Re: What apple ][ is the best?

[spec@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector)]

In article louiss@gate.net (Louis Schulman) writes...

>In spec@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector) writes:
>>In article "mflynch" <mflynch@msn.com> writes...
>>
>>>What is the best kind of Apple II? (//, //+,//c, ect...)
>>>E-mail me at prodos3@geocities.com
>>>
>>>Tell me what you think
>>
>>    Simple. Without a doubt, the Apple IIGS.
>
>Well, there is some doubt.  From the point of view of capabilities, you of
>course are right, since the GS has the most features, 16-bit CPU, etc.
>But of course it is also the most recent.  I'll bet I can equip a 300 MHz
>Pentium Pro to outperform a GS, but what is the point?

    Of course you can equip a 300 MHz Pentium to outperform a GS -- or
for that matter you could equip a 486, or even lowly 386 in most cases
to do the same. Though exactly what _is the point_ here? The person
asked what is the best Apple II computer available, and the answer is
clearly the IIgs, and there is no debating it.

    If you want to talk about price as a barrier, that hasn't been
so for at least 5 or 6 years now. You can purchase a IIgs almost as
inexpensively as you would any 8-bit Apple II (people used to avoid
the Apple IIgs because its cost, but that is no longer an issue).

>To me, the GS is simply a different computer representative of the time it was
>made.  The 8-bit Apples, however, are among the most historically significant
>computers of all time.  They were in production 16 years.  And amazingly, 
>they can be equipped to perform tasks never even dreamed of when they were 
>first made.

    So what your saying here is the Apple IIGS is not an Apple II?
It can seem like that, it is very different from any other Apple II
computer ever made -- it doesn't even look like an Apple II for that
matter. I suppose the reason you might see it as not being related
to the Apple II family is because change occurred, it is the first
and *only* Apple II computer that used new technology. All the other
models are just minor variations of the original 1977 Apple II. From
the II Plus right up to IIc Plus, little ever changed.

>My choice would be the //e, since while still incorporating the same basic
>features as the first Apple ][, including a tape drive port, nonetheless
>supports many modern features.  It is a true classic.  The GS, whatever
>its abilities, is much less significant, and represents, for good or for
>bad, a modern computer on the path not followed.

    That's a surprise to me. What "modern features" does the Apple IIe
support? It is relatively unchanged from the original Apple II, other
than the fact it supports a full ASCII keyboard, the equivalent of a
built-in Language card and a bank-switching auxiliary slot replacing
slot 0 (making Double-Hi-Res and 80 columns text possible).

    You can use an Apple IIgs as strictly an 8-bit classic Apple II,
but you get the benefits having things built-in that normally have
to waste a slot (i.e. 5.25 and 3.5 disk controller, clock, RGB video
card, Slinky Memory card, two Serial cards, sound card, mouse card,
Workstation/LocalTalk Card, accelerator card, etc). I know people
who used the GS inside an Apple IIe case and did exactly that.

    I just popped the lid off my IIe, all the slots are full. Now,
if you look at things, every single card would be duplicated in a
GS -- 512K Auxiliary board, a 1 MB Slinky card, Super Serial Card,
Accelerator IIe, Mouse Card, Phasor sound card, 5.25 card and Time-
Master II clock card. Remember when the IIc came out? People had a
dilemma -- did they want the expansion slots of the IIe, or the
built-in features of the IIc? Well the IIgs solved that, it put
both into one box plus added modern features to boot.

>I think there has been a real trend towards forgetting about the 8-bit
>Apples and focusing on the GS.  In the long run, however, it the 8-bitters
>that will be remembered and honored, and rightly so.

    Die hard 8-bit Apple II users have always been bitter about the
Apple IIgs. Go read any old copy of InCider or A+, there were many
letters which complained the magazine focused too much on the GS
and forgot about the classics like the II Plus, IIe and IIc. The
thing is the Apple IIGS was and still is the future of the Apple
II, it allows you to be backwards compatible yet at the same time
is able to move forward (well, to a point today. These days its
age is starting to show when people push it to do "modern" tasks).

    I used to be an Apple II Plus user, but I had no problem going
over to the IIGS. I was able to continue using the machine as if
I still had a II Plus (for as long as I needed) and still try some
of the things modern computers were doing at the time. That was the
beauty of the machine, it had one foot in the past and one in the
present/future. IBMs are nice that way too, they also looked
backwards and forwards.

Mitchell Spector
spec@vax2.concordia.ca