Re: When you can't prove anything, just flame

[KILPATRICK@Tank.CYBERphile.co.uk (Richard)]

In article <4tumdj$sdc@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>, dalloff@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Dave Althoff) says:
>
>Richard (KILPATRICK@Tank.CYBERphile.co.uk) wrote:
>(quoting someone whose ID I snipped...sorry...)
>: >   When I talk about the Apple II line, I talk about the following:
>: >the IIGS, the //e, //c, IIc+, ][+, and Apple ][. Each based on what
>: >its name tends to appear as on the case and/or startup screen.
>
>: Normally I wouldn't follow this is up. But, for once, Hear Hear.
>
>: As a dedicated user of ][, // and II in the CORRECT place, I can only
>: agree with this.Exept I use lower case IIgs, as on the case :).
>
>Well, I tend to refer to the Apple ][, Apple ][+, Apple ][e, Apple //e
>(quick way to distinguish between the original ][e and the enhanced //e,
>don't you think?), //c, //c+, and IIgs.  Though I may have used "][gs" on
>occasion just to be contrary.  And for me, the generic family name is Apple
>][.

Internally (i.e. in my files on Apple ][) I refer to the various //e 
systems as: //e (original) //ep (unenhanced, cheap plastic case!) //eu
(Upgraded //e to //e enhanced), //ec (enhanced //e), //ep (platinum //e)
and //ex (Extended keyboard //e).

I differentiate between the last two because I have been told that the
Platinum //e came with a small keyboard as well. Unless anyone knows
different...

Yes, I know the platinum has IIe screen-printed on the case. I guess
that would be shorter than my defs, but who's going to know what I'm 
referring to?

Regards,
Richard

PS - I have another IIgs called Gus...