Re: Ethernet & Internet on Apple 2

[mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon)]

Tim Haynes wrote:

>"Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote in message
>20040626210035.12238.00000770@mb-m01.aol.com">news:20040626210035.12238.00000770@mb-m01.aol.com...
>> sca no@spam.com asked:
>[snip]
>
>> The joy of the Apple II is that it is still pretty much the way
>> that it was ten or twenty years ago--with a few conveniences
>> added, like the possibility of adding a solid-state hard disk
>> based on flash memory--kind of like an add-on electric starter
>> for the Model T.  ;-)
>
>Ahhhh... that explains a lot!  This is why the only person on csa2 who is
>capable of implementing a (good and probably 'cheap') VGA adapter card for
>the A2, won't do it.  ;-)

Not exactly, since having a modern display is exactly the kind of
"convenience" that would not pervert the Apple II "experience" for
me.  ;-)

And I am not an "adept" with modern digital video chips.  I expect
that it would be at least as great an effort for me to design a suitable
adapter as for others with design experience.

You can also be sure that an adapter offering the performance you
have come to expect from a good RGB monitor is not a simple
device.  The only hope for low cost is a high level of integration
in a scan converter IC.  There are several possibilities, all of which
have been discussed here before, but none both simple and good.

I think I understand the problem well enough to diagnose the
difficulties with inexpensive converters, but that does not lead
immediately to a solution without the appropriate IC.

You are correct in one respect, though--I have enough NTSC scan
rate RGP monitors to satisfy me for now.  If my motivation to use
a VGA monitor ever got beyond the "here's an adapter for only $35,
so I think I'll try it" stage, then the prospect of a better adapter
would be more interesting to me.

I sympathize with those who would like to share a single monitor
with multiple (modern and classic) machines, and cannot find a
suitable multiscan-capable monitor.  But I regard this as a limited
interest "convenience" option, which has apparently not motivated
anyone sufficiently to solve it well.

>> But it's still a Model T, and that's what I love about it.
>
>Sigh...  Good thing Applied Engineering never really felt that way!  To each
>their own, I guess.  How much would we have to pay you to develop a VGA
>adapter, anyway??  :-)

AE would develop hardware if it perceived a market for it.  I expect
that if Ethernet had become commonplace before the precipitous
decline of the Apple II commercial market, they would have developed
an Ethernet card for it.  At the time, the primary uses for Ethernet
were file sharing and email.  The Apple II could have supported these
applications quite reasonably.  For that matter, Appletalk networking
(using a Workstation card) supports such activities at a speed
appropriate for Apple II's.  (The biggest limitation on file sharing is
the lack of _server_ software for the Apple II, which would allow
peer-to-peer file sharing.)

Today, when people talk about Internet connectivity, they are usually
not talking about FTP.  They mean web surfing.  This kind of activity
on an Apple II is, in my opinion, is about as rewarding as watching
a DVD on a 7" black & white TV.  It's not that it can't be done, it's
that the experience is extremely limited.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but we all have to decide how we
are going to spend our time.  I currently have other projects that are
keeping me interested and happy.

In any hobby where older artifacts are involved, there are at least two
distinct motivations:  the desire to restore and preserve the artifact
in as near pristine condition as possible, and the desire to extend
the artifact in the direction of modern equipment as far as practical.
I respect both of these motivations, but both have limitations in
practice.  Neither is universal.  Both can become ridiculous.

When I was doing this "full bore" in the late 80's, it was clear to
me even then that what I was actually trying to do was prove to 
myself that my Apple II could do "anything that the competing
platforms could do"--and it actually worked for a while.

But then it became clear that I needed a more modern platform
to support more modern activities, and my Apple II became a
recreational refuge from the "just get it done, who cares how"
world of modern computing.

I love the Apple II for several reasons, but one of the most satisfying
to me is as a platform for resource-constrained problem solution.
The Apple II is a well-defined "sandbox" for exploring how much can
be done by sheer wit, as opposed to brute force.

My primary machine is a //e, very well appointed, with an 8MHz Zip
Chip, a 250MB SCSI drive, a 1MB AUXRAM card, a game-port clock,
etc., etc.  I use it for many things, but primarily to support programming
in assembly language and Applesoft.

When I write programs, however, I always write them for a 1MHz 6502
machine.  Part of the reason is that the "extensions" are not standard
(of course), so any code that depends on extensions will not be usable
by a large fraction of the few remaining Apple II enthusiasts.  But, to be
honest, another part of the reason is that I enjoy solving problems in an
environment constrained by speed and space.  It raises the bar for
creativity and increases the satisfaction when the problem is solved.

-michael

Check out amazing quality sound for 8-bit Apples on my
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/