Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Habib who wrote (13312)	5/10/1998 4:45:00 PM
From: J R KARY	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213177

'97's paper on Rhapsody suggests easy I/O drivers - USB ? Richard can't help but feel AAPL is prepared to step up to a Win/98 delay , considering this Rhapsody I/O driver writing comment : " The core OS device drivers run in the kernel's address space and provide I/O services to both the blue and yellow boxes. They support true plug-and-play, have integrated power management, can be loaded and unloaded dynamically, and are modular and extensible. They are programmed using object-oriented techniques in Objective-C or C++ using the I/O Kit. Writing drivers is fairly easy. For example, Martin Minow of Apple reported that it only took him about three weeks to port the Copland SCSI driver to Rhapsody. He says that "it's easier than you think to write drivers." Take a few minutes and fully read this paper on Rhapsody from '97 : charlotte.at.nwu.edu Consider a year has passed - WWDC will be big , plus isn't Rhaposody planned for MacWorld July '98 ? There is no unrequited love between MSFT and AAPL . The State AGs also plan MSFT suits on free application code in an OS . Could this be why AAPL is charging for Quicktime and JUST Saturday updated its software agreement to keep it that way . If Rhapsody is like this paper portends , AAPL will have a higher PE soon . Regards, Jim K.

To: Richard Habib who wrote (13312)	5/10/1998 6:18:00 PM
From: Rocky Reid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213177

RE:USB concerns Being in the audio/video field, I can only hope that Apple's lack of SCSI in the iMac isn't implemented in its other models. The devices I use everyday require considerably more throughput than what USB can offer. Perhaps Apple is positioning an introduction of a firewire upgrade for the iMac. Since Intel recently canned its firewire development, maybe now is the time for Apple to assert the virtues of this major improvement by actually implementing it in ALL of its models (as well as USB). This could really show up Intel, and further demonstrate Apple's commitment to speed, and "toasting Intel" as evident in their commercials.

To: Richard Habib who wrote (13312)	5/11/1998 4:27:00 PM
From: FruJu	Respond to of 213177

> I will just about > guarantee you that the USB implementation in the iMac will be the > same as the Win98 implementation which by the way is a change from > previous implementations. The hardware will be the same, but they still have to write the drivers specifically for the Mac. Witness the PCI card situation, where the hardware is exactly the same between the Wintel and Mac boxes, but still only a fraction of the Wintel PCI card vendors bother writing the driver software to make their cards run on a Mac. Actually, the situation probably won't be as bad as PCI, just because the peripherals for USB will be more low-end, simple things compared to the PCI cards. E>