Re: New Apple II (was Apple's next move ...)

[rubywand@aol.com (RUBYWAND)]

In article <4ohjum$ej6@hearst.cac.psu.edu>, kcr103@psuvm.psu.edu (Kenneth
C. Richardson) writes:

>If someone develops a 32 bit Apple II running at 20MHz with an 20Mhz
>I/O bus, can you imagine how fast some of the software presently
>written would run?  If the computer has a dedicated graphics
>controller, the video could be almost completely off loaded from the
>main CPU.  Sound would also not be taxing the main CPU.  With a Math
>Coprocesser installed, one would have a very capable machine.  Yes, I
>would be willing to spend $1500 bucks on one.  The most important thing
>would be having a decent word processor (and perhaps some internet
>software) for the thing when it was released.

     A machine something like the one you describe with 32MB 15MHz main
memory would be a fairly significant upgrade. In terms of speed, we might
have roughly a x4 improvement over a current 10MHz Zip-GS system.

     Of course, Video performance would be much better-- e.g. greater
resolution, more colors. (A  _lot_ depends upon the actual Video
sub-system implementation.)  Sound would be notably better, too, since a
larger, more versatile Sound sub-system is a relatively inexpensive
upgrade.

     The catch is that the $1500 20MHz 32-bit new II would have to
incorporate very good sub-systems to come moderately close to competing
with the $1500 PC. Successful competition with PC is important because the
chief motivation for Apple in producing a new II is winning a good chunk
of the home market.

     Basically, 20MHz is not fast enough to inspire the confidence that
"Yes, Apple is serious about producing 1st Class competition for PC".

    "Serious" is something more like a II built around a 50MHz 65C832 or
65C1632.


Rubywand