Re: Apple Drops Backward Compatibility for Next MacOS

[pubpc1@library.ucla.edu]

"Sam Franklin" <frankl1@korvair.com> wrote:
>Your "superior" IIgs (dwarfed in features and in the marketplace by the
>Amiga and Atari ST -- not to mention the Mac itself) ran at a mere 2Mhz.
>Also, in 1986 Sculley was running the company (he introduced the Apple
>IIgeewhiz).
>
>Sam
>
>pubpc1@library.ucla.edu wrote in article
><55asnc$1n4o@uni.library.ucla.edu>...
>> That's what I mean.  In 1986, the Mac was selling very badly.  Apple was
>> surviving only based on Apple II sales.  But Steve Jobs kept pushing the
>> Mac, against all business reason.  Even after the superior IIGS came out.
>

Sam, like we have posted many times over, the 65816 is clocked differently.
Benchmarks show that that "2MHz" (actually, 2.8MHz) chip runs slightly
faster than a 6MHz 80286 and slightly slower than the 68000.

Think, man!  The IIGS runs a GUI.  If the 65816 were clocked the same way
as the 80286 or 68000, how in the world does it pull off this feat?

See my post in response to Chris and also take a look at what Nate and David
posted regarding how you cannot compare MHz between processors.  You have
to compare real world speed.