Re: How will the Apple II survive?

[Jeff Blakeney <CUTjblakeney@sympatico.ca>]

On 22 Apr 2004 17:10:02 GMT, mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon) wrote:

>Everyone (and, boy, there always seem to be a bunch ;-) who
>wants to fantasize about a "new Apple II" always wants to
>"improve" on it by adding VGA graphics, 24-bit addressing,
>etc., etc.

Well, first off, the IIgs already has 24 bit addressing but you
probably meant 32 bit or more and might have also been referring to
the data bus instead of the address bus.  I understand what you were
going for, though.

However, PC and Mac users today want the same thing.  They want to
continue to get newer and improved machines.  They want faster
machines with better graphics and sound and more computing power.
Personally, I have a Pentium III with an ATI All-In-Wonder-128 video
card, a Creative Labs sound card (can never remember which one) and a
40 GB hard drive and I want a Pentium 4 with a Radeon based ATI
All-In-Wonder, an Audigy sound card and at least a 120 GB hard drive.

Why should that desire be any different for Apple II users.  I would
love to have an Apple II with a faster (and possibly more powerful)
processor, better graphics, better sound. and more storage space.

>Do you really think that this 1) captures the essence of the
>constrained environment of the Apple II,

The Apple IIe and IIc have a double hi-res graphics mode that doesn't
exist on the Apple II or II+ and the IIgs has even more graphics modes
and better sound than all the models before it.  Do any of them no
longer capture the essence of the Apple II?  I think the big problem
with this question is that one word you used: "constrained".
Personally I would never put use that word to describe the Apple II
environment as the machine is so open you can add anything you want to
it so it is far from constrained.  If it were, there would be no
memory,  accelerator, graphic, sound, storage, communications or other
cards available for it to expand it beyond its initial design.

>or 2) will cause lots of new software development to
>exploit the new features to bloom?

It would be nice if it would but it probably wouldn't cause "lots" of
new development to occur.  There would be some, though, and that's all
we've been living on for the past decade or more as it is.  The big
benefit would be the ability to use our existing programs faster, with
larger windows on the screen of nicer, newer monitors, with cleaner
sound all from a faster and larger storage device.

>In my opinion, the answer to both questions is a resounding
>"No!".

My answers would be 1) it could and 2) it might.

>Try to enjoy the Apple II line for the glorious thing that it is,
>not for what you think/wish/hope it could have been.

I enjoy it for what it is but that doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't
wish for better.  Perhaps the difference is that I still use my IIgs
for more than just playing games and tinkering with.  I still do word
processing, databasing, spreadsheeting, telecommunicating and other
things with it.  Until just recently, the only word processor I had
for my PC was Wordpad so you might understand why I still do most of
my word processing and page layout on my IIgs with the help of
programs like GraphicWriter III and NiftySpell.

-- 
 Jeff Blakeney - Dean of the Apple II University in the
                 Apple II Community on Syndicomm.com
 CUT the obvious from my address if you want to e-mail me