Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!hp-sde!hpcea!twakeman
From: twake...@hpcea.CE.HP.COM (Teriann Wakeman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Computer for the rest of us?
Message-ID: <430043@hpcea.CE.HP.COM>
Date: 21 Sep 88 00:01:07 GMT
Organization: HP Corporate Engineering - Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 51
And the schism between the haves and have nots in this country keeps
getting bigger.
Once upon a time, there was a company called Apple Computer that was going
to bring the computer to the rest of us. Thousands of Macintoshes were
donated to schools. A group was formed inside Apple to come up with ways
to maximize Macintosh usability by handicaped people. Schools in poor
largely non-white areas were targeted for special help so that the kids
might someday find work on a more equal footing with their counterparts
from more financially advantaged areas. A group within Apple became
concerned by the lack of participation by girls in school computer
activities.
In a country where for the last eight years {years of prosparity according
to our president} the gap between the have nots and the haves have
widened; Where the average yearly income for a full time employee in
this country is under $25,000/year; Where more children then ever do not
live in homes because their parents cannot afford to house them; Apple has
spent considerable resources trying to bring computer literacy to the
poor and disadvantaged.
What has this accomplished? Many children from poor families have been
exposed to computers in schools for a few years and have come to realize
that with time they may be able to learn enough to free themselves from the
generations of poverty that spawned them. Do they get a chance to continue
learning at home or after they pass that sometimes brief window of exposure?
I suspect that all of us who have access to the NET and the know-how
to use it either have or soon anticipate having an income that has
enough disposable income to purchase a computer system. We use our
knowledge of the computer to help provide our income. We bitch about
Apple raising their prices and many of us go ahead and buy that new
system, grumbling all the way from the bank to the computer store.
But how many more people are there that now can not afford a Macintosh?
{Do you really think that the Plus will be sold much longer?}
What of all the work being done by groups within Apple exposing people to a
dream that they will never be able to afford??
Whatever happened to the dream of the computer for the rest of us? To the
vision of Mac decendants as common in households as a toaster?
When was the last time you saw a Mac being advertized as the computer
for the rest of us? Who are the rest of us?
Has the dream become a tease to those ever increasing numbers of people
who can not afford a Macintosh?
If the dream dies what of the dreamer?
TeriAnn
From: dlw@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (David Williams)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Computer for the rest of us?
Message-ID: <11540170@hpsmtc1.HP.COM>
Date: 21 Sep 88 22:03:36 GMT
References: <430043@hpcea.CE.HP.COM>
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Lines: 72
Terriann asks:
>Whatever happened to the dream of the computer for the rest of us? To the
>vision of Mac decendants as common in households as a toaster?
>When was the last time you saw a Mac being advertized as the computer
>for the rest of us? Who are the rest of us?
>Has the dream become a tease to those ever increasing numbers of people
>who can not afford a Macintosh?
I think the answer is that it died when Steve Jobs, Andy Hertzfeld, Burrell
Smith, Guy Kawasaki all left Apple.
Apple's focus for the Macintosh is no longer the individual--it is the
individual in BUSINESS. Or the power to be your best in a CORPORATE WORLD. The
vast majority of Macs are now sold directly into businesses. Gone (for the most
part are those of US who put our money where our mouth was and personally
bought a Mac and took it to work.
Apple does not care about us anymore...their prices reflect that. To my mind
the minimal Macintosh is a Mac II with at least 2 megs of memory, Color and
at least a 90 meg hard disk. How many individuals will be able to afford this
at the rate Apple's prices are going? Not many I assure you.
So, where can we turn? Perhaps Steve Jobs once again...if the rumors of the
features and price of his 4meg 68030 machine have enough truth to them.
Steve Jobs took Jeff Raskin's vision of an appliance computer and productized
it. John Sculley, JL Gassee have taken that vision in turn to grow Apple into
a organization whose focus is to sell Macs to Businesses and Apple II's to
Individuals. I don't want an Apple II, and I won't buy one. I want a Personal
Workstation, and I think NeXt Inc. will be shipping one shortly.
I wish Apple success in its ventures into the fortune 500...
