Re: What's to become of the Apple II?

[rubywand@aol.com]

In article <3293D4DF.FBB@primenet.com>, "Charles P. Hobbs"
<transit@primenet.com> writes:

>
>I tend to doubt it. . .Apple's got too much invested in the Power Mac
>based machines.
>

     Apple, Inc. seems to agree. They appear to be getting out of the
P-Mac manufacturing business. More and more, Mac's will be made by
cloners.
  

>. .If Apple's leaving the Mac world, it's going down
>pretty quickly. 
>

     The strategy would be to transfer manufacturing of Mac, IIe, etc.
products to third parties. The company would, over time, sell-off a large
chunk of its manufacturing component, while, where possible,
contracting-out use of its facilities for production by cloners.

     Apple does not seem to be "leaving the Mac world" or, even, "the II
world". It is, evidently, angling to become a kind of computer products
development company. It develops, promotes, licenses, and, to some extent,
supports, products. It may do initial production runs and marketing; but,
third-party makers take the big risks associated with large-scale
manufacturing and sales.

     In case all of the "seems", "appears", etc. qualifiers do not make it
clear, we are talking about an extrapolation, not some 'inside
information'. Apple _seems_ to have chosen a strategy which will, if it
works, free it of its manufacturing component albatross.

     Is Apple "going down pretty quickly"? The company does appear to be
engaged in a 'controlled collapse'. A risk is that, at some point, income
will fail to match projections and the collapse will be impossible to
halt. Manufacturing is an albatross, in part, _because_ it supplies a
measure of security. To be free of the albatross is to lose the security
it provides.



>It'd be hard to believe them coming out with a 68XXX based machine 
>again,
>much less something based on the 65816. . .
>
>

     So long as a third party is willing to take the big risks, Apple may
back almost anything.


Rubywand