Re: Apple Computer, What Are You Up To?

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

Randy Shackelford <shack@onyx.southwind.net> wrote:

>Mike Kent <Mkent01@galileo.cris.com> wrote:
>
>:> Seeing how all this new innovation and energy has not only revived the
>:> Apple, but the whole computer industry, I am well willing to go with
>:> current wave of change.  Especially since it leads to the future.
>
>: But why do you think this is an either/or decision?  What I think
>: Supertimer is trying to say -- and what I know I am -- is that maintaining
>: backwards compatibility allows users to upgrade at their own pace and
>: their own budget, not Apple's.
>
>While forcing needless complexity on everyone? And, as has been pointed out,
>you can use SCSI cards, USB to serial converters, and ethernet to localtalk
>converters to get the same thing. I also have read talk about a so called
>"legacy card" which I presume provides all those ports. G3s still have ADB
>by the way. The things on new boxes that I don't care for are being forced 
>to use twisted pair ethernet and those garish looking new cases.

It is NOT needless complexity.  Like I said, forcing users to buy
expensive adapters to run OLD investments is not user friendly.
What can be more user friendly than both old and new ports at
the back of the computer?  Can't Apple provided five models with
both types of ports (USB and legacy) before chopping off the old
ports?  That's ALWAYS what Win/DOS PC manufacturers have
done and their users have always been happy.  I mean, why do
you think Apple has such big success and failure cycles?  It is
because they come up with a great innovation that attracts lots of
new converts, but then when those new users become old users,
every new model of computer from Apple that alienates old users
that have investments in current peripherals causes some to either
defect or not upgrade at all.

Remember, Apple considers the current Apple computer owner
who does not upgrade to be "no longer using Apple machines."
For example, we are all using Apple IIGS units, but Steve Jobs
says "no one uses those anymore."  Same can be said about the
Quadra user, probably.  Apple/Jobs only sees you if you are willing
to continually convert.  Drop your current hardware whether it is
from the Win/DOS world OR the Apple world and follow the
"next big thing."

>: As I sit here typing this on my IIgs, right behind my keyboard is a 1978
>: vintage Disk ][ 5-1/4" drive attached to a 1978 vintage Disk ][ controller
>: card in slot 6.  It sits right next to my 1999 vintage Iomega Zip drive
>: attached to my SCSI card in slot 7.  The two are perfectly happy sharing
>: the desktop together, and the GS works great with both.  Why should I be
>: forced to make a choice between the two?
>
>I on the other hand have a superdrive card with one drive attached, a SCSI 
>card with hard disk and CD drive attached, and localtalk networking. My 5.25
>drives have been mothballed for years. So I guess it's just a matter of using
>what you like/need. I see you mentioned that it takes a SCSI card to connect 
>your Zip drive too. Kinda like if you had a G3, no?

But there was never an Apple II with a built in SCSI port!  The SCSI
card is an UPGRADE.  Whereas, Apple and its defenders seem to
think that sticking an SCSI card in a new G3 or buying a USB to
SCSI adapter for an iMac is a DOWNGRADE.

I think it is better to compare the power and keyboard ports of the
first Apple IIGS units.  They had both ADB and IIGS power
connectors on the motherboard AND old IIe keyboard and power
connectors.  You could retrofit your current IIe unit with the new
IIGS motherboard.  It was only later in the ROM 3 that they took
out the IIe connectors.  The ROM 00/ROM 01 motherboard was
the transition.  Another example is the way the ROM 00/ROM 01
accesses the mouse.  The ROM 00/ROM 01 could use your old
IIe mouse and mouse card in GS/OS.  The ROM 3 unit could not.
Again, provide a transition in the initial new models, only to take
it out later on.