However a word of caution that I hope the Apple employes on the net can
communicate up their management chain:
There are a lot of little guys (I call them Change Agents) that you are leaving
behind.
We are the people who bought your machines in the past.
We are the people who took your machines to work when management
said a personal comptuer had to run MS-DOS.
We are the people who develop small and large niche markets for you
to penetrate by selling hardware.
We are the people who CAN NO LONGER AFFORD YOUR STATE OF THE ART
MACINTOSHES.
We have to choose between buying cars, houses, feeding and clothing
our families and (in the case of students) pay for our education.
Your price points no longer make it feasible for us to choose Apple.
What happened to increasing performance and functionality thru the
use of the declining cost of technology? What is the REAL cost
differential of using a 25 mhrz 68030 in the Mac IIx or even a 33m?
Why didn't the SE ship with a 68000 at 16mhrz?
The gap of access to technology and information has just grown wider.
Perhaps some other company will step in to fill the void that exists, one can
only hope.
David L. Williams
Change Agent
Macintosh owner (since 1984)
dlw@hpda.HP.COM
...!hplabs!hpda!dlw
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!
mailrus!iuvax!viking
From: vik...@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Computer for the rest of us?
Message-ID: <3600031@iuvax>
Date: 22 Sep 88 00:19:00 GMT
References: <430043@hpcea.CE.HP.COM>
Organization: Indiana University CSCI, Bloomington
Lines: 17
Nf-ID: #R:hpcea.CE.HP.COM:-43004300:iuvax:3600031:000:701
Nf-From: iuvax.cs.indiana.edu!viking Sep 21 19:19:00 1988
"A computer for the rest of us."
I think that idea followed Steve Jobs over to NeXT. :-) Seriously, I
*do* think the Mac Plus will be sold for a while longer...and maybe
even for less money.
The problem seems to be a conflict between the corporate need to maximize
profits (that's why they hired a guy from Pepsi, you know) and a tradition
of innovation that may not be as valued anymore.
The fact that Apple raised prices without warning (even developers found
out after the fact) makes me a bit angry and disappointed, but I'll have
to reserve judgement until the K-12 Mac and other announced products are
presented to the public before I give up on Apple totally.
Oh well...just a thought...
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!ucsdhub!ucsd!rutgers!mailrus!
ames!oliveb!sun!plaid!chuq
From: c...@plaid.Sun.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Computer for the rest of us?
Message-ID: <69545@sun.uucp>
Date: 22 Sep 88 05:34:09 GMT
References: <430043@hpcea.CE.HP.COM> <3600031@iuvax>
Sender: n...@sun.uucp
Reply-To: c...@sun.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Organization: Fictional Reality
Lines: 54
>"A computer for the rest of us."
>
>I think that idea followed Steve Jobs over to NeXT. :-) Seriously, I
>*do* think the Mac Plus will be sold for a while longer...and maybe
>even for less money.
>
>The problem seems to be a conflict between the corporate need to maximize
>profits (that's why they hired a guy from Pepsi, you know) and a tradition
>of innovation that may not be as valued anymore.
Are you sure you folks aren't living a Fantasy? I bought into the Macintosh
early. A 128K, two floppy system ran me $2800 (THAT early. I still have it,
it's still working every day, although now it's got two megs and a hard disk.
And is on it's third analog board....). My 512K upgrade ran me $700 or so.
I can't believe anyone who's been involved with the Mac since early days
EVER believed they were buying on price. The Mac has never been the 'cheap'
machine. It's always been for 'the rest of us' who knew there had to be
something better than MS-DOS and cryptic commands. It wasn't a price point,
it was a philosophy. And I don't believe Apple EVER marketed the Mac as the
machine for those who couldn't affor a PC.
The rest of us are those folks who want machines that work WITH us, not
AGAINST us. The Mac as 'cheap commodity for all us poor folks' is a Fantasy
created by those who want it. It's not Apple's dream, and never has been.
So quit screaming at Apple for not being something they never pretended to
be. You want cheap, go buy an Atari or an Apple ][. You want state of the
art, you want good, you want power, you want Toys, you have to expect to pay
for it. The best always extracts a premium. And Apple deserves it.
