Re: Action needed or Apple becomes a looser!

[johnlb@primenet.com (John Bowling)]

In article <treiter-0807961503290001@remote-44.modems.comet.net>,
Toby Reiter <treiter@comet.net> wrote:
>Rubywand,
>I think the idea of a Super II would be a great idea, but do you really
>think that it is a viable option for Apple Inc. at this time?  I know
>people have said that it would be possible to package a high powered Apple
>II computer at a relatively ionexpensive price, but how much of that is
>realistic?  Even if Apple could create the components necessary to create
>a killer Apple II, would people buy an Apple II platform computer.  Can
>you imagine the dialog which would take place at the computer store:
>CUSTOMER: So, can it run Windows 95?
>DEALER: No.

Why not under emulation?

>CUSTOMER: How about Windows?
>DEALER: No.

Why not?

>CUSTOMER: It's an Apple. Can it run Macintosh software?
>DEALER: No.

Why not?

>CUSTOMER: Well is it fast? Like 120 mhz?
>DEALER: Actually, its 40mhz.
>(Granted this would create a computer which would kick the pants off any
>other (almost), but average Joe Schmoe has no idea) what megahertz really
>mean).

Now, why not do the same dirty advertizing gimmic they do with IBM's and put
in a 200+ MHz crystal and divide it down?  Given it's real speed, no one 
could tell!

>CUSTOMER: I think I'll go buy a PC clone. Thank You.

But it would be a PC clone, and Mac clone, and, bets of all, an Apple II
clone.

>See, even if Apple could create a new Apple II computer, it would not be
>bought for the simple reason that it would not be backwards compatible to
>any previously "undead" platform.  Although it indeed would have been
>possible to have a Super Apple II if Apple had continued the Apple II
>line, at this point, the II has been so abandoned that I don't think it
>represents a true alternative for the Macintosh for Apple.  The truth is,
>people are willing to buy innovations, in other words, huge changes from
>current standards, but they will not be willing to buy something which
>acts just like a souped up Macintosh or PC without having the advantage of
>being able to use either of these platforms. I know this a little of a
>pessimistic viewpoint, but the truth is, even if somebody took a
>phonograph, allowed it to play digital LPs, and gave it 1000rpms, people
>still wouldn't buy it because the vast majority of them have switched over
>to CDs and tapes.  Of course, people who really love records might buy it,
>but that only represents a small fraction of the total populace. So, in
>conclusion, I feel that your doomsday picture of Apple with a new Apple II
>as the only possible savior is misguided. 

So Apple's only salvation would be to make a PC (only) clone?  Why bother?
They are better off quiting business.

John


--
--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--
- John Bowling          -- Did anyone notice the recent switch by the
- johnlb@primenet.com   -- southern baptists to become anti-christians?
--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--