On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Richard Erlacher wrote:
> However, there's an easily observable basis for the beliefs regarding
> the Apple][ disk subsystem that I've put forth in this case, unlike
> the erroneous conclusions that early 20th-century Americans had drawn
> about diet.
In the Dick Erlacher World of Factually Erroneous and Frivelous Opinions,
perhaps. In the real world? Nein.
> The Apple][ disk subsystem was made in order to offer drives with a
> capacity advantage over its competitor, the TRS-80 single-density
> 5-14" drives. I don't remember the details of the cost difference,
I think your timeline is in error here. I believe the Apple Disk ][ was
on the market before the TRS-80 disk drives. And at any rate, your
analysis is, again, wrong. Apple offered disk drives because it was a
good marketing move, and it just happened to store more data than Radio
Shack's because Woz's design was elegant, clever, and superior.
> but the main advantage to Apple was in that they built their own drive
> electronics and cound benefit at the system level, cost-wise, from
> every little thing they left out. First of all, they didn't have to
<the rest of Dick's spewage flushed>
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
Received on Tue Nov 06 2001 - 14:57:53 GMT