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

[rubywand@aol.com (RUBYWAND)]

In article <4lklvf$onl@news.ios.com>, Eric Dietrich
<madscientist@treebranch.com > writes:

>.... Here's my question....
>
>Is the GS-X going to be a new Apple ][ or a new platform altogether?
>....
>Personally, If I put my money behind or into ANY GS-X or ROM 4/5 or
whatever we >are calling it this week,  Its gonna be an Apple II.  Add
features, emulate
>the whole thing in firmware (like the powermacs) but don't just whip up a
][-like
>computer and toss in a software shell that runs "some" programs.
>
>Yes, I realise that it would probably make the machine cost too much.  An
>completely new Apple ][ is, with all likelyhood, completely impractical. 
So maybe >its time to be happy with our ROM 03 ][gs. ....  
>....
>The last thing the Apple ][ needs is an identity chrisis!
>

     You have zeroed-in upon the pivotal Apple IIGS-X design issue. So,
consider this question: 

     II users do not question that the IIgs is, in fact, an "Apple II".
Very well; why?! What makes IIgs an Apple II, legitimate successor to II+
and IIe and worthy of II user support?!

A. "Apple, Inc. named it the _Apple II_gs. If Apple says it's a 'II,
that's that."

     Not an altogether brainless assertion. Apple's designation did help
establish identity.


B. "Apple IIgs runs Apple II+/IIe software."

     By now, many IIgs users are aware that II+/IIe compatibility carried
a high price tag. A conservative estimate is that a 'pure', non-old II
compatible GS would run twice as fast as the current model. Another cost
which seldom gets mentioned is that the vast reduction in complexity would
greatly reduce both hardware glitching and the presence of bugs in
firmware and software.

     The chips which permit Old II compatibility are relatively costly and
they absorb considerable motherboard real estate, too. Use the space and
$$$ to make a better GS and you get at least 1MB of full-speed RAM, 1MB
Ensoniq Sound, support for 12MB in the Mem Expansion Slot, 256-color 640 x
400 display, and GS Slots with full 24-bit Addressing.

     The clincher is that GS users seldom run II+/IIe software. Even when
new wares were rather scarce, the attraction of oldies was limited to a
few programs. Worse yet, many users ended up keeping their old II's. They
can run old II software whether or not it's supported on the GS!

     How do you suppose the "pure GS" would have fared against PC
competition which waited a full two years after GS for 320 x 200 color VGA
and AdLib Sound? which, just now, is moving toward a decent desktop OS?
Given a choice of a truly new, pure, higher-performance GS and the GS
Apple delivered in 1986, how would you vote?


     Is our hypothetical non-II+/IIe compatible pure GS an Apple II? Would
Apple II users have bought this New II in 1986? Are you kidding?! We would
have waltzed into the local Computer Smart showroom, bitched about non-IIe
compatibility, been blitzed by a super demo, and plopped down our money on
the spot. The "_Apple II_gs" name helps; but, it's Performance that really
counts.

     Why not PC? Actually, most of us own PC's. Why in the world do we
refuse to dump our II's and accept PC as a replacement? Easy, the PC is
not a 'II!


     My point is that "Apple II" is, chiefly, a design concept. GS-X is an
Apple II because it is

     Integrated: Sound, Video/Graphics, ...  are built-in and
standardized.

     Open and Expandable: it has Slots matched to system capabilities.

     User Accessible: Firmware, Slot pin-outs & functions, key registers
and soft-switch locations, general machine operation, I/O features,
low-level Monitor commands and routines, etc. are all well-documented.

     User Controllable: a built-in high-level language, GS-X BASIC permits
the average user to develop programs which harnass machine capabilities
with reasonable efficiency.

     User Affordable: The computer's price is within the range most buyers
allow for spending on such items.

     Competitive: Feature-for-feature, the computer is a match for any
competing machine in the same price range. 


     The above are all attributes which earned the first Apple II/II+
machines millions of users and supporters and made Apple, Inc. such an
astonishing success. 

     GS-X may not directly run a byte of current Apple II software. It may
or may not win Apple's support. Nevertheless, GS-X is more genuinely an
Apple II than any machine introduced in over a decade.



         



       

       


     Most 
 

Rubywand