Re: Battle of the Nostalgics

["Jason Whorton" <jason at microxl.com>]

"Supertimer" <supertimer@aol.com> wrote in message
20030209163422.04786.00000193@mb-ce.aol.com">news:20030209163422.04786.00000193@mb-ce.aol.com...
> Now that I have had a chance to use several different
> generations of platforms, it seems clear why some
> folks are so fascinated with the Apple ][+ and others
> are so dedicated to the memory of the Apple IIGS.
>
> For every great family of hardware, there is always
> a battle between the most popular of the family and
> the most advanced.  From a technical point of view,
> it is self-evident that the Apple IIGS was the better
> computer than the ][+.  In many ways, it was better
> than the Macintosh at the time of its release (that
> would be the Macintosh Plus before the IIGS and
> the Macintosh SE slightly after for those who don't
> remember) yet represented the last of a generation
> and this is the reason there are two camps of
> Apple II users.
>
> Realizing that the IIGS was the last and greatest
> of the Apple II family, many users simply skipped
> it and jumped to the Mac.  That is why there are
> a lot of us who do not know the true capabilities
> of the IIGS and think of the entire Apple II family
> in terms of the Apple II+.
>
> I have seen this happen in other platforms.  The
> last and greatest of the AMD K6 processors, for
> example, was the K6-III+.  Scaling up to 616Mhz,
> this chip ran twice as fast per clock as the K6-2,
> the most popular of the CPU family.  It also
> blew away the first Pentium IIIs before on-die
> cache was integrated.  Yet except for those of
> us who stuck with the CPU family, the K6-III+
> is a footnote.  The K6-2 is the chip that is what
> is remembered, a model that was always slower
> than the equivalent Intel chip, a black sheep that
> is thankfully forgotten thanks to the Athlon.  In
> many ways, the Athlon was like the Macintosh.
> The Athlon was the next generation processor
> and it smoked the Pentium III.  More importantly,
> the first Athlons were already around when the
> K6-III+ appeared, just like the Mac arrived before
> the Apple IIGS.  Like Apple, AMD didn't really
> support the K6-III+.
>
> The same thing has happened with Intel with the
> Tualatin Pentium III.  Like the K6-III+, the Tualatin
> overcame the limitations of the rest of its family
> due to a die shrink to 0.13 microns.  This
> advance enabled the Tualatin to outperform the
> equivalent clocked P4 which had already been
> introduced.  Like the K6-III+, the Tualatin also
> owed part of its performance to a larger on-die
> cache.  Yet the Tualitin was just a footnote
> because it ware introduced after the P4, which
> was the generation to replace it and Intel really
> did not support the chip.
>
> There would always be those of us, the ones who
> first jumped ship to Macintosh, Athlon, and P4,
> who snide at those who remember the IIGS,
> the K6-III+, and the Tualatin PIII fondly.  Those
> users will always see the past colored in the
> view that their machines were always the kings
> of the hill.  That the previous generation richly
> deserved to be dead and burried.
>
> Yet many of us have a more accurate view of
> history.  Those of us that realize the truth know
> that in order to truly remember the glories of
> past technology, one must remember the best
> of each generation.  One cannot truly understand
> the Apple II until one understands the true nature
> of the Apple IIGS.  One cannot truly appreciate
> the K6 or PIII families until one understands the
> K6-III+ and the Tualatin PIII.
>
> So to all those who have chanced to discover an
> old Apple IIGS, do more than play that old
> Apple ][+ Defender on a DOS 3.3 5.25" disk with
> it.  Take the time to put in a hard disk drive,
> connect speakers to the audio port, find an RGB
> monitor, get a copy the best version of GS/OS
> and install it on the hard drive.  Install at least
> 4MB of memory and run the best software it is
> capable of.  Do this not to try to beat the Mac
> or PC of 2003.  That is not the point.  Do this to
> truly enjoy and understand what a great machine
> the IIGS was in its time. And above all, never
> NEVER write Apple ][GS (yuck)!

Hello.  One point that occurs to me is that the Apple IIgs is not the latest
and greatest member of the Apple II family.  It is the LAST and greatest
member of the Apple II family.  Unlike, the Super Socket 7 and Socket 370
chips and boards, it has not been replaced by something better for just a
few dollars more.  Using JUST an Apple ][+ would be similar to limiting
yourself to Windows 95 and JUST the applications and hardware that will run
on it.  This is excepting nostalgic value - "I had an xyz when I was
younger, I sure would love to have one again".

Thank you,
Jason Whorton