Thread
Classic II Corrosion: Am I Screwed?
Yes, but even the Plus was selling with 2MB stock at the end. And unlike the Plus, if you did not upgrade the RAM board right away after you dropped $1,000, you were screwed – Remember System 7 was the first users had to pay for too, so many Classic users opted out. Many Classics I have seen are missing the RAM board. You sound like an Apple marketing brochure defending the Classic. A hard drive could be added anytime for years afterward, but not that RAM card. It trapped a lot of people into that 1MB configuration. The point remains, it was a bad decision by Apple in the long run and left SE users no options until the Color Classic, which offered no improvement over the SE/30. Apple came to see the compact as an entry-level model to be phased out, and never produced a superior compact to the SE/30.Yea, that entry level config also didn't have any hard drive built-in and was simply to replace the Plus period at a lower price ...There was a better more expensive config with that non-standard RAM board already installed resulting in 2MB of RAM and a 40MB hard drive installed too that was ready for System 7 (which needed both of these things)
Also, Apple advertised the Classic as being 25% faster than the Plus, and the SE as being 15-20% faster. However, I believe I have seen benchmark tests which indicate the SE was faster than the Classic in some real world tests. I might be wrong since I can't currently find anything to prove or disprove. I leave it to others expertise.
Actually 7.1 was the first release where Apple actually began charging for system software. With 7.0 the system software was still free, but the upgrade kits had the manuals too.Remember System 7 was the first users had to pay for too, so many Classic users opted out.
Yes, which is why I wrote System 7, not 7.0. And System 7 remains the first system Apple charged for, not counting boxed sets with manuals of System 6. So, 6 months after the Classic was released, Apple offered 6.0.8 to maintain compatibility with System 7. Since System 7 required more than 1MB RAM and a SCSI drive to run, it is unlikely many Classic users plunked down the money only 6 months later to add a very expensive hard drive and another Meg of RAM, plus they got the illusion of an upgrade with 6.0.8. A year later, Apple began charging for the System as well, adding yet another deterrent to upgrading.
Yea, it would be better if they bought the 2/40 config with both already installed in the first place, but I bet the $999 price was tempting.Since System 7 required more than 1MB RAM and a SCSI drive to run, it is unlikely many Classic users plunked down the money only 6 months later to add a very expensive hard drive and another Meg of RAM.
In response to an earlier post (I no longer know how to Quote):
Apple did produce what is in some ways a superior compact to the SE/30. It just wasn't sold in the USA. It was the Color Classic II, and it was a very capable little consumer/ education machine: 33MHz processor, 32-bit clean, 33 bus, 36MB RAM capability, LCPDS/ethernet capability, thousands of colours with a vram upgrade, built-in microphone....
Now, having said that, there are also lots of ways in which the CCII was not superior to an SE/30: no version of A/UX, for example, runs on a CCII and certainly it was not in any sense of the term a high end machine when it was introduced. But it also wasn't the cheap / deliberately crippled machines that the Classic, Classic II and Color Classic were.
So yes, the SE/30 is king of the Compact hill, but even so, it is not the fastest or (for most uses) the most capable of the Compacts. That distinction is the CCII's.
My own view is that the trouble with Apple's products at the time in question was that the company was in the business of soaking its customers by charging way too much for hardware, when it really ought to have been in the business of selling lots more computers more cheaply. Its profit margins were obscene, and though the strategy of selling low volumes at high margins kept the company in business for a few years, making good machines at less grotesquely inflated prices (like today) would have allowed for higher sales and thus there would have been no need for the crippled "low cost" line.
Apple did produce what is in some ways a superior compact to the SE/30. It just wasn't sold in the USA. It was the Color Classic II, and it was a very capable little consumer/ education machine: 33MHz processor, 32-bit clean, 33 bus, 36MB RAM capability, LCPDS/ethernet capability, thousands of colours with a vram upgrade, built-in microphone....
Now, having said that, there are also lots of ways in which the CCII was not superior to an SE/30: no version of A/UX, for example, runs on a CCII and certainly it was not in any sense of the term a high end machine when it was introduced. But it also wasn't the cheap / deliberately crippled machines that the Classic, Classic II and Color Classic were.
So yes, the SE/30 is king of the Compact hill, but even so, it is not the fastest or (for most uses) the most capable of the Compacts. That distinction is the CCII's.
My own view is that the trouble with Apple's products at the time in question was that the company was in the business of soaking its customers by charging way too much for hardware, when it really ought to have been in the business of selling lots more computers more cheaply. Its profit margins were obscene, and though the strategy of selling low volumes at high margins kept the company in business for a few years, making good machines at less grotesquely inflated prices (like today) would have allowed for higher sales and thus there would have been no need for the crippled "low cost" line.
Yea, Gassee was famous for that strategy, and that was part of why he was forced out. After that, the October 1990 round of Macs (which not only include the Classic, but also the LC and IIsi) began development, and these machines was developed in realisation that this strategy was a mistake.My own view is that the trouble with Apple's products at the time in question was that the company was in the business of soaking its customers by charging way too much for hardware, when it really ought to have been in the business of selling lots more computers more cheaply. Its profit margins were obscene