🚀 go-pugleaf

>>I suppose it makes some sense since Apple now has
>>the IIcx,i and IIx. But I bought a Mac II in the first
>>place on the grounds that its six slots would enable it
>>to be upgraded as the technology advanced. Apple's
>>strategy of obsoleting it seems to be a betrayal of
>>that reasonable, to my mind, expectation.

A Mac II can be upgraded to a IIx. The six slot format is definitely not
dead, since the IIx is still a current product.

It's also silly to speculate that the II is going to be obsolete -- Apple
couldn't afford to do that. Not only are there lots and lots of them out
there in the real world, it's been the machine of choice internal at Apple --
the thought of having to upgrade all the Mac II's we have here would put the
wrath of accountants into anybody....

>It seems at times that _whatever_ Apple does, it's accused of being a heartless
>money-hoarding capitalist giant.  Sheesh!

You get used to it. Sort of.

>That doesn't mean that a Mac II itself is
>obsolete: although you can't upgrade it to a IIci,

You can, though, upgrade to a IIx. Or add a PMMU and run System 7.0 when
avaialble without upgrading to a 68030. Or leave it alone and run System 7.0
when available without virtual memory. The Mac II has a lot of life left...
In fact, when I finally upgraded my home machine I went with a Mac II, not a
IIx. Why? Because I decided I would rather save some cash buying a slightly
slower machine and use it for a two page display instead....



-- 

Chuq Von Rospach <+> Editor,OtherRealms <+> Member SFWA/ASFA
chuq@apple.com <+> CI$: 73317,635 <+> [This is myself speaking]

Anyone who thinks that the argument over {sci,rec}.fishies is about
group names doesn't understand the system.