🚀 go-pugleaf

WARNING: This article contains blunt language and may be offensive to
family audiences.  It is also my final word on the subject, at least
on this go-around.  Sigh.  Some of us have work to do.


In article <11317@ut-emx.UUCP>,
	mentat@walt.cc.utexas.edu (Robert Dorsett) writes:
   You obviously haven't been using the Mac for very long.

I guess not.  I've been using them since the original 128K Mac was
introduced.  I've got a well-used copy of the original Inside Mac (you
know, the looseleaf edition that was printed off on a daisywheel
printer with "Insert illustration here" where the pictures were
supposed to go?).  In past jobs I've administered academic Mac sites
consisting of hundreds of machines.  These days I use and program my
Macintosh every working day, working principally on user interface and
networking software.  Yup, I'm a mere novice, all right :-(.

   The Macintosh was originally sold as a CONCEPT--with neither the
   software or hardware being adequate to support that concept.

Bullshit.  Nothing is sold as a concept (aside, perhaps, from real
estate scams :-)).  The Mac was and is sold as a product.  There was
and is a concept behind the product, and that concept *still* isn't
fully realized, but that's a separate issue.

   one was instantly forced into software
   obsolescence.  Original 128K owners have payed up to $4495 to keep their
   computer "current."  

At this point, the 64K ROM->128K ROM upgrade has become and upgrade or
die situation, but IF AND ONLY IF you need new software.  Even this has
more to do with software companies than Apple.

   I do, however, think that the Plus-era is perfectly usable for 99% of us--
   I like mine, and have no interest in upgrading in the foreseeable future--

Right.  So who cares if it's obsolete?  I'm serious here.  A lot of
people (at least on Usenet) seem to think they have a right to have
the best now, because when they bought their machine, it was the best
then.  They don't think this way about their cars, or their stereos,
or whatever; I don't see why the computer ought to be any different.

   in this case, I'm voting with my pocketbook, noting that Apple's releasing
   very expensive, haphazardly designed equipment.

It sure doesn't seem that way to me.  The IIx, IIcx, and SE/30 seem quite
well designed to me.  And I've been on a hardware design team.  And yes,
it was a commercial one, not a class project :-).

   When they stabilize with
   an architecture, or maybe design an expandable architecture, I'll jump
   on the bandwagon.

Like maybe the PC/XT/AT/PS2/clone "architecture"? :-).  Apple's done a
good job balancing changing technology and product stability.  It's hard.

The same boards work in a IIcx that work in a II or IIx (or even an SE/30
if you buy an expansion chassis...).  The same software runs on an
SE/30 as on a Mac Plus.  It runs it better, granted, but that's part of
the point of a growing product line.

   From someone who recently bought a Mac SE/30, they're INCREDIBLY slow...

Well, they're slower than a hard disk, but they are quite noticeably faster
than the 800K disks, especially for reads.  Besides, there are too many
Plusses out there for software companies to switch formats now, not to
mention the difference in media cost.  Look at the AT high-density drive
for a real-world example of this.

   Since when does Apple have a mechanism to trade in computers?  THAT I could
   go for...

Point taken.  I've never met anyone who had a problem selling a used
Mac, though.

   All of which I'm sure Apple more than takes care of in its 1000%
   price mark-ups.

More bullshit.  Apple makes a lot of money.  Apple also (so far) has been
willing to spend a lot of money on the future.  Apple is driving its own
technology, something that costs a lot of money and involves a lot of
risk.

A PC clone manufacturer has to recoup the cost of hardware, and that's
about it.  Apple has to do a lot more.  And they do it well.

   Why do people insist on being apologists for Apple?

Some of us like what they've done so far, and realize how risky it is, and
how well they've met the challenge they've set for themselves.

   if Apple 
   ever provides a five-year, 50,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty on its 
   equipment, perhaps people would settle down.

Funny, I had to pay for my 50,000 mile extended warranty.  What's AppleCare?

Apple's not perfect.  No computer company is.  I happen to think, for a
lot of reasons, that Apple's the best we've got, and I don't think that
the economics of this industry are as simple to understand as a lot of
other people seem to think.  Maybe it comes from being on "the other
side of the fence" myself.

Have fun, folks.  I'm outta this one,

-- 
Amanda Walker, InterCon Systems Corporation
amanda@lts.UUCP / ...!uunet!lts!amanda / 703.435.8170
--
"I can only assume this is not the first-class compartment." --HGTtG