🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <42977063.1a7ab@cumin.engin.umich.edu> swerling@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ace Swerling) writes:

> In article <Apr.11.01.01.35.1989.22877@topaz.rutgers.edu> witting@topaz.rutgers.edu (Paul K Willing) writes:
> >
> >THE IDEA:  Take a Mac IIcx box, pull out the 68030, the MMU, the math
> >co-processor, and any other expensive bits that aren't required.  Drop
> >in the standard 6800 and a regular Floppy drive.  Actually, Apple may
> >prefer to do a complete board revision to prevent quick and dirty
> >upgrades, but you get the picture.  We could call it a Mac IIv (for
> >value or some such nonsense).
> >
> The only thing that ocurrs to me about this is that the current Mac II's have
> trouble keeping up with all of the processing necessary for 8-bit color.  It
> takes lots of RAM and processing power just to keep this system barely afloat
> many times.  I don't think that it's possible to get the power necessary for
> this task out of a 68000.  People are hungry for more power and despite the
> cost advantage, I think that people are going to buy more rather than less
> powerful Macs, especially as the OS requires it.  People will still buy 68000
> based Macs for a while just as people bought 8088 and 8086 based PCs for a
> while after the AT was introduced.  Actually, they bought them for years because
> there was no reason to change.  But the Mac market moves faster, and a powerful
> processor will be more and more necessary in the near future.  I don't think
> that Apple will want to introduce a crippled machine and be blamer years down
> the road for doing just that when they knew it was going to be obsolete in a
> very short period of time.  Beside that, by the time they got it out, I don't
> think *anybody* would want it.  It would be a bad marketing move all the way
> around.
> 
> Nice idea though.
> 
> -Ace
> University of the National Champion Wolverines

Actually, the idea was to try to use the cx board as much as is as
possible.  Later expansion could be as simple as dropping in a new
clock and 68030.  MMU's or FDHD drives could also be added as one saw
fit.  If Apple objected to making upgrades so easy, a simple scheme
for crippling the board could be devised (omit certain wire paths on
the board, a simple jumper could be added/removed, etc).  For Christ
sake, they are still producing Mac plusses!

Also, I question whether everyone will follow the upward path.  IBM
clones still use 8088's, they are cheap to design and build.  The new
PS/2 line still uses them. (the Model 30 has a 286 option)  68030 will
not push the 68000 machines out for a long time, since even if the
costs are equal, the existance of a 68000 machine will allow them to
charge more for a 68030. 

Anyway, you are the second to mention that color might be difficult on
the Mac IIv.  Given this, we could elimenate it, and produce a cheap
B&W video card to be connected to a 12"-14" monitor.  I personally
hate the 9" things in most macs.  Or simply drop to a 68020, instead
of all the way down to a 68000.  They would probably want to call that
a Mac IIc (but I hope not.  Ugly flashbacks to a Apple IIc, which they
still sell, completely trashing your idea that they would be outdated)
Maybe do both, calling the upgraded IIv a IIv 020 (aka the SE 030).
Heck, we could continue this and sell a IIv 030, which would still be
cheaper because it lacks a coprocessor, MMU, and FDHD drive.

Also, from the demo given at the IIcx's introduction, board swaps to
upgrade the machine should be VERY easy.

paul
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Graphiti on the wall of civil rights organization in the sixties
 
	"There is a town in Mississippi named Liberty
         There is a Department in Washington called Justice"

A more socially aware sort of .sig     witting@topaz.rutgers.edu