Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!mtunx!rutgers!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!ANDREW.CMU.EDU!jm7e+
From: jm7e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("Jeremy G. Mereness")
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Danger of IIgs+
Message-ID: <4Weq3jy00V4GMJ80NC@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: 7 Jun 88 03:20:15 GMT
References: <8806061536.AA11762@crash.cts.com>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 115


A moderate's point of view.....

After reading both Phil Goetz's and Todd South's comments on
the "Danger of the //gs+," I feel I have to respond at least a little
bit to make a few things a little clearer from a historical perspective...

Phil Goetz wrote that the evolution of the computer has suggested that the
smarter the computers have become, the less curious the people who use them
areto explore the machines' possibilities beyond that of published software.
He further points out that the // line, esp. with the GS, has started on a
similar path.

Well.... lessee.

> The regression of the users became more visibly apparent with the large
>crop of IIe owners. Not only are most of them afraid to so much as change
>ROMs, an unknown number of them have no programming ability at all.
>Then came the IIc, which Apple specifically designed for the anticipated
>next generation of users who would quake at the prospect of inserting a
>card into a slot themselves.

You know why? Listen....

As far as the //e is concerned, and all computers in the // line following it,
(or maybe in the computer world at large) Apple has had to come to grips with
the fact that there are a great many more people out there who will buy
computers but are afraid to fiddle with them than there are hobbiests and
hackers, and perhaps more to the point, these people generally have more money
to throw around. Let me use K-12 schools as an example. High school teachers
are typical techno-phobics that have absolutely no intention of opening their
//e's unless the installation manual expressly tells them to. These people will
never, ever see the true potential of the machines that the hackers will
discover, but a school system will buy //e's in BULK! Apple Computer Co., as
much as I hate to admit it, had to begin catering to this market of more
ignorant, single-purpose, software dependent users. Hell! If Apple didn't, IBM
certainly would fill the gap.

The same analagy can be drawn to the business user. I clearly remember
businessmen complaining about how computers were simply too difficult to learn
how to use way back in 1978. Sure, Apples could be programmed to do many of the
easy, simple things that mainframes were being forced to do at the time, but
corporations had full-time programmers to configure mainframes; I don't think
they could see fit to hiring a similar position to likewise maintain an Apple
][. Therefore, business declared that it was up to the computer manufacturer to
see to it that the machines were as as refined and easy to use as possible
before it was placed on the desktop (Visicalc proved that this was possible)
and in order to fulfill this wish, personal computers had to be made faster.

User-friendly Interfaces take memory and speed. Thus, much of the power of new
machines is dedicated to an easy, user-oriented interface; not, as programming
and hardware hackers alike would prefer, toward an effective  programming
envirnment. The pinacle of this evolution, of course, is the Macintosh, where
one can never break through to the machine-code without special programs like
the Mac Programmer's Workshop.

>I propose that the machines themselves may
>cause brain-damage to their owners. I bring forth this proposal after
>repeated observation of rational people who, upon buying IIes or IIcs,
>lose this rationality for a kind of pseudoreligon in which the computer
>is treated as a holy object which is meant only to run precanned software,
>and whose lid may be opened only by members of the Priesthood of Dealers
>who have proved their right to work on the machines by successfuly charging
>$40 to open the lid.

It is true that this is more common, but that is because the //e is more
common. It is a pity that so many common people are like this but how many
people pay $40 bucks to get their stereo's repaired? or kitchen appliances? or
even cars?

People are certainly not getting brain damaged, and any hacker who
has gladly traded in his //+ for a more capable //e will tell you that the
increased power does NOTHING to discourage his continued interest in the
machine. What examples are necessary? Double hires graphics on the //e and
hacking with extended memory? Howzabout the fact that game hackers like Lord
British now require 64K machines for their programs instead of 48K? Believe it
or not, the hacker is going to be the first person to realize the limits of a
machine and start wishing for more (I mean, who would know better?)

>I must therefore caution anyone against buying a IIgs+ before data is
>in on its effects on the user. I repeat: The IIgs+ is potentially DANGEROUS.
>Due to its great power, even a test drive at a dealership may be hazardous.

Number one, you can't stop technology. Face it. Even Reagan's SDI "Star Wars"
is inevitable, because you can't stop people from figuring new things out and
expanding human and machine capability. So, accept the fact that computers will
continue to get faster and more capable.

Number two, power never stopped creativity. You are confusing power with closed
architecture, which means the Mac has no ctrl-reset that pops you into
applesoft, or even the monitor. You have to learn C and buy MPW from Apple to
program on it, or atleast buy Miscrosoft Basic and ResEdit. It is too bad that
the GS seems to be taking this road with APW, but it can still be hacked upon,
and if I ever see a GS+, you know I am going to do some jury-rigging with its
synthesizer port. Besides, you can still ctrl-reset into the monitor on a GS
and can program it w/o a disk drive. APW just makes it easier. As for more
power, my final argument is this; go to a major research university like MIT,
Berkeley, or Canegie-Mellon and take a look at X-Windows and file-sharing.
These machines are powerful as @#$^% and have user friendly, window interfaces.
The difference is, one of the windows is a UNIX shell, through which you can
take anything and EVERYTHING apart and put it back together again, including
the window manager your running on.

Try and tell me the hackers here rely on "canned software." Even computer-shy
novices do some "hacking"; they hack there own preference file....


Capt. Albatross
jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu

============
disclaimer: These opinions are mine and will remain so until more intelligent
or
insightful or informed people are kind enough to show me the error of my ways.
Remember: A mind is a terrible thing to baste.