am simply fond of the ability to pop
the top of a // or IIgs case in a second's time...

"Supertimer" <supertimer@aol.com> wrote in message
20030209163422.04786.00000193@mb-ce.aol.com">news:20030209163422.04786.00000193@mb-ce.aol.com...
> Now that I have had a chance to use several different
> generations of platforms, it seems clear why some
> folks are so fascinated with the Apple ][+ and others
> are so dedicated to the memory of the Apple IIGS.
>
> For every great family of hardware, there is always
> a battle between the most popular of the family and
> the most advanced.  From a technical point of view,
> it is self-evident that the Apple IIGS was the better
> computer than the ][+.  In many ways, it was better
> than the Macintosh at the time of its release (that
> would be the Macintosh Plus before the IIGS and
> the Macintosh SE slightly after for those who don't
> remember) yet represented the last of a generation
> and this is the reason there are two camps of
> Apple II users.
>
> Realizing that the IIGS was the last and greatest
> of the Apple II family, many users simply skipped
> it and jumped to the Mac.  That is why there are
> a lot of us who do not know the true capabilities
> of the IIGS and think of the entire Apple II family
> in terms of the Apple II+.
>
> I have seen this happen in other platforms.  The
> last and greatest of the AMD K6 processors, for
> example, was the K6-III+.  Scaling up to 616Mhz,
> this chip ran twice as fast per clock as the K6-2,
> the most popular of the CPU family.  It also
> blew away the first Pentium IIIs before on-die
> cache was integrated.  Yet except for those of
> us who stuck with the CPU family, the K6-III+
> is a footnote.  The K6-2 is the chip that is what
> is remembered, a model that was always slower
> than the equivalent Intel chip, a black sheep that
> is thankfully forgotten thanks to the Athlon.  In
> many ways, the Athlon was like the Macintosh.
> The Athlon was the next generation processor
> and it smoked the Pentium III.  More importantly,
> the first Athlons were already around when the
> K6-III+ appeared, just like the Mac arrived before
> the Apple IIGS.  Like Apple, AMD didn't really
> support the K6-III+.
>
> The same thing has happened with Intel with the
> Tualatin Pentium III.  Like the K6-III+, the Tualatin
> overcame the limitations of the rest of its family
> due to a die shrink to 0.13 microns.  This
> advance enabled the Tualatin to outperform the
> equivalent clocked P4 which had already been
> introduced.  Like the K6-III+, the Tualatin also
> owed part of its performance to a larger on-die
> cache.  Yet the Tualitin was just a footnote
> because it ware introduced after the P4, which
> was the generation to replace it and Intel really
> did not support the chip.
>
> There would always be those of us, the ones who
> first jumped ship to Macintosh, Athlon, and P4,
> who snide at those who remember the IIGS,
> the K6-III+, and the Tualatin PIII fondly.  Those
> users will always see the past colored in the
> view that their machines were always the kings
> of the hill.  That the previous generation richly
> deserved to be dead and burried.
>
> Yet many of us have a more accurate view of
> history.  Those of us that realize the truth know
> that in order to truly remember the glories of
> past technology, one must remember the best
> of each generation.  One cannot truly understand
> the Apple II until one understands the true nature
> of the Apple IIGS.  One cannot truly appreciate
> the K6 or PIII families until one understands the
> K6-III+ and the Tualatin PIII.
>
> So to all those who have chanced to discover an
> old Apple IIGS, do more than play that old
> Apple ][+ Defender on a DOS 3.3 5.25" disk with
> it.  Take the time to put in a hard disk drive,
> connect speakers to the audio port, find an RGB
> monitor, get a copy the best version of GS/OS
> and install it on the hard drive.  Install at least
> 4MB of memory and run the best software it is
> capable of.  Do this not to try to beat the Mac
> or PC of 2003.  That is not the point.  Do this to
> truly enjoy and understand what a great machine
> the IIGS was in its time. And above all, never
> NEVER write Apple ][GS (yuck)!