Thread
Decked out Apple IIgs vs. Decked out PLUS
It's late 1986 and you are at a computer convention.
You happened to register in the raffle.
You Win!!!
Your Choice is a brand new:
Decked out IIgs, Fully loaded as possible from apple
Box of brand new software, Printer Color Image Writer the whole deal!
Or A
Plus, Fully loaded as possible from apple
Box of brand new software, Printer Color Image Writer the whole deal!
You can only choose one.
What one might it be?
You happened to register in the raffle.
You Win!!!
Your Choice is a brand new:
Decked out IIgs, Fully loaded as possible from apple
Box of brand new software, Printer Color Image Writer the whole deal!
Or A
Plus, Fully loaded as possible from apple
Box of brand new software, Printer Color Image Writer the whole deal!
You can only choose one.
What one might it be?
Back then, it would've been the gs for me.
But, then again, I was in 4th grade at the time, and my school didn't have any Macs, instead a bunch of //e's. One of which sorta became "mine" when we'd go to use the computer lab. A machine that essentially was identical to my current //e, except unenhanced, and an aftermarket half-height second floppy drive. Also didn't have the RamWorks II.
-J
But, then again, I was in 4th grade at the time, and my school didn't have any Macs, instead a bunch of //e's. One of which sorta became "mine" when we'd go to use the computer lab. A machine that essentially was identical to my current //e, except unenhanced, and an aftermarket half-height second floppy drive. Also didn't have the RamWorks II.
-J
I would have chose the IIgs at the time. It was backwards compatible with all the software out at the time and was color. Since I knew nothing about hard drives and computers really it had the wow factor.
Tough call.
In 1986 I had a Sinclair Spectrum. My uncle did fairly well im business and bought a Mac Plus with the huge 20mb external hd. To get to play with the Macs graphic interface was just awsome. I would probably have chosen the Mac Plus. Atleast before 1987, when the Amiga arrived.
In 1986 I had a Sinclair Spectrum. My uncle did fairly well im business and bought a Mac Plus with the huge 20mb external hd. To get to play with the Macs graphic interface was just awsome. I would probably have chosen the Mac Plus. Atleast before 1987, when the Amiga arrived.
Color was such a big deal at that time, I think the IIgs would have won out for me because of that!
My answer would be different if today I could go back in time as my current self and make that choice -- There is a special place in my heart for compact macs, much more than any Apple II. "Today-me" would definitely go for the Plus.
My answer would be different if today I could go back in time as my current self and make that choice -- There is a special place in my heart for compact macs, much more than any Apple II. "Today-me" would definitely go for the Plus.
Does the GS have the might-as-well-be Mac GUI- GS/OS on it? The Woz edition IIgs I had 18 years ago had that. With the color and look alike GS/OS, I'd probably go with the IIgs.
Plus, hands down.
In 1986 I had the aging C-64 with wireless joysticks and 15" Trinitron TV for playing Red Baron. I'd already made the decision to pass on the Laser 128 for A2-ness and the Commodore 128 for CPM. Instead, by '86 I'd purchased the Tandy 1000SX/13"(?) CGA Monitor & had bolted training wheels up to it for the stock Basic and Lotus Framework install.
In 1986 Fontographer had already been released and was in use as the first PostScript illustration program up on Madison Avenue. Since I was in the sign and display business at the time, I was all over that like stink on poo. [}
] ]'>
Of course, I was already a little over 30 with the rug rat underfoot at the time.
In 1986 I had the aging C-64 with wireless joysticks and 15" Trinitron TV for playing Red Baron. I'd already made the decision to pass on the Laser 128 for A2-ness and the Commodore 128 for CPM. Instead, by '86 I'd purchased the Tandy 1000SX/13"(?) CGA Monitor & had bolted training wheels up to it for the stock Basic and Lotus Framework install.
In 1986 Fontographer had already been released and was in use as the first PostScript illustration program up on Madison Avenue. Since I was in the sign and display business at the time, I was all over that like stink on poo. [}
] ]'>Of course, I was already a little over 30 with the rug rat underfoot at the time.
Decked out IIgs, after all the OS is more modern than classic MacOS. 
^Cool video.
-J
-J
@ NJRoadfan - it was about the apps, not the OS, especially back in 1986 before all wound up being developed for Windows.
nice vid nj.
that is a killer setup you have there
the HD in that enclosure must be a quantum.
that is a killer setup you have there
the HD in that enclosure must be a quantum.
Depends how much I knew about either system at the time,
but I think seeing them side by side,
IIGS for me.
Color on the screen, larger screen, and the color printing? Yes.
When I was younger, black/white (based on TV sets) meant boring to me.
Even if it was a green phosphorus screen, I'd take it.
but I think seeing them side by side,
IIGS for me.
Color on the screen, larger screen, and the color printing? Yes.
