Re: Awks stuff

[tpe123@gaol.com (escobedo)]

In article <1998061222022600.SAA12579@ladder01.news.aol.com>, a2mg@aol.com
(A2MG) wrote:

> >> Rubywand 
> >Appleworks 2
> 
> No. For 128k, AppleWorks 3 is better than either  2 or 4. I can think of no
> reason why AW 2 would be preferred over 3.
> 
> Bev

All kidding aside, you made your point so much more elegantly than
Dickhead Mates ever could. After tasting AW 2 from Asimov, perhaps your
comments can convince someone to *purchase* AW 3, given that it is, in
fact, superior to AW 2.

Unfortunately, I won't be one of those who upgrade. And here is why:

No amount of upgrades, hardware or software, will make *ANY* Apple II half
as functional as the multitude of $50 486s or Macs flooding the used
markets now. For all intents and purposes, the A2 IS dead.

It is a bit sad that the A2 won't see much more commercial development
because of "pirates". A pragmatic view is that pirating is a fact of life
and the cost of doing business for a software maker. But I think a bigger
factor than pirates is that any money spent on an A2 just won't add much
value. Obsolescence is inevitable. 

This is not, however, a slam against the Apple II. I own two. They have
great sentimental value and even greater hacker value. They were truly
great machines -last decade. And even though the Apple II may be dead, I
still find some joy in using the machines.