home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!jetson.uh.edu!wmporter
- From: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter)
- Subject: Re: ***** NEED INFO: LCII vs IIsi *****
- Message-ID: <11SEP199204433294@jetson.uh.edu>
- News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41
- Sender: usenet@menudo.uh.edu (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: rosie.uh.edu
- Organization: University of Houston
- References: <9209031916.AA17076@kiwi.tropix.uucp>
- Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:43:00 GMT
- Lines: 24
-
- In a recent article Baldwin Ng (bng@tropel.gca.com) asked:
-
- >Could some of you help me to figure out which one is
- >better? LCII or MacIIsi? Pros and cons in aspects
- >like clock speed, screen-refreshing speed, expandibility
- >and so on are VERY WELCOME! Oh, also graphics display
- >properties....
-
- I have an LCII; my good friend has an si. Both are good machines. The basic
- difference is this: the LCII is cheaper, but slower, and has fewer expansion
- slots. The LCII, though it has an '030 chip, has a 16-bit data path, where the
- si has a 32-bit data path. What this means--as I understand it--is that the
- LCII has, as it were, a highway with fewer lanes, so at rush hour, the speed at
- which traffic moves is going to be slower than on the IIsi. I don't find it
- intolerable, however. Depends a lot on what you're doing: for most tasks, an
- LCII will be quite powerful enough, while for some tasks (like CAD) a IIsi
- isn't going to cut it either.
-
- Moral: If you can afford it, get a IIsi. Otherwise get an LCII with at least a
- 13" monitor. You'll be happy either way.
-
- William Porter
- Internet: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu
- Classical Languages: University of Houston
-