home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!sun-barr!olivea!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!doug.cae.wisc.edu!kolstad
- From: kolstad@cae.wisc.edu (Joel Kolstad)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
- Subject: Re: 10th anniversay of the C=64?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov6.014726.23754@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
- Date: 6 Nov 92 07:47:26 GMT
- References: <1992Nov1.140655.23999@doug.cae.wisc.edu> <1992Nov1.213159.23938@cs.umb.edu> <92310.092811SYST8134@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca>
- Distribution: na
- Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
- Lines: 27
-
- In article <92310.092811SYST8134@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> <SYST8134@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> writes:
- >
- >Now, if you want to compare APPLE II computers and C64's as has been done
- >ever since they came out around the same time it is C64 hands down,
- >especially when bang for the buck enters the conversation.
-
- Although a super-preped Apple machine, such as the II GS with an accelerator
- board runing OS GS and ProDOS will easily outdo a C-64 (and C-128, for that
- matter) with an accelerator and GEOS. OS GS is considerably more
- functional than GEOS. ProDOS allows seamless subdirectory and hard disk
- integration for all programs.
-
- Granted, this comparison is a little unfair. If Commodore had come out
- with some of those neat high end 8 bitters that Fred Bowen tells us about,
- and is BSW had done GEOS 3.0, the II GS could probably have been matched.
-
- You're right about the price bit. Slots do cost money, though, and they're
- another reason the Apple II was better than the C-64 is some ways --
- those slots lets you easily drop in 80 column boards, hard disk interfaces,
- etc., things that are much harder to accomplish on the 64.
-
- IMHO, the 64 and Apple II was _both_ great machines. If I had a few
- thousand dollars to throw around, I'd probably go buy a GS. God only
- knows that there's a lot of machines _today_ that'd I'd prefer to a
- Macintosh!
-
- ---Joel Kolstad
-