🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.mac
Article #14004

Re: Should 64K ROMs be supported?

#14004
From: Jason Haines
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1986 00:37
29 lines
1418 bytes
> upgrade?  For most of the casual users, people who don't rely on their
> Mac as part of their work, the upgrade isn't necessary.  Should they be
> forced to buy added power they don't really need?

My thinking is that if someone doesn't upgrade at least the ROMs/Drive, they
do so for the following reasons :- 

1) Lack of money;
2) Lack of brains;
3) shortage of upgrades;
4) no need, just a casual user; or
5) some other strange reason.

Now people that fit into box 1) don't have the money to buy the upgrade, so they
have little money to spend on software. These are a major body of software
pirates, since they lack the money to buy software, they copy what they need.

The shortage of upgrades is a valid point - implies that people are falling
over each other to get upgrades.

People in box 4) need very little software, so that a 128K ROM ONLY position
can be supported.

Anything else?

Jason Haines

BTW, Happy New Year
Technical Details
Message-ID: <542@runx.OZ>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!munnari!otc!metro!ipso!runx!baron

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!munnari!otc!metro!ipso!runx!baron
From: baron@runx.OZ (Jason Haines)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Should 64K ROMs be supported?
Message-ID: <542@runx.OZ>
Date: Sun, 28-Dec-86 19:37:07 EST
Article-I.D.: runx.542
Posted: Sun Dec 28 19:37:07 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 31-Dec-86 18:46:21 EST
Organization: RUNX Un*x Timeshare.  Sydney, Australia.
Lines: 28