Re: AE PC Transporter Questions...

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

Supertimer wrote:

>"Paul Grammens" <grammens@svn.net> wrote:
>
>>"Supertimer" <supertimer@aol.com> wrote
>>>
>>> I had a PCT and used an XT and an IBM AT (286) as well as
>>> a IIGS.  The stock IIGS could outperform either PCs and the
>>> PCT anyday.
>>
>>One thing about the 286's and later is that they went faster and faster. I
>>think the 286 started out at 6 MHz, and ended up at 20 MHz. I don't know why
>>the ROM 3 had the same clock speed as the ROM 0.  No way you can keep up
>>with the competition that way.
>
>Indeed, it was political reasons at Apple more than anything.
>Even if you take the fact that WDC did have faster chips
>(which ultimately reached 20Mhz as used on CMD's C64
>and C128 accelerators...yes these faster chips came later
>but support from Apple could have accelerated the process).

There is another factor--yield.  Apple evaluated the probability of
WDC being able to produce Apple production quantities of 16MHz+
65C816's, and decided that the risk was too high (at the time).

Of course, there is also a business risk in not extending a product
line which is critical to the company's success.  Evidently, Apple
executives did not consider the Apple II series to be critical to
their success...

Fortunately (for Apple), it appears that they were correct.

-michael

Check out 8-bit Apple sound that will amaze you on my
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/