Sorry, I wasn't really going for an insult. They're not bad machines if they're used for light applications (like spreadsheets, word processing, SimCity 2000, Oregon Trail, etc).
However, "engineered to suck" is pretty accurate for those models. The only machines on par, really, are the Quadra 630 and IIvx, which are also engineered to suck, except they mostly just recycle the vast majority of their components from machines several years older (most notably the memory and disk controllers). The IIvx also uses a 16MHz system bus with a 32MHz 68030, while the Q630 uses super-slow IDE hard drives and antiquated 3MB/s SCSI controllers. The LC II isn't exactly a hallmark of quality design, either, with its 32-bit processor hobbled by a 16-bit system bus, no on-board FPU socket, and 10MB RAM max.
The 52/6200 was built to be as cheap as possible, and they sacrificed nothing in their quest for the bottom line. I'll spare you the details, but if you'd like to read about them, go here: http://lowendmac.com/roadapples/x200.shtml
However, "engineered to suck" is pretty accurate for those models. The only machines on par, really, are the Quadra 630 and IIvx, which are also engineered to suck, except they mostly just recycle the vast majority of their components from machines several years older (most notably the memory and disk controllers). The IIvx also uses a 16MHz system bus with a 32MHz 68030, while the Q630 uses super-slow IDE hard drives and antiquated 3MB/s SCSI controllers. The LC II isn't exactly a hallmark of quality design, either, with its 32-bit processor hobbled by a 16-bit system bus, no on-board FPU socket, and 10MB RAM max.
The 52/6200 was built to be as cheap as possible, and they sacrificed nothing in their quest for the bottom line. I'll spare you the details, but if you'd like to read about them, go here: http://lowendmac.com/roadapples/x200.shtml