Re: OS For IIGS

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

In article "Greg J. Buchner" <buchner@freenet.msp.mn.us> writes...

>On 25 Nov 1997, Mitchell Spector wrote:
>
>> I'm talking about generic clones,
>> not brand-name clones like Compaq, Dell or IBM which generally ARE
>> expensive.
>
>But the Macintosh _IS_ a brand name computer...to be realistic you
>have to compare it to a like computer manufacturer.

    When you purchase a brand-name PC computer (such as those listed
above) you are generally paying extra for the name. Clones assembled
from generic parts are not any lesser, in fact they are often better
because _you_ hand pick what goes in. Come to think of it, the only
parts that are generic are the towercase, floppy drive, memory and
internal cables. Most people do not put much attention into the
purchase of those items, and when they do, it is just the size of
the case (miniture, medium or large) and the speed and type of SIMMs.

    People assembling their own systems often do care about the
brand of motherboard (there are brand-name boards), brand of CD-
ROM drive, brand of monitor display, keyboard, mouse, sound and
video card, hardrives, etc. I think it is a fair comparison, you 
can and often _will_ assemble a high quality and powerful system. 
In fact I know I could put together a nicer and higher quality 
system than anything Apple Computer is selling. Once again, I'm 
just picking what goes in, I get to be quality control. If you buy 
from Apple you trust in them to be quality control. That may sound 
good, but I've noticed Apple putting in cheap parts lately because 
they figure most people won't notice the difference. Computers are
quickly becoming something for the general public who know very
little or nothing about them. Anyone notice how contrast and
brightness knobs are starting to become a luxury on new monitors
sold today? Or printers without on/off switches? Talk about 
cutting corners to the extreme...

>And why should Apple license the Mac motherboard...IBM never went
>and licensed the IBM PC...someone just reversed engineered it and
>put the bios on the market.  Let's seem someone do that for the
>Macintosh.

    Well because a propritary system is not going to make it.
Remember when there were dozens of generic Apple II clones on
the market? Brand-name clones and even no-name motherboards
and cards you could purchase at just about any computer shop,
to build your own Apple II? The Apple II was at its peak of
popularity during this era. Notice how once Apple stomped out
all the clone manufacturers it become less and less mainstream?

    When I was interesting in the Apple II back in 1982-83 or
so, I couldn't afford a real Apple II Plus or the then new
Apple IIe. However, I found an Apple II clone for a fraction
of the price and with more features than the official Apple 
offered and that is what I bought. Everyone I knew had an 
Apple II, it was almost like a mirror image of what the PC
clone market is today (on a much smaller scale, certainly,
but the Apple II was mainstream). I think the Macintosh
would do better, grow and change if it were allowed to be
freely cloned and copied. It would also change the software
and hardware market. Unfortunately it may already be too
late to change things, and even if there were a window of
opportunity to open the Macintosh market, Apple is doing
everything it can do to close it now.

Mitchell Spector
spec@vax2.concordia.ca