To: Mr. K
Apple did things first and did them well and did them right. Do the words "closed architecture" mean anything to you? They had an open architecture with the Apple II, but the Mac was un-extendable.
Until USB became prevelant, the Mac was critically crippled.
963 posted on
03/17/2005 3:33:27 PM PST by
m87339
(If you could see what a drag it is to see you.)
To: m87339
Do the words "closed architecture" mean anything to you? They had an open architecture with the Apple II, but the Mac was un-extendable. Alright - another person that understands the situation!
To: m87339
that is the point I made... They did things better, but shot themselves in the foot by thinking they were so superior they could price themselves higher and have closed architecture
982 posted on
03/17/2005 7:01:00 PM PST by
Mr. K
(I plan put my "Run Hillary Run" bumper sticker on the front of my car)
To: m87339
Do the words "closed architecture" mean anything to you? They had an open architecture with the Apple II, but the Mac was un-extendable.
Until USB became prevelant, the Mac was critically crippled. Tell that to my old PowerMac 9500, introduced in 1995, with its six (6) PCI slots... or all the earlier Macs with 2 SCSI buses...
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson