Re: Of course we can trust Apple for our next

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

"Edwin E. Thorne" <ethorne@chicagonet.net> wrote:

>No, I'm not kidding.  The C64 had all the hardware features of the Apple II
>and a GUI called GEOS too.

Not all.  The Apple IIe had 80 columns and 128k standard as well
as much faster floppy drives.  It was expandable to 1MB and beyond.
I think the Apple IIe/IIc was more similar to the Commodore 128.
There was GEOS for the IIe/IIc too and Todd Elliot, a Commodore
programmer, tells me that the internals are almost identical to
Commodore 128 GEOS from a programmers point of view.

What the Apple IIe lacked was a sound chip and sprites.  It was
a much inferior a graphics and sound machine to the C64...but
the Apple II leaped into the Amiga class with the GS.

I looked up the C65...a very impressive computer.  The screen
resultions were superior to the Atari ST, Amiga, and Apple IIGS.
However, it lacked the 4096 color 12-bit palette of these three
computers.  Atari, Amiga, or GS graphics would have had better
color, even if less resolution.  Of course the GS' 15 voice, 32
channel sound chip gave it superior sound.

This would be how I would classify the analogy:

C64 = Apple II+ (enhanced with a Phasor 12-voice FM sound card)
Apple IIe/IIc = Commodore 128
Apple IIGS = Amiga