Re: Why still using Apple II?

[bob <bob@home.net>]

On 7 Jun 2005 04:19:10 -0700, acctforjunk@yahoo.com wrote:

>
>I wouldn't say that using the 6502 versus the 8080 was such a bad thing
>per se, because it differentiated it.  Then again I haven't thought
>about it too much.   I have heard that the Mac will be using an Intel
>processor, that just blows me away. 

No big surprise really.  Ever since the second generation of PowerMacs
were launched with PCI bus support the Mac has progressively become
nothing more than a PC architecture machine with an IBM Risc
processor.  Granted, the OS is different but now with OSX the Mac is
nothng more than a PC box running a variant of NetBSD with an improved
X-windows desktop manager.

> Myself, I'm now a PC guy.  I can
>only assume that lots of Mac enthusiasts are crushed.

It was bound to happen.  Do you honestly think IBM is willing to
invest more money in newer PPC designs for a machine that has a
microscopic installed base ?

>I'm pretty sure Apple isn't going to do anything about the Apple II.
>It's history for them, and you're right; the Apple would require a
>redesign of it's motherboard.

Apple really washed its hands of the Apple // line back in 1984 yet
despite strong sales of the // line right up till the end of the
decade, Apple chose to ignore the A2 userbase.