Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!munnari!basser!frankng
From: frankng@basser.oz (Frank Ng)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Should 64K ROMs be supported?
Message-ID: <849@basser.oz>
Date: Tue, 23-Dec-86 15:35:29 EST
Article-I.D.: basser.849
Posted: Tue Dec 23 15:35:29 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Dec-86 18:45:40 EST
References: <476@runx.OZ> <1490@hoptoad.uucp> <907@ur-tut.UUCP> <4939@reed.UUCP> <531@runx.OZ>
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Science, Uni of Sydney, Australia
Lines: 33
Summary: The rest of us still use 64K ROMs

In article <531@runx.OZ>, baron@runx.OZ (Jason Haines) writes:
> ...
> 
> I have yet to see one good reason why people with Macs are not getting the
> ROM/Drive upgrade. Surely most Mac users want that extra power that the new
> ROMs and new 800K drive give them over the vanilla 512K.
> ...

There are many good reasons, most of them involve money.  The
~AUS$600 for the upgrade is not an insignificant sum.

My mac (and HD20 (lucky me) and imagewriter) was generously provided
to me through my department from a research grant from the government.

Even if I wanted to I cannot upgrade the machine myself since I don't
officially *own* it.  To upgrade it would require the hassle of
getting a further grant of some sort.

I am sure there are more machines in a similar situation.

64K ROMS should be supported!

-----
Frank Ng
Basser Department of Computer Science
University of Sydney
New South Wales 2006
AUSTRALIA

ACSnet: frankng@basser
ARPA:   frankng%basser.oz@seismo.css.gov
UUCP:   seismo!munnari!basser.oz!frankng
_____