🚀 go-pugleaf

[Many good arguments]
[Make a price reduction retroactive]
Retroactive price decrease is a bad idea because it does not eliminate what
you had hoped it would-namely, the anger over having bought something only
to see its price drop shortly thereafter.  The people who bought the
computer four months ago will be upset because the aren't being given a
break like their neighbor who bought three months ago.  Just have a price
reduction without the retroactive clause.

[Send in the clones...]
I strongly believe that Apple is in a position where clones should become an
essential part of Macintosh.  Just as Apple currently relies very heavily on
its connections with the third-party hardware and software manufacturers,
Apple should begin to rely on clone manufacturers to take care of the
low-end of the market.

Everyone agrees that Apple desperately needs to beef-up its installed base. 
Apple *could* make a no/low-profit Mac, but that's not Apple.  This isn't a
fault, it's just Apple Corporate Culture--"Macintosh is the Mercedes of the
computer market."  I believe that Apple should continue to focus on the
segment of the market that ranges from the middle-of-the-road to the
high-end in power/price demands.  This will keep Apple's profits high enough
to further Macintosh technology.  *BUT*, most importantly, Apple needs to
realize that this strategy, by itself, will not work--it must be done in
conjunction with a proper focus on the low-end.

Apple should/will not spend its resources on the low-end (as defined as the
$1000 market).  Thus Apple should work in conjunction with a few, select
manufacturers who can prove to Apple that they understand Macintosh and are
willing to put out high-quality hardware.  If such a manufacturer is
impossible to find, Apple could spin-off such a company, such as they are
doing with Claris.  Apple should then sell the 256K ROMs and System Software
to the manufacturer(s) as a package.  This low-end manufacturer (LEM) would
be constrained by agreement to only produce at the low-end (currently
68000-based performance (and Apple // class, which could be integrated into
a hybrid low-end machine)), thus not threatening Apple's domain.  The ideal
initial product for these LEMs would be a cheap version of the SE.  Since
these companies are relatively unconstrained by the need for large amounts
of R&D money, they could price the SE much lower than Apple could.  Apple
would then drop the Plus (which they should have done a while back, IMHO)
the SE, and the // series, and replace them with a new baseline Apple
Macintosh computer.

Based on a 68020, this new Mac (the IIe, "e" for entry-level) would be
"headless," but come with expandable, built-in 4-bit color capability (able
to drive an Apple Color Monitor as is), a Processor-Direct Slot, a NuBus
slot, 2 megs of RAM, 512K ROM, a SCSI port able to handle data transmission
at a 1:1 interleave, AppleTalk*, ADB, 2 internal FDHDs, 2 serial ports, and
1 parallel port.  This is the System Seven baseline of technology, but is
easily expandable to handle virtual memory (with a 68881), increased storage
(with external hard drives), increased performance (with a cache card), or
larger/more colorful (16-bit max) displays (with the addition of more video
RAM), and full use of the NuBus slot.  Such expansions would be standard in
a IIei, announced sixth months later.  *AppleTalk would be on a removable
card so that it could be upgraded to EtherTalk.

Six to twelve months later, announce a revamped lineup of Macintosh
computers, composed of the old II series.  The IIcx/ci would form a
medium-expandability computer line based on the 68030, with the cx being
similar to the IIe: expandable 4-bit color*, PDS, 2 regular NuBus slots, 1
high-speed NuBus slot (NuBus II?), 2 megs RAM, 512K ROM, SCSI @ 1:1,
AppleTalk, ADB, 1 FDHD, 1 internal SCSI II HD without DMA chip (can be
installed later), 2 serial ports, 1 parallel port.  The ci would have
built-in EtherTalk, 4 megs of RAM, 16-bit color*, and DMA for the SCSI II
port.  *The key changes here are: 1) Expandable to 24-bit color, and 2) the
ability to add an AMD29000 chip dedicated to driving the display (as is
rumored for the "real" IIxi).

The IIx would cease to be 68030-based; instead, it would be 68040-based, and
split into two models, just like the other two lines.  The IIx would have:
expandable 24-bit color, PDS, 3 NuBus II/3 NuBus III slots, 4 megs RAM, 512K
(1 meg?) ROM, DMA SCSI II, ADB with independent processor, 1 FDHD, 1
internal HD, 2 serial ports, 1 parallel port.  The IIxi would add 32-bit
color, 6 NuBus III slots, 16 megs RAM.

This would create a balanced, powerful lineup of computers that would expand
the power of Macintosh and be profitable enough to provide the R&D money
that Apple needs.  As the 68050 gets underway (or if Apple decides that the
88000 is the way to go), the bottom-line would be transferred to the LEM. 
Thus, when the 68050 is used in the IIx/xi lineup, the 68040 would be used
in the IIc/ci lineup, the 68030 would be used in the IIe/ei lineup, and the
68020 would be given to the LEM to play with.

Comments (besides "It'll never happen... " :-( ?
						-CCb

sobiloff@stolaf.edu