🚀 go-pugleaf

thomas@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Thomas Summerall) writes:

> M-  Thank you for your extremely helpful and well thought-out reply to my
>    obviously ignorant inqiry into the possibility of Apple II emulation on
>    the Mac II.  But I have a few (and probably just as foolish) questions.

Remember, you called them foolish, not I.

> Well, M, I wonder...

I'm glad to see we're on a first-letter basis already.  And I thought
you were going to flame me!  How silly I must have been...

> When the Amiga first came out I seem to recall a dearth
> (that means lack ;-> )  of software for it.  Perhaps it could have indeed
> benefitted from the ability to execute programs developed on an admittedly
> inferior machine.

When the Macintosh first came out I seem to recall a dearth of
software for it, too (MacWrite, MacPaint, and a buggy version of
Multiplan if I remember correctly).  Do you think an Apple II
emulator would have been a popular software item for it at the time?

> Maybe an Apple II emulator is a bit
> other programs for more obscure tasks like geneology or children's education
> (a field for which I recall a particular abundance of apple II software) or
> any of the other areas in which it is difficult to find native applications.

I can just see a bunch of educators rushing out to buy Mac II's so
they can emulate Apple II's to run their educational software.

And you accused my reply of not being well thought out.

> What a good idea!  But what if I could only just afford a Mac II, and am now
> saving up for a modem?  Should I buy an atari instead?

Use freshman economics.  If buying an Atari would give you greater
marginal utility than buying a modem, then buy the Atari.  The whole
point of economics is that you have limited resources for the things
you wish to purchase and that you try to maximize your utility.

It is also probable that if you spent all of your money on a Mac II
and are not able to purchase peripherals, you probably made the wrong
decision and should have purchased a less expensive machine such as
an SE.  For personal use, few applications justify a Mac II.

> Maybe they should
> through out the idea of a virtual machine, and merely have a different computer
> throw out the idea of a virtual machine, and merely have a different computer
> screen and a math coprocessor for my great sound and graphics for entertainmen\
> t and education, and then another
> one with a letter quality printer built in for WP, and another one with a
> modem for...But wait, wouldn't that get sort of expensive?  Oh well, if
> you think it would be a good idea...

No, I don't think it is a good idea.  But it is a fact that each
computer system is particularly well suited for a certain class of
applications, either because its architecture is well suited for
supporting them or because software developers have standardized
around it.  You are taking my point, carrying it to an extreme, and
arguing against that instead of responding in an intelligent manner.

People have been known to purchase entire computer systems for the
express purpose of running one software package.  People have been
known to purchase Macs for the purpose of running software such as
MacPaint/MacDraw, PageMaker, and HyperCard.  Is it so wrong to also
purchase an Atari XE or Commodore 64/128 for games, considering the
abundance and quality of the games they support?

> Thanks again for correcting me, and I apologize to the net for asking such
> a dumb question...

Anytime, and your apology is accepted.

			--M


Michael Portuesi / Information Technology Center / Carnegie Mellon University
ARPA/UUCP: mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu			    BITNET: rainwalker@drycas

disclaimer:  the above opinions are mine and not those of my employer.