🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <544@atux01.UUCP> jlc@atux01.UUCP (J. Collymore) writes:
>that people are buying up faster & faster; then they introduce two pieces of
>software (HC and Multifinder) that although they come with the Mac package for
>immediate use, they CAN'T be used easily with the system because the default
>1Mb RAM is not fully sufficient.
>
>This may suddenly discourage a lot of potential Mac SE & II buyers, and thus
>reduce Apple's sales.
>
>Possible solutions for Apple are to prepare and release (real soon) an
>HC & Multifinder that will run well on 1Mb, OR begin selling Macs WITH 2 Mb!

Dumb question time:  Why (other than their heritages) do multifinder and
hypercard *REQUIRE* so much memory.  I thought that much of the magic of the
"old" mac was that any application would run on a little Mac, but perhaps
with poor performance.

Why can't these programs keep some (perhaps at the user's discretion, as in
MS Wors 3.01) of the data on disk instead of in memory.  That way, I can use
a hard disk to its maximal advantage, and not have to invest in gobs of
semiconductor memory.  I'd much rather plunk down $600-$800 for a 20-30M HD
than for an additional 1Meg of memory; I'd be able to use the HD for both
heavy data, DA, font and application storage, PLUS the ability to use these
ifancy new programs.

Yes, switcher was implemented to be able to use the expanded memory when the
Fat Mac came out, but before SCSI hard disks were on the market.  Must
multifinder follow in the same path when the environment has changed?
-- 
Rich Straka     ihnp4!ihlpf!straka

Advice for the day: "MSDOS - just say no.re