Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!oliveb!felix!kehr From: kehr@felix.UUCP (Shirley Kehr) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Mac II recommendation Message-ID: <73358@felix.UUCP> Date: 4 Dec 88 18:22:43 GMT References: <595@cadillac.CAD.MCC.COM> <71934@felix.UUCP> <389@eutrc3.UUCP> Sender: daemon@felix.UUCP Reply-To: kehr@felix.UUCP (Shirley Kehr) Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA Lines: 29 In article <389@eutrc3.UUCP> rcbaab@eutrc3.UUCP (Annard Brouwer) writes:kehr@felix.UUCP (Shirley Kehr) writes: <>Do you think it's best to go with the 030 and it's memory management for <>future OS's or is this a waste of money if you're only going to run Mac <>software (not A/ux)? Annard In response to an earlier article (on my system) that noted lack of summaries by those requesting email, I'll summarize what I learned from this question. The response was overwhelmingly in favor of the IIx because future versions of Mac software would use the PMMU, saving me the trouble of upgrading the Mac II in the future. However, I did not rush out and buy it yet because others suggested that I wait until after the first of the year and see what new models would be available and what that would do to the prices of older models. In particular people mentioned the 3-slot Mac II and the SE with the 68030. They think that the superdrive will be the standard floppy on all new machines. Now, if I can only wait! These 60-mile drives on the weekend are getting to me. Shirley Kehr