I *could* have saved myself enough money to buy a second Mac by waiting
until the prices dropped to where they have today. Think about what it cost
to buy a 128K then, and how much Mac you could get for that now (two Mac
Plusses, at street price). Then look at the University program, the
University discounts, the developer discounts. Go price what an IBM PS/2
with enough hardware to run the Presentation Manager costs -- and be willing
to wait for the presentation manager on top of it.
Take a look at the cost curve of the Mac line since the introduction. And
then compare that to the power curve. THEN tell me the Mac used to be 'for
the rest of us' and isn't any more. THEN tell me the Mac is expensive. It's
a damn sight less expensive than the Good Old Days you all seem to remember
so fondly.....
If you don't like Mac prices, don't buy Macs. Go buy a PS/2, and run
something that's almost as good, almost as fast, and almost as cheap as a
Mac. There are those of us who happen to be glad that Apple isn't giving
away the future (those margins and high prices, among other things,
guarantee the research and development that'll make future Mac's even
better. Give them away today, they won't exist tomorrow).
Chuq Von Rospach c...@sun.COM Delphi: CHUQ
Editor/Publisher, OtherRealms
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!ncar!tank!nucsrl!bob
From: b...@eecs.nwu.edu (Bob Hablutzel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Computer for the rest of us?
Message-ID: <10330042@eecs.nwu.edu>
Date: 23 Sep 88 01:19:40 GMT
References: <430043@hpcea.CE.HP.COM>
Organization: Northwestern U, Evanston IL, USA
Lines: 41
> Apple does not care about us anymore...their prices reflect that. To my mind
> the minimal Macintosh is a Mac II with at least 2 megs of memory, Color and
> at least a 90 meg hard disk. How many individuals will be able to afford this
> at the rate Apple's prices are going? Not many I assure you.
I assume that a Porsche makes a good family car, too?
Look, nothing personal, but I wish people would realize a few things:
a Mac II is a luxury.
color is a luxury.
large memory is a luxury.
big disks are a luxury.
To my mind, the minimal Macintosh is a Mac Plus with a single floppy. It
just depends on what you want to use the Mac for.
If you want frills, you pay for frills. Period.
One should not complain that a machine on the cutting edge with the
power _and software base_ of the Mac II is expensive. You get what you
pay for.
(Yes, I have a Mac II. No, I don't feel any need to justify myself. I
was willing to pay the price for it, and have no regrets. Of course,
I'm busy writing systems programs. If I were just writting term papers,
no way I'd blow my money on a Mac II).
> So, where can we turn? Perhaps Steve Jobs once again...if the rumors of the
> features and price of his 4meg 68030 machine have enough truth to them.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Look, with the current reputation of NeXT (Do they set release dates
with a dartboard, or what?) I would wait at least a year before even
considering buying one. No point in throwing out perfectly good money.
Yes, even if the machine does everything but blow my nose for me.
Bob Hablutzel B...@NUACC.ACNS.NWU.EDU
Disclaimer #1: These opinions are mine.
Disclaimer #2: I wasn't originally going to say "blow my nose for me".
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!
rutgers!apple!lsr
From: l...@Apple.COM (Larry Rosenstein)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Computer for the rest of us?
Message-ID: <17578@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 23 Sep 88 03:05:57 GMT
References: <430043@hpcea.CE.HP.COM> <11540170@hpsmtc1.HP.COM>
Reply-To: l...@apple.com.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein)
Organization: Advanced Technology Group, Apple Computer
Lines: 48
(I probably will regret posting this, but here goes.)
In article <11540...@hpsmtc1.HP.COM> d...@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (David Williams) writes:
>
>I think the answer is that it died when Steve Jobs, Andy Hertzfeld, Burrell
>Smith, Guy Kawasaki all left Apple.
Do you long for the days when a 128K machine cost $2000 - 2500? This is not
to disparage the efforts of those people, but simply to point out that all
was not perfect back in 1984.
