Re: A Tale of Two Apples

[shack@deimos.frii.com (Randy Shackelford)]

In article <17OCT199723141927@vax2.concordia.ca>,
Mitchell Spector <spec@vax2.concordia.ca> wrote:

>    What killed the Apple IIgs was _Apple Computer_. Other than the fact
>that the Macintosh SE had a higher vertical screen resolution and more
>powerful 68000 processor (although not necessarily much faster in terms
>of noticable speed) the SE was inferior to the Apple IIgs. As for the
>Macintosh II, with a price tag near $10k, it was well out of any average
>person's price range (making the IIgs a slow, poor-man's Macintosh II).

I'm remembering more like five grand for Mac IIs. 

>    It was absolutely disgusting that Apple was shipping the GS with just
>256K of memory for the first 2 years the machine was out! Out of the box
>the computer could not run any of the GS-specific software titles out
>there, this was plain stupidity (it would be like selling a car without
>a gas-tank and engine, later informing the customer they'd have to buy
>that as an extra option when they discovered the car won't run!). It was
>not until late 1989 that the GS shipped with a full 1 MB of memory out
>of the box, pretty much towards the end of its life span (and by that
>time most applications were demanding 2 MB or more).

Apple started bundling memory cards some time in '87, and the dealer where
I got my original IIgs in March '87 did so before that. You really need to
keep in mind that in those days memory cost $, and putting a lot in the
box would run the price up. It's really not that big a deal to put in a
memory card, especially nowadays.

One time I mentioned to a service guy during one of the many logic board
swaps my IIgs had to have early on that I wanted a 1.5 mb memory card and
he said "not good for much unless you're heavy into RAM disk usage."

>    Another annoyance was the lack of a built-in SCSI port. The Macintosh
>Plus had one from the beginning, the Macintosh SE even allowed you to add
>a hardrive internally. In order to make a IIgs usable, as most here know,
>that has always required a hardrive. Why did Apple not ever add that?

It'd be rev C speed if it were built in, who wants that? For those who
bought //e's new and popped the lid and saw an array of slots and a vast
empty space around them, this is no surprise or bother either. Adding cards
is easily done. And suppose you didn't want SCSI? Would you want to have
to pay for it anyway? Wasn't really cheap back then. I didn't get a hard
disk until my IIgs was over three years old, and paid $350 for a 30 mb
drive in mid '90. Another thing to keep in mind in these days of $100/gig
hard disks.

>Or why was the 'Video Graphic Controller' chip never updated to support
>a 400 vertical resolution mode, or more than 16 colors per scanline? Or
>why was the Ensoniq chip given only half its usable memory capability or
>no built-in stereo-out/sound-in connector on back? Where were the faster
>65C816 chips in the machine?
>
>    Leaving these things purposely out made it clear Apple was not serious
>about the Apple IIgs, and if you wanted a "serious" product you had to buy
>their Macintosh. The Apple IIgs was just there if you wanted an Apple made
>product (as opposed to Commodore/Atari solutions) for school, home or hobby.

That must mean that when Chevrolet left Corvette features out of Chevettes,
they weren't serious about selling Chevettes. I think I see a lot more
Chevettes on the road though. Every product made by any company has a
target market and a price tag to match.

>>Against both of these machines, with Apple not even informing the dealers
>>that hard disc solutions were available for the Apple IIgs, or that they
>>could be expanded beyond 1.25 Meg with 3rd party boards, the Apple IIgs
>>didn't stand a chance.  The dealers made the IIgs look like a toy - and
>>that was because they didn't know any better because Apple wasn't telling
>them.
>
>    Yep, yet another digusting thing Apple did. Despite the fact the IIgs
>outsold all other computers Apple was selling (including the Macintosh)
>they decided to completely cut all its marketing and advertising. Suddenly
>it had become too popular and threaten Macintosh sales (actually it did
>more than that, it beat Mac sales). Apple's solution was to just an hide
>the fact it existed from the public eye, keep its price tag very high
>(higher than a fully equipped Mac setup) and sit on its growth. It was
>never discontinued as it remained an excellent cash-cow, at least for a
>couple of years.

Even though it seems ludicrous to think they have to do so, Apple did
promote other companies' products for the IIgs early on. I have some old
dealer propaganda wich talks about the kind of software you could get to r
run on it. The dealer where my IIgs came from had quite a stock of addon
stuff too, e.g. a whole shelf of AE peripherals on display.

>    There was one point Apple actually went around telling companies to
>stop producing Apple IIgs software back in 1990 (one of the reasons so
>many titles were never completed and sat in limbo). When the Apple it-

I'd need to see some proof of this. I figure it was driven by market factors,
similar to the way less and less Mac software is coming out in 68K versions
these days.

>self refused to support the machine, drop its price or enhance its
>features, many software companies didn't even need to be told to stop.
>There was lots of potential in the machine, but how wanted to spend
>several thousand dollars for a bare-bones computer, then spend several
>thousands more to buy 3rd party solutions to put in what Apple LEFT OUT.

Three words: "third party opportunity". That's the reason Apple gave for
not including external video in the first generation Powerbooks. Boy seems
like they're damned if they don't support third party companies and if they
don't build in everything under the sun too.

>And after all that, find out software companies were dropping support
>because Apple didn't want to back the machine? Once again, it was Apple
>that killed the machine. Not piracy, not the Mac (not directly anyhow)
>and not other reasons people out there may believe. I really don't think
>there was ever any other computer more negelected by a company than the
>Apple IIgs (the Amiga would be my second choice, but at least Commodore
>kept the price competitive and updated the hardware). Its really sad
>when you think about it, and Apple hasn't really changed its ways.

How do you figure? Apple's been offering logic board upgrades all along,
and new boxes have the processor on a swappable card so you can up the speed
with Apple or third party processor cards. Plus they have pledged that 
Rhapsody will run on any box built from the 9500s on, and that box debuted
in summer '95. And Mac OS 8.0 runs on my six year old Quadra 700.
-- 
Randy Shackelford                                 
shack@frii.com