🚀 go-pugleaf

>          I have a question for all those satisfied Mac users out there -
>     why should I join your ranks?

Because we'll kill your dog? No, that was yesterday. Never mind....

>          I am presently using a 8088 based PC system, and I would be using
>     the Mac for mainly two purposes: word processing (where any old Mac
>     will do), and developing Educational Software using A.I techniques in
>     PROLOG.  This later business requires both lots of speed and power.

>          It seems to me that at the very least the Mac plus is ruled out by
>     the lack of memory.  The Mac SE looks better, but it isn't all that
>     fast and the expansion options are limited.

I don't agree with this assessment. The big differences between the Mac Plus
and the SE is the speed increase because of the video circuitry and the
slot. You can happily (and inexpensively) put 4 meg in a mac plus. It'll be
somewhat slower than an SE, but much, much cheaper.

You can put an accelerator into an SE, giving you an 020 and even more
speed, if you really think you need speed. In fact there are accellerator
boards available that make the SE faster than the II. 

>          So it is the Mac II for me, right? - Wrong.  First, the Mac II is
>     a very pricey animal, second it is using a CPU that has already been
>     superceded, third the cost of accessories for that machine make it
>     impossible for me to put together a complete system.

If you aren't considering the II because the processor is superceded, why
are you even thinking of an SE or Plus? They're double obsolete. 

I also think this is a silly argument. Does the chip do the job? If so,
unless you have a neurosis of being state of the art, who CARES if it's
"obsolete." Technology is obsolete only when it can no longer do what needs
to be done, not when something newer and niftier comes along.

And besides, the mac II can't be obsolete until the 68030 mac is
announced... Just because they have chips doesn't mean they have systems...

>     1.)  Buy a Mac SE and risk outgrowing it.

An SE gives you the option of accelerator, big screen, lots of memory, and
large disks. If you're on a budget, I think it's a good risk.

>     2.)  Buy a half equipped Mac II, and hope that I am able to eventually
>          upgrade it.

I think it's important to buy a machine you'll be happy with at the outset.
If you buy half a machine and it can't really do what you want, then you
won't be happy. You're better off buying an SE and selling it when you
really outgrow it, unless you think that (1) the stuff you can't afford on
the II isn't important, or (2) the budget restrictions you have will go away
fairly quickly. If you're talking six months, it's one thing. But a year?
Two? That's too long.

>     3.)  Wait until Apple comes out with a Mac II+ (or whatever) with a
>          68030 CPU and a 25 Mhz (or so) clock speed.

What if they don't? And expect it to be more expensive than the Mac II, so
if you think you have budget crunches now....

I'm not a big believer in "waiting for the next toy" unless the current toys
can't do what you want. If you wait six months for the next machine, that's
six months where you get no work done, no development. Consider the lost man
hours against the advatanges of waiting. In dollar&cent numbers, there
aren't any.

>     4.)  Buy an 80386 CPU based AT clone.  Save myself a healthy chunk of
>          dough, and hope that the software mess for those machines gets
>          finally strengthened out someday.

Except that all real development is in OS/2, and the AT clone is even more
obsolete than the MacPlus. 

>          Some further notes.  Because of the way Apple has cornered the
>     educational computer market, I expect to be delivering my software on
>     something like a Mac+.

Optimally you should develop on the kind of machine you're delivering to.
It's very possible that a program that is 'good enough' on the MacII is so
sludgey on a Plus that it's unusable. That's something that needs to be
considered, and if I could only afford one machine to develop stuff for low
end Mac's, I'd go for an SE even if I could afford a II. Because I want to
use what the market does, so I know if the performance is acceptable. 

If you're under a budget (and who isn't) buy an SE. I see no reason to buy
high end equiptment unless you really need high-end performance (and the
only real high end needs for the II are A/UX and color, in my eyes -- speed
is relative). I'm very strongly against buying half a machine and hoping,
and even more strongly against buying rainbows and hoping that the next
machine does everything. It won't, and waiting for something new is just an
excuse to not get work done.


Chuq Von Rospach			chuq@sun.COM		Delphi: CHUQ

    Even with my limited Chuq I got into a few conversations, and one man wanted
    to argue politics with me. -- Lisa Goldstein (After the Master, Asim, 5/88)