Re: why did apple go mac?

[frankc <frankc@NOSPAMsrv.net>]

> > My opinion is that Apple had a limited vision of the big picture.
> > Basically they pulled an IBM with the Mac line.
>
> One problem. The Mac was 1984. The PS/2 was 1987. It would be better to say
> that IBM pulled an Apple. The result for both was (at least in the short term)
> major losses, in money, and in influence on the whole field.

Was the PS/1 microchannel?

> > IBM was ticked that
> > everybody was cloning the XT and came out with the PS/2.  The PS/2 had a
> > proprietary bus that nobody could clone without permission from IBM.  The
> > ISA bus was and is open so anybody can make cards for it.  In much the
> > same way the Apple II bus was and is open so again anybody can make cards
> > for it.  I think it was speculated by Apple that if you make a proprietary
> > bus and make everybody pay you to make cards for it then you will be able
> > to control the market.  Wrong, if the Apple II line had continued new
> > chips would be made that would still run the original Apple II software.
> > Today we would probably have a 651000 Pro with a 1GHz clock rate running,
>
> At one point in the mid 1980s WDC thought they would have a 65832 running at
> c. 100 mhz. It shouldn't have been too difficult to have made the 65016 (16
> bit bus) and a 65032 (32 bit bus) If a certain project that a member of
> AppleLinc is working on comes to fruition, we could have a PowerPC chip
> emulating a 65816, a mythical 65832, and/or running in native mode, all in a
> IIGS case. That would be cool.

Yes, that would.