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 _____