Re: memory for apple IIgs

[et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black)]

Willi Kusche (a2@wilserv.com) writes:
> Hi, y'all!
> 
> "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<cKGdnT14Z85UBKjd4p2dnA@comcast.com>...
>> So, go ahead and run your GS like a //e if you like
>> it that way, but please, also run MS-DOS 6.22 on
>> your Pentium 4 and OS 7.1 on your G5s.
> 
>     A Pentium 4 has the horsepower to run Windows.  A G5 has the
> horsepower to run OS X.  The 65816 does *NOT* have the horsepower to
> properly run a GUI.  Just my opinion, of course.
> 
>     You're welcome.
> 
> Willi

And realistically, a GUI does not add function.  It simply makes
things "user friendly".

I moved from a Radio Shack Color Computer (running Microware OS-9)
to a Mac Plus (given to me as a discard) in late 1993.  I had to
get a hard drive for it, because it was unuseable with a single floppy
(and the price of an external floppy was such that a hard drive
was worth the extra price, even besides it making it more useable
than just an extra floppy drive).  It had 1meg of memory, twice
as much as the CoCo.  But I lost multitasking, and it really did
not do anything more than the CoCo.  In other words, the hardware
got better but the software reduced that capability to where I hadn't
really moved forward.  (The Mac Plus was cute, and I actually wanted
for once to have a relatively mainstream computer, which is why I
switched at the time.)

There is lots about the GS that makes it a better computer than the IIs
before it.  A faster CPU, and more ram.  That Ensoniq synthesizer.  The
fact that the keyboard is separate from the actual computer.  So much 
that required boards in previous IIs are built in.

If the only reason for moving to a IIGS is because it runs a GUI,
then that isn't saying much about the computer.

   Michael