🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <11346@ut-emx.UUCP>, mentat@walt.cc.utexas.edu (Robert Dorsett) writes:
> 
> To this day, I have difficulty understanding why the Mac 128 was not released
> with at least a high-speed hard disk interface.  

Steve Jobs.  At one time he was convinced that the Mac needed no more than
70 characters/line in its display.  He figured this out by examining some
number of typewritten documents...most of which had the margins set to
give 70 characters or less.  I was very nearly roasted by him when I
passed him one day in the hallway and mentioned that 70 might not be
enough for some reasonable applications.  (I was saved when he got
sidetracked into trying to find out where the leak had originated...)

He was entranced with the visual design of the Cuisinart.  Literally.
He was very hot on the notion of the Mac as an appliance: just plug it
into the wall and go.

And the "high-speed" serial ports were a Good Thing, SCSI ports and
the like were unecessary.  And on and on.

> >   When they stabilize with
> >   an architecture, or maybe design an expandable architecture, I'll jump
> >   on the bandwagon.
> >
> No, like the Apple II architecture--the basic 1978-era machine could be
> expanded and modified to keep place with technology until the current day.
> That's a far cry from the nine-month obsolescence period of current Mac's.
> If you want a more sophisticated example, what about S-100 systems?

The Apple ][ what?!!!!

I spent nearly five years in the Apple// division (whatever the name at
any given time).  The Apple//gs is an overpriced slug.  Grossly overpriced.
And it needn't have turned out that way, but that's the way things are
today.  Your example is a very bad one.  It reeks.  I hope the Mac doesn't
follow the Apple//'s trail, much as I enjoyed using my //s for several
years.

> By the way, Amanda, how does your "development" theory fit into the incredible
> overpricing on Apple peripherals?  I mean, merely THAT is sufficient cause
> to question the pricing of the CPU boxes.

Apple (and most other manufacturers) use a fixed (by each given company)
formula for pricing their equipment.  Typically based on their cost per
unit *at the time they begin producing machines for introduction*.

Price schedules for peripherals are different than CPUs, mostly because
more of the peripheral's internals are made by outside suppliers.  You
can bet the prices are going to be higher.  (Take a look at the prices
of DEC or HP peripherals some time...)

Usually the price declines over time, but not at the rate at which the
actual production cost declines.  Not nearly.

Roughly, the original Mac cost about 25% of what the selling price was.
Apple had to pay for production, R&D, rent, office supplies, salaries,
marketing, sales, marketing,...

At one point, shortly after Mr. Sculley joined Apple (one of the best
things to ever happen to the company, imo), twice as much money was
being spent on marketing the Apple// as was spent actually making them.

Apple's support is pathetic.

Apple's warranties are insulting.

Good luck in getting Apple to change their ways.   Me, I'm going to
push for commercial space flight in my lifetime.