Re: A Tale of Two Apples

[nathan@visi.com (Nathan Mates)]

In article <199710311057353439274@slip129-37-106-131.wa.us.ibm.net>,
B.J. Major <bjblackbear@ibm.net> wrote:
>I don't know what you are getting at here, except that you seem to be
>harkening back to the memory question and exactly how much of it the GS
>shipped with.  That is NOT disputable; it is a known fact exactly how
>much memory the early GS shipped with.  Now, whether it was enough
>memory to do what a certain person needed is a whole different ballgame,
>and a question I've tried to keep separate, but you insist on lumping it
>in altogether.

   Simply because the GS initially shipped with not enough memory to
be fully useful, in case you haven't comprehended any of the posts
explaining this in the past. I'm going to try and keep this to short
words to hopefully get this through your skull (or do we need pictures
for the poor Mac user [pronounced 'Inferiority complex'] here).

   With 256K of RAM, the GS could NOT load the operating system, the
GS-specific tool sets which allow it to put up a Mac-like UI, and any
reasonable application. In fact, there's no way you *could* completely
load just the OS and the ram based tools whatsoever. Is that a problem?
Heck yes, and you're in denial.

   Therefore, this machine could NOT do what apple sold it as-- a
small color mac compatible with Apple IIs; you needed to buy more
memory to make it usable. Someone should have set up a complaint to
the BBB, as this is a classic bait and switch operation. Please remove
your blinders; Apple sold a machine without the RAM to live up to its
billings.

Nathan Mates

--
<*> Nathan Mates http://www.visi.com/~nathan/      <*>
# This posting is copyright Nathan Mates, and may not be reprinted
# in full, partial, or quoted form on any archive site associated with
# Charles Turley.