Re: why did apple go mac?

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

guy-jin <guyvf@my-deja.com> wrote:

> why did apple 'upgrade' to the macintosh when
>the ][ series was still going strong? i mean the
>][GS came after the mac! why switch? why didn't
>apple just keep improving the ]['s, like IBM did
>with the PC?

Ok, I know what an Apple IIGS can do and if anyone tells you
that Apple switched because the IIGS was the best that an
Apple II can be, don't believe them.  Apple could absolutely
have kept improving on the Apple II concept well beyond the
IIGS.  I only recently fully switched to the PC.  My IIGS has
been expanded to over 1GB of storage, CD-ROM and Zip
drive media for removable storage, and 8MB of RAM.  It
even has an SVGA card and the processor is five times the
original speed.  When the Mac LC and the '486 were the
high tech models of the day, my IIGS could hold its own
against any of them and, in my opinion, did the tasks I
wanted to do (word processing, page layout, and telecom)
better.  The printed page, produced on an ink jet printer
with truetype fonts, was indistinguisable from that of a PC
or Mac.

So why did Apple give up on the Apple II?  In my opinion,
they did so because of the "vision" of Steve Jobs.  Well,
ok, there was a rivalry between Jobs and Wozniak and
Jobs wanted something he could say Woz was not a part
of.  That's one issue.  Since Woz created the II, Jobs felt
the need to get it out of the way.  But back to the vision.
Steve Jobs has always and consistently championed the
closed, self-contained system.  The first Mac was this.
And now that Jobs is back, we have iMacs and G4 cubes.
All of these point to the vision of a closed system that
the user does not have to think of.

The downside to a closed system is lack of expansion.
I think one reason Apple dropped the II was because of
this shift from the open, expandable system to a closed,
convenient one.

The Apple II was simply incompatible with the Jobs vision.
He has a point.  There are those who would prefer a
machine like the iMac.  But I think most Apple II users
would want more.  Having used a IIGS, I felt right at home
upgrading my PC.  What do I think of the G4 Mac cube in
contrast?  I think it is fantastic but I think that if I were to
get one, next year I would be unhappy.  This is the basic
difference: do you want the packaged deal or the open
system?  I think many PC users who liked packaged
deals would actually like an iMac or G4 cube better.  But
I think that most Apple II users would be more at home
with a PC than with a Mac.

I no longer harbor a grudge against Apple.  You see, the
modern day Apple II is here.  It is just not made by Apple.
Just get a nice AMD 1Ghz Athlon system, open up the
case, and start configuring the PC the way YOU want it.
Put in the video card YOU want and the sound card YOU
want.  Put in all the memory YOU want.  Even modify the
hardware the way YOU like.  Sound familiar?  Apple II
users with our seven slots (plus model specific slots like
the IIGS memory expansion slot) know the joy of this all
too well.  It is all here in the PC world as well.  The PC is
the modern day Apple II.

Apple going with the Mac has simply given us a choice
should you like the closed system.