When I was younger, black/white (based on TV sets) meant boring to me.
Even if it was a green phosphorus screen, I'd take it.
I'll go back to playing Shufflepuck Cafe..... in color.@ NJRoadfan - it was about the apps, not the OS, especially back in 1986 before all wound up being developed for Windows.
The Apple IIgs out of the box was compatible with 8-bit Apple II programs, so long time favorites like VisiCalc and Appleworks were still in use (the latter saw updates into the late 90s-early 00s). There were IIgs specific apps like Appleworks GS. In terms of content creation, most of the 16-bit era programs like Deluxe Paint were ported to the system. Plus you got stuff like Music Construction Set on the audio side.
This thread reminds me of when I was (*mumblemumble* old) back in 1986, whatever general interest computer magazine the family was subscribed to at the time (I honestly can't remember, it may have been "Compute!") ran a contest where the winner could pick between either a Mac Plus with an external hard drive or an IBM PC/AT of some configuration with a hard disk and a color monitor, I don't know if it was CGA or EGA. I'm pretty certain if the family had won back then we would have chosen the AT but I probably would have lobbied for the Mac at least a little just out of curiosity; Macs were "exotic" out in the sticks back then.
(Realistically the AT would have been the "correct" choice for a number of reasons but if we had won it it probably would have been repeatedly gutted and upgraded with new motherboards well into the mid 90's, as happened to the boat-anchor AT clone we ended up with a year or two later.)
Tell the truth I was pretty anti-Apple II at the time, so if I'd won the contest described here back then I would have been pretty tempted to pick the Plus over the IIgs simply out of spite. When I was in elementary school it was the rich kids who owned Apple IIs and if your school had Apples in the computer lab, which most did, they'd lord their ability to take disks home over the other kids. (You really had to love how the teachers were so willing to run off pirate copies of the lab software for those jerks...)
(The secondary schools the area, however, mostly had PC clones. Way to be consistent guys, but another argument for the PC/AT!)
(Realistically the AT would have been the "correct" choice for a number of reasons but if we had won it it probably would have been repeatedly gutted and upgraded with new motherboards well into the mid 90's, as happened to the boat-anchor AT clone we ended up with a year or two later.)
Tell the truth I was pretty anti-Apple II at the time, so if I'd won the contest described here back then I would have been pretty tempted to pick the Plus over the IIgs simply out of spite. When I was in elementary school it was the rich kids who owned Apple IIs and if your school had Apples in the computer lab, which most did, they'd lord their ability to take disks home over the other kids. (You really had to love how the teachers were so willing to run off pirate copies of the lab software for those jerks...)
(The secondary schools the area, however, mostly had PC clones. Way to be consistent guys, but another argument for the PC/AT!)
njroadfan, you should get the other model System Saver. It has 2 slots for your 3.5" drives so you can tuck the System Saver + 2 floppies under the monitor.
That unit was called the "Conserver" from Applied Engineering.
http://apple2online.com/web_documents/ae_conserver_brochure.pdf
They aren't all that common, unlike the System Saver GS.
http://apple2online.com/web_documents/ae_conserver_brochure.pdf
They aren't all that common, unlike the System Saver GS.
1986? The GS, for sure. Although if late 1987, and offered the same choice, I'd go with the Plus - by that point, the Macintosh being the winner was more clear. In 1986, the GS made it appear that the Apple II line still had quite a life left in it.
Apple IIgs all the way. Our school got these new prior to the LC's and I though they were just the coolest thing.
TONS of cool games for these plus color and sweet sound.
Not to bit of a fan of single color displays or black and white. Just my pref.
Still have yet to get my hands on a IIgs for my collection.
TONS of cool games for these plus color and sweet sound.
Not to bit of a fan of single color displays or black and white. Just my pref.
Still have yet to get my hands on a IIgs for my collection.
Apple IIgs for sure. It had the color, the much larger software base as well expansion possibilities, even back in the day, getting IIgs specific cards/software would mean ordering them abroad, as IIgs was not even sold in Finland. In same catelogory the Amiga 1000/500 had that market seqment owned quite nicely. I can't remember what the schools had generally but ours had atleast some CP/M machines and i'd assume some basic model PC's.
Amiga models kicked those PC's h a r d with the specs and the price.
Amiga models kicked those PC's h a r d with the specs and the price.
In late '86, I was using an old Timex Sinclair 2068, and I lusted after Macintosh products. Other than the Apple IIe computers we used in high school, I knew little about Apple II computers, other than how to program them in Basic. So probably would have gone for the Mac.
If I hadn't already seen comps done on the Mac in printout from LaserWriters and Lino output, using them for projection patternmaking and screen printing, I likely would have been tempted by the IIgs as well. I liberated one on the sidewalk near the shop later on, pretty cool hardware.