>Apple does not care about us anymore...their prices reflect that. To my mind
>the minimal Macintosh is a Mac II with at least 2 megs of memory, Color and
>at least a 90 meg hard disk. How many individuals will be able to afford this
>at the rate Apple's prices are going? Not many I assure you.
Why is this the minimal Macintosh? I doubt that many individuals would buy
such a configuration from any vendor.
I doubt that anyone at Apple took great joy in raising prices. If Apple was
out to get every dollar possible, don't you think we would have raised
prices a while ago? The demand for machines hasn't gone up only recently;
it has been high for quite a while. Memory has been tight for many months.
It would have been very easy to raise the price of CPUs at the same time we
raised the price of memory upgrades.
>However a word of caution that I hope the Apple employes on the net
can communicate up their management chain:
>
>There are a lot of little guys (I call them Change Agents) that you are
>leaving behind.
You are doing this yourself. As someone pointed out, this newsgroup (among
others) is summarized and distributed to hundreds of people internally who
wouldn't otherwise read Usenet.
>What is the REAL cost. differential of using a 25 mhrz 68030 in the Mac
>IIx or even a 33m? Why didn't the SE ship with a 68000 at 16mhrz?
It seems anomalous to me to complain about high prices in one paragraph and
then about engineering changes such as these which would only increase the
cost of the machines.
Larry Rosenstein, Object Specialist
Apple Computer, Inc. 20525 Mariani Ave, MS 46-B Cupertino, CA 95014
AppleLink:Rosenstein1 domain:l...@Apple.COM
UUCP:{sun,voder,nsc,decwrl}!apple!lsr
From: rnv@motsj1.UUCP (Ron Voss)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Computer for the rest of us?
Summary: Get Real! (I'm a hypocrite)
Message-ID: <940@motsj1.UUCP>
Date: 23 Sep 88 17:32:11 GMT
References: <430043@hpcea.CE.HP.COM> <11540170@hpsmtc1.HP.COM>
Organization: Motorola Microcomputer Division, San Jose Ca.
Lines: 19
In art. <11540170@hpsmtc1.HP.COM>, dlw@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (David Williams) writes:
> Terriann asks:
> >Whatever happened to the dream of the computer for the rest of us? To the...
> Apple's focus for the Macintosh is no longer the individual--it is the
> individual in BUSINESS. Or the power to be your best in a CORPORATE WORLD. ..
> Steve Jobs took Jeff Raskin's vision of an appliance computer and productized
> it. John Sculley, JL Gassee have taken that vision in turn to grow Apple into
> a organization whose focus is to sell Macs to Businesses and Apple II's to
We all wish Macs cost less. And all other products at the top of their class.
The Apple board of directors is required by law to work in the best interests
of the stockholders. This usually means to maximize profits, short term, long
term, and/or both. Tell me you think they're making mistakes. Jobs et al
made a marketing decision to sell to the rest of us. The ploy worked on
you and me and millions. You think the price-performance ratio is worse now?
--
Ron Voss, Motorola Microcomputer Div
hplabs!motsj1!rnv CIS 73647,752
408-991-7390 Opinions: My own
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pyrdc!netsys!ames!think!barmar
From: bar...@think.COM (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Minimal configuration (was Re: Computer for the rest of us?)
Message-ID: <28433@think.UUCP>
Date: 23 Sep 88 17:32:20 GMT
References: <430043@hpcea.CE.HP.COM> <10330042@eecs.nwu.edu>
Sender: n...@think.UUCP
Reply-To: bar...@kulla.think.com.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 18
In article <10330...@eecs.nwu.edu> b...@eecs.nwu.edu (Bob Hablutzel) writes:
>To my mind, the minimal Macintosh is a Mac Plus with a single floppy. It
>just depends on what you want to use the Mac for.
That's a bit bare, unless by "single floppy" you mean single EXTERNAL
floppy. Have you ever tried to run Installer on a single-floppy
system? Maybe you don't mind swapping disks every second for an hour,
but "the rest of us" do. And there are many popular applications that
don't have room for the System on the application disk.
I'd say that the minimal usable system is a Mac Plus with one internal
and one external floppy.
Barry Margolin
Thinking Machines Corp.
bar...@think.com
{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar