Re: What is the quintessential Apple II?

["Charlie" <charlieDOTd@verEYEzon.net>]

"mdj" <mdj.mdj@gmail.com> wrote in message 
1168352973.799915.22830@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com">news:1168352973.799915.22830@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
>
> Charlie wrote:
>
>> With great fear and trepidation I must note that it seems your belief 
>> that
>> using compatibility as a criterion is dangerous is because the IIgs wins.
>> Emulators don't because they are not very hardware compatible.
>
> Personally, I think the IIgs is less compatible in it's standard trim
> than a IIe is. For example, the disk controller firmware has issues
> with certain software titles.

My II+ and IIe don't even have disk controller firmware. You had to buy a 
controller card. Which incidentally works just fine in my IIgs. <grin>

I will agree with Michael Mahon though, that the IIgs doesn't have a 
cassette port.  I'd forgotten about that.

> Many communications programs or  programs
> that print will not work due to the IIgs serial ports not using 6551
> ACIA's.
>
> Of course, both these issues are fixable, but on the IIe, you don't
> need to fix them ;-)

True it didn't have serial ports to fix. Of course you mean with a SSC card 
added but you can add them to a IIgs same as a IIe or II/II+.

>
>> Compatibility is the only criterion (mentioned so far) that can be tested
>> objectively.  Others like color, feeling, closeness to Woz, etc. are very
>> subjective.
>
> Okay, I'll bite :-) Since we're trying here to define the
> quintessential Apple II, a qualitative measure, the only objective
> criterion is consensus. And I assure you, your assumption that your
> objective criterion carries more weight than the myriad of subjective
> ones offered will proved incorrect.
>
> ;-)

I'm sure you're right there.  I always get my butt kicked in newsgroup 
arguments, uh, I mean discussions. <grin>

Charlie