Re: Apple ///?

[bjbear@ibm.net (B.J. Major & Dennis J. Gorin)]

> Let's just suppose that I stick a binary of a program which runs on
> a 4004 on my web site.  Oooooh.  Guess that makes me have "some software
> support" for the 4004 on my web site, right?  Or even a binary which runs
> on an Apple I.  Wow!  I'm now an active supporter of the Apple I, right?

No, I never said that.  But there is a *complete* set of  System 6.0.1
software there on Apple's FTP sites (formerly for which you had to pay),
Appleshare set up for //gs & Mac, SCSI utilities, CD ROM utilities, Copy
utilities, etc.  As a -new-to-gs-but-not-new-to-Apple //-user, I've taken
advantage of almost everything they have there.

> > No, they have no obligation to stick this on their web site, and yes, it's
> nice to see that it's there.  However, this does not constitute "some
> software support."  This constitutes a lame attempt to look like they
> still give a damn.  Which I'm having a hard time buying.

I guess you would rather they offer *nothing* for Apple // at their FTP
sites at this point.  I disagree.  And if they offered nothing at this
point, you'd have THAT to bitch & complain about.  No matter what they did
now, they couldn't please people like yourself.

> : > : And the decision to "kill off the Apple //" has nothing
> : > : to do with the present state of affairs at Apple Computer.
> : > : Their present problems are caused by these things:
> : > 
> : > : 1.  Insufficient and weak advertising--especially television.
> : > 
> : > During the Apple ][ years, Apple showed exactly ONE (1) television ad
> : > per year.  This is likely not the problem.
> 
> : It is a different world now.  Companies live and die by
> : advertising.  Last night during a one-hour prime time tv
> : show, I saw three ads for IBM and their computers.  Microsoft
> : is hammering away at the public with "Where do you want to go
> : today?".  If Apple does not get in an aggressive position,
> : the public will believe the hype about the company not being
> : significant anymore and think it doesn't even exist.
> 
> And I suppose if they stuck with the Apple II and supported it actively,
> they would still have this problem?  During the 80s, most schools were
> Apple II-based, at least in the classrooms with the kids.  When the Apple
> II was axed, a lot of schools switched over to PC clones.

Regardless of whatever Apple decided to do with the // line, I can assure
you that Apple // would no longer be the standard in schools now.  Not with
32 and 64 bit machines reigning as king.  It's the *90s*, not the 80's
anymore!  Schools would have had to switch to something else eventually
when the 8/16 bit computer revolution was over.  Most of them I'm aware of
switched to Macintosh and are only now buying PC clones to supplement their
computer labs.

> : > 
> : > : 2.  Waiting much too long to license the Mac OS & hardware to
> : > : Mac clone makers.
> : > 
> : > This wasn't a problem for the Apple II; in fact, Apple sued clone makers.
> 
> : This is a moot point.  When you're the only game in town
> : you can charge anything you want and get away with it
> : because the public needs it.  IBM clones killed off this
> : whole idea forever.
> 
> IBM clones were in direct competition with the Apple II.

My point, exactly.  Clones were made almost immediately for IBM computers,
while Apple continued to hold the reins so tightly that no one could
legally MAKE either an Apple // or Mac clone.  So by doing this, Apple
priced themselves right out of the market entirely.

> : > : 4.  Bad management and bad CEOs (present one excluded) for the
> : > : last several
> : > : years--enough to do it permanent damage from which it may not recover.
> : > 
> : > Apple ALWAYS has had bad management.  Apple ///.  Lisa.  Mac part 1.
> 
> Sculley was at the helm when they killed the Apple II.  I think he's one
> of the "bad CEOs" which you mentioned above.
> 
> : > : I don't happen to agree with Apple's decision to axe
> : > : the // line (especially the //gs), but the Macintosh
> : > : was gaining strong momentum and much more visible and
> : > : in use as a standard platform than what we see now. 
> : > : To blame Apple's present problems on the decision to
> : > : axe the // line is shortsighted at the least.
> : > 
> : > No, accurate.  And it would be LONGsighted, anyway.
> 
> : Let's say for argument's sake that the 8-bit // line was
> : discontinued when they did, but they left open further
> : development of the //gs.  Just how long do you think this
> : could have gone on?  Computers are now pushing 64 bit CPUs
> : and such; a machine with a dual 8/16 bit CPU as the //gs
> : has would not have lasted much longer.  It would have had
> : to eventually get totally revised, rebuilt, new CPU to
> : replace the old, new OS, etc. etc.  So what would be left
> : of what you now know as the //gs?  Not much.
> 
> Hmmmm.  I believe "Lemonade Stand", as well as all those other educational
> programs would still run native, and the schools would still be using them.

I like all the old Apple // educational software, but let's face it--that
looks pretty dated now that we have CD ROM multimedia and the
like....something like that (lemonade stand) would not be sophisticated
enough for today's students.

> 
> The hardware may change, but the software lives on.

The software and hardware is only living on for us hobbiests who want to
support it.  It is no longer a viable tool for the general public to go out
and buy.

> 
> For example, how long do you think Microsoft would stay in the market, if
> they suddenly announced that they were no longer going to support the x86
> architecture; instead, they were going to produce software exclusively
> for a completely new machine which they call the "MicroSloth"? 

New Microsoft sofware (Win '95 and others) will not run on older PCs.  At
least with Apple, older Apple // stuff runs on the "newest" Apple // and
90% of old Mac hardware can run System 7.5.5.  I say that's pretty darn
good.

--bj
Apple //--///--Macintosh user/supporter/collector