Talk:Apple IIe/Archive 1

Expanding the Apple II's presence on Wikipedia

This entry had originally been just a blank (empty) page that automatically redirected you to the Apple II family. I wanted to see that change, so I did just that and changed it--writing up a entire entry on the Apple IIe computer from the ground up. Why? The Apple II line is probably the most important and historically relevant in the history of personal computers, and I've not seen that reflected on Wikipedia. For that reason, and my own personal fondness, interest, experience and knowledge of the machine, I've made it my personal goal of sorts to expand its presence here.

I feel each machine in the Apple II family line deserves its own entry in Wikipedia, rather than just a short blurb written as a few lines of text in the page mentioned above. It is afterall the computer that started it all, the literal grandfather of the personal computer industry we see before us today. In any case I've started with the Apple IIe (it being the longest lived machine in the line, and at Apple in general) and will shortly create entries for all other models; I believe the Apple IIGS is already covered but I'd like to work on revising and expanded that as well. I've tried to make this article more encyclopedic than a technical in nature. I've also added a sprinkling of pictures relating to some the major topics mentioned in the article, making it more interesting. Like any other it's not necessarily finished or flawless, but I hope this contribution will be useful to those who are curious about the history of this model. --Mitchell Spector (--Apple2gs 00:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC))

Enhanced IIe sticker -- "65C02" vs. "Enhanced"

There was a bit of debate over this in the comp.sys.apple2 Usenet group when I first wrote up this article. Most people have only seen the "Enhanced" sticker on the front of cases, which is what Apple included in the upgrade kit and presumably affixed to factory shipped machines after March 1985 (pre-enhanced out of the box). I have, however, seen at least one local Apple IIe that factory shipped with a "65C02" sticker when growing up, and trying to make sense of why so few others have seen them (almost to the point they seem rare). One note of interest is this was a Canadian Apple IIe (shipped from Apple Canada) and manufactured sometime in 1986, just months before the Platinum IIe was introduced.

I know these "65C02" sticker badges exist, but before putting it back into the article without an explaination, has anyone else seen these, or can explain why they're so less common? At best guess I would say only international IIe's had these badges, or possibly late model machines (I know international IIc's avoided English wording on the front of the case, opting for symbols instead).--Apple2gs (talk) 00:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I always thought that the sticker was to prevent an electric shock, because I noticed that on some IIe that when you touched the green light on the monitor power button and then touched the green light on the keyboard you always got a shock. As kids, we use to trick each other at school with this all the time, but it all ended when the stickers came out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.105.124.70 (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Enhanced vs. Non enhanced.

The images of the Enhanced vs Non enhanced might have to be clarified (I don't know how though). I owned and still own an Apple IIe with the >small< open & closed apples that was originally non-enhanced.--Paul Zaleski --PZ 00:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking just that when I selected the photo, that it might cause confusion. The Apple IIe's with the newer keyboard and case did NOT necessarily ship with the enhanced chipset (as a matter of fact, I have a IIe with the smaller black print keys and even a motherboard with silk-screen part numbers for the enhanced chips, yet it shipped with the non-enhanced chips). I think the solution is to modify the 2nd image so the "Enhanced" sticker is no longer visible, and then add a third photo with just a close up of the sticker badge (anyone have a photo of a "65C02" sticker?). It should be noted the only Apple IIe revision 100% guaranteed to be Enhanced is the Platinum IIe, earlier models could be easily "downgraded" --Apple2gs 11:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

IIe Revisions

November 1993? So were the IIe's in the Apple catalog(thru 1996 I think) just New-old stock but the last one came off of the assembly line in 11/93? --PZ 16:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

The Apple IIe was officially removed from Apple's price list November 15, 1993. I doubt they were producing them new up until then either, according to an Apple spokesperson (the "Project Apple Storm" meeting) they sold a total of 7 IIe's nationwide, for the entire month of October 1992. Maybe you're thinking of the PDS Apple IIe Card for the Macintosh, that stayed on Apple's price list well beyond the IIe's discontinuation. Also worth mentioning is Sun Remarketing (or was it Shreves?) had bought Apple's remaining stock of Platinum IIe's and was selling them brand-new-in-the-box for US$99 in the mid to late 90's. In any case, after November 15, 1993 the IIe was no longer available for purchase from Apple Computer and presumably authorized dealers as well. If anyone did buy one from Apple after that date, I'd be curious to know. --Apple2gs 19:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. For some reason I thought it was '96. Your 11/15/93 sounds valid. --PZ 08:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you could definitely buy a brand-new boxed Apple IIe in 1996, but just not from Apple. I double-checked by pulling out at an old Sun Remarketing catalog from February 1995, it was in stock and listed for $195 then. I know they later cut it down to $99 (still new and boxed) a couple of years later to clear out stock. In retrospect, I probably should have bought one for my collection back then. They're not impossible to find these days, but like most platinum Apple equippment that's been heavily used, they turn an unslightly yellow/brown if exposed to direct UV light.--Apple2gs 09:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

How many colors?

The article states that the High-Resolution video mode has "280×192 (6 colors)", i.e., six colors, but the rest of modes have 16 colors. Did you mean "16" instead of "6"? Ricardo Cancho Niemietz 16:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

6 colors (six) is indeed correct. High Resolution mode had available: green, violet, orange, blue, black and white. Technically there is a secondary black and secondary white which had different behavior when placed beside other colored pixels, but otherwise 100% identical in appearence to the primary black and white. It wouldn't be correct saying there were 8 colors available for this reason. Interestingly the very original Apple II (revision 0 motherboard) only had 4 colors available in High Resolution mode: green, violet, black and white. The secondary black/white weren't available then.-Apple2gs 07:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, two of the 16 colors of the "16-color" modes look identical (the two grays, #5 and #10). So effectively there are only 15 colors, not 16. -- 85.179.171.232 19:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

You're basing that on personal observation rather than technical fact. The two greys are quite distinct if viewed on an RGB monitor, or even composite if properly calibrated (i.e. tint, brightness and contrast). Granted I have noticed on some of my composite displays and modern TV sets displaying yellow and brown appear noticably off, and little distinction between the two greys, but adjusting the picture resolves it.

The Low-Resolution, Double-Low-Resolution and Double-High-Resolution palette is for the most part identical to the Commodore 64's palette, as well as several other computers of that era. Same fixed set of 16 colors.--Apple2gs 21:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Binary prefixes

Recently changes have been made to this article to use binary prefixes (KiB, MiB, kibibyte, mebibyte etc). The majority of reliable sources for this article do not use binary prefixes. If you have any thoughts/opinions then this specific topic is being discussed on the following talk page Manual of Style (dates and numbers) in the sections to do with "binary prefixes". Fnagaton 10:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Slot 0, the Auxiliary Slot, and Slot 3

The article makes some inaccurate statements about these.

The Auxiliary