I'm still using the KBD from that one! :approve:
I'm still using the KBD from that one! :approve:
Would the Plus have actually had a hard drive?
No hard drive with either, I would have chosen the IIGS, might still today.
Hard drive with the Plus, I probably would have chosen a Plus.
Although, back then I would have only been interested in games, so the IIGS would probably have won out.
Tough call, did I flip flop enough?
No hard drive with either, I would have chosen the IIGS, might still today.
Hard drive with the Plus, I probably would have chosen a Plus.
Although, back then I would have only been interested in games, so the IIGS would probably have won out.
Tough call, did I flip flop enough?
@NJRoadFan
Do you also boot from the CFFA card?
I am curious how the speed compares between the HD and your SCSI card.
I finally acquired a SCSI card for an Apple II, but it's just the standard model Apple SCSI, not the high speed model.
Do you also boot from the CFFA card?
I am curious how the speed compares between the HD and your SCSI card.
I finally acquired a SCSI card for an Apple II, but it's just the standard model Apple SCSI, not the high speed model.
I have done informal benchmarks between the CFFA3000 and my RamFAST Rev. D SCSI card with the stock 256k cache. Keep in mind that this was done before the latest CFFA3000 firmware with improved access times.
Boot up time from power-on to desktop.
CFFA3000 (no DMA support available): 44 seconds
RamFAST (DMA Off): 41 seconds
RamFAST (DMA On): 38 seconds
The RamFAST lives up to its name, even though its connected to an old, slow Apple 40SC external hard drive. Its most noticeable when closing Finder windows (at least on a machine with a TWGS running at 12.5Mhz with 32k cache). You get a pause when the CFFA3000 writes the FINDER.DATA file information before closing the window, while it instantly closes on the SCSI drives. CFFA volumes take a second to mount when returning to Finder, while the RamFAST volumes mount instantly. Part of it is DMA and part of it is aggressive caching. Chances are you won't notice any speed difference anyway if you are running a stock 2.8Mhz IIgs.
If it wasn't bottlenecked by an 8bit 1Mhz bus, the RamFAST is likely faster than Apple's built in SCSI implementations.
Boot up time from power-on to desktop.
CFFA3000 (no DMA support available): 44 seconds
RamFAST (DMA Off): 41 seconds
RamFAST (DMA On): 38 seconds
The RamFAST lives up to its name, even though its connected to an old, slow Apple 40SC external hard drive. Its most noticeable when closing Finder windows (at least on a machine with a TWGS running at 12.5Mhz with 32k cache). You get a pause when the CFFA3000 writes the FINDER.DATA file information before closing the window, while it instantly closes on the SCSI drives. CFFA volumes take a second to mount when returning to Finder, while the RamFAST volumes mount instantly. Part of it is DMA and part of it is aggressive caching. Chances are you won't notice any speed difference anyway if you are running a stock 2.8Mhz IIgs.
If it wasn't bottlenecked by an 8bit 1Mhz bus, the RamFAST is likely faster than Apple's built in SCSI implementations.
Interesting for sure. Was that with a Compact Flash card, or does it not matter USB vs compact flash?
Do you think the performance of your SCSI card would improve with a faster drive?
If I'm not mistaken you have the fastest accelerator and the fastest SCSI card made for the IIGS right?
I am looking forward to using mine with an actual SCSI drive.
Do you think the performance of your SCSI card would improve with a faster drive?
If I'm not mistaken you have the fastest accelerator and the fastest SCSI card made for the IIGS right?
I am looking forward to using mine with an actual SCSI drive.
The RamFAST is the fastest SCSI card for the Apple II. The Transwarp GS could run up to 16Mhz, but that requires modification and a better power supply. The law of diminishing returns kicks in though, so any speed boost over 12Mhz would be negligible. Performance of the card likely won't improve much with a faster hard drive. The Apple II bus is the bottleneck. Speed of CF vs. USB doesn't make a difference, both are so much faster compared to the host system. The CFFA3000 has more processing power than the IIgs its in!
If I were where I am now [HS Senior] in 1986 I'd be accustomed to Apple II software, so that and color would send me to the IIgs. Luckily I now have both and don't have to make a choice.
I just sold a TS1000 last month.
that's how i got hooked, ZX81 with 1k memory, (original from Timex 1000)
as for choice, me i would take the IIgs, never had or touched a plus went from the IIgs to IIfx
as for choice, me i would take the IIgs, never had or touched a plus went from the IIgs to IIfx
Gotta love how you could peel the keyboard off a ZX81/TS1000 like a sticker. Best use I ever found for one was as a source of a spare Z-80 when the one in my Tandy 4P went *poof*.
There you go ZX80 replica -> http://www.ebay.com/itm/ZX80-Replica-Kit-/151179082155?pt=US_Vintage_Computers_Mainframes&hash=item2332f9b9ab :lol: