Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!ccicpg!felix!john From: john@felix.UUCP (John Gilbert) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: MultiFinder RAMDisks Message-ID: <15602@felix.UUCP> Date: 8 Dec 87 23:48:51 GMT References: <1927@unc.cs.unc.edu> <6664@apple.UUCP> <5104@oberon.USC.EDU> <14543@felix.UUCP> <5431@oberon.USC.EDU> Sender: daemon@felix.UUCP Reply-To: john@felix.UUCP (John Gilbert) Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA Lines: 173 In article <5431@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >In article <14543@felix.UUCP> john@felix.UUCP (John Gilbert) writes: >>In article <5104@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: Conveniently omitted is a statement from the original poster which I quoted in my article and was directly responding to: The requirement for the minimum, fully functional Mac is 2 meg. ( should be preceeded with >>> ) >>>The valid complaint against Apple is that the now standard >>>Hypercard/Multifinder software combination demands 2 meg of memory to >>>work reasonably. >> >>The requirement for the minimum, fully functional Mac is 1 meg. Use >>of MultiFinder and HyperCard do not really fall into the category of, >>minimum, fully functional. They are extensions. You can use HyperCard in >>1 meg. You can use MultiFinder with many applications in 1 meg. I might >>add that just being able to switch between the finder and one application >>at a time is a great improvement, so this is a useful configuration. > >Use of HyperCard and MultiFinder constitutes using a standard program under the >standard operating environment, which cannot be done on the middle-of-the- >product-line configuration. Whether something is useful is not the point, it >is whether Apple is providing value and good service to their customers by >putting together a set of system software that purports to multitask but cannot >run two standard programs when given 1 meg of memory. It appears to me that >they are hoping to get people to upgrade their memory. Now, that isn't evil, >but it would be nice if they were a little more honest about it. You can still use HyperCard! You can still use Multifinder! It is a fact of life in computing that there are limitations based on physical resources. You can use both, but not at the same time. At least your machine has the potential to use them simultaneously someday. The "standard" operating environment is using plain old "Finder". Using Multifinder is... >>First, using Multi-Fnder is an OPTION, not a requirement. > >True. I have the option of using the new standard system software, or the >old software that is provided for compatibility with older systems. No, WAIT!!! Not true. You can use the very latest, brand spanking new system software without Multifinder. You have absolutely no reason to use an older system unless some application happens to require it. >>Secondly, the most useful things the Macintosh does, it >>does without HyperCard. HyperCard is just catching on, and does not yet >>avail the power of Word, PageMaker, SuperPaint, Excel. It is probably >>capable of doing a lot of things it doesn't do yet, but I can't believe anyone >>NEEDS HyperCard. Yet. >> > >This is no argument. The fact is, HyperCard is a standard piece of software. >Everyone gets it. Apple is hyping it as the greatest thing since Macintosh. >Apple is pushing to involve people in developing stackware. The program is >useful and does eliminate the need for buying many application packages. I >have several applications running in it already. True, no one NEEDS Hypercard, >but then again no one NEEDS a Macintosh. >>With that in mind, I wonder why you think youe SE is "obsolete", or why you >>feel "forced" to buy a memory upgrade. It still does all the useful things >>it did before they introduced MultiFinder. Your SE will be "fully functional" >>for years to come. But do your think youe base level system should do >>EVERYTHING any Mac can? Just depends upon what you mean by "fully >>functional". Why did you buy a personal computer? What is it you need >>to get done? > >If MultiFinder were some fancy extension to the Macintosh that Apple felt was >an extra, it would be sold as an extension to the system and not bundled as >the standard system software. How do you substantiate that? I just plain don't see that that follows. > Apple would not be sending information out to >developers telling them to change their software so that it will be "Multi- >finder friendly". I am judging "fully functional" by what Apple is telling me >is its standard system. As a developer, if I choose to improve my software to take advantage of what Multifinder offers, then I will have a better product. This does not mean that folks not using Multifinder are worse off with my product. Apple wants developers to make the most of what is available, and also not to forget those configurations which do not use all features whenever possible. They have never encouraged us to assume multifinder and forget the rest. I assume "fully functional" to mean that the computer is usefull as sold. It does not mean it can run all combination of things. >My SE is not a base level system. It is the middle of the product line. I don't >expect it to do everything. I do expect it to run the standard software. And it does. You just seem to think it all has to run at the same time. >>You see, 1 Meg SIMMs do not grow on proverbial trees. They could ship >>Mac SE's with 2 megs. They could also justify charging you an extra $350 >>too. What about the person who doesn't need the extra memory? You can still >>do a LOT in 1 meg. > >As a side note, the $400 memory upgrade is the education discount price. I was >told it would be $800 full retail. For what it is worth, Apple will more >likely tack more money onto the retail price that $350. Don't buy Apple! I bought 2 1meg 120ns SIMMs from a parts supplier for $175 apiece. You can EASILY find such parts for under $230 each, and the 3rd party upgrades in the Mail order adds are now all under $500 for 2 megs, complete with instructions and warranty. Apple can get them cheaper in quantity, I am sure. I *thought* you were arguing originally that the problem was they had sold you a system that could not use the software without more memory, and that the SE should come configured for the "standard software". Here you seem bothered by the fact that the required memory would have cost too much more. >Apple could have put a little effort into making Multifinder smaller. This is a pretty bold statement. Do you know how much effort they put in? How much waste is there in Multi-finder? Stick the word "Perhaps" at the front and I wold feel better, but hey, this is not about MY feelings. I suspect there is room for improvement. There is also room for lots more features too. >The fact that Multifinder is an excessive memory hog has been well documented >in this forum. They could also have made HyperCard a little smaller, or at >least segmented it so that it could run in something less the 750K! >(It took a lot of will power not to use an explitive between "750" and "K"). There are many applications out that now come with configured memory sizes approaching this. 4th Dimension is one. MPW is another. I still feel: 1. You do not NEED HyperCard. I love it. I do not NEED it. You CAN run HyperCard without Multi-finder, so it is not useless to you. 2. One does not NEED multi-finder to do useful things on a Mac. You CAN use Multifinder in 1 meg with many programs, so it is not useless to you. 3. Apple never sold you something with the promise that you could run HyperCard with Multifinder in 1 meg as part of the conditions for the sale, or even as a sales incentive. If your salesman did, you got a legitimate gripe with the sales guy. 4. It is not wrong to package together pieces of software that will not run together in small, supported configurations. It is not wrong to sell configurations which are so small that they can not run all the software that comes with it at the same time. This is especially true for those customers who have very important, yet simple needs like just using PageMaker to crank out the newsletter. Those folks appreciate not having to spend more for the extra memory. 5. A 2 meg SE would be a useful configuration, and is worth listing on the price list. Had you bought such a configuration I suspect you would pay almost as much as buying a 3rd party upgrade. No big win, only you would probably feel better. Sigh. Maybe they should just put a whopping price tag on the software to make it seem like an "OPTION"??? Charge you $200 for HyperCard, $200 for Multi-finder, and then you would have spent $400 and still have only 1 megabyte. I'm glad it's cheap. John G. -- John Gilbert !trwrb!felix!john