Article View: comp.sys.mac
Article #39068Re: IIcx intro (Mac II dead?)
From: William M. Bumgarner
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1989 07:43
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1989 07:43
9 lines
779 bytes
779 bytes
It has been mentioned that the II is a cost effective alternative to the IIx for people who need the extra slots. Consider this: Cards for the Mac are expensive-- most projects that would involve more than 3 cards in development will probably deem the extra $500 that the IIx costs over the II as a reasonable investment. b.bum wb1j+@andrew.cmu.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<UY5rmiy00UjHMPMo5U@andrew.cmu.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!oliveb!apple!bbn!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!wb1j+Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!oliveb!apple!bbn!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!wb1j+ From: wb1j+@andrew.cmu.edu (William M. Bumgarner) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: IIcx intro (Mac II dead?) Message-ID: <UY5rmiy00UjHMPMo5U@andrew.cmu.edu> Date: 10 Mar 89 07:43:42 GMT Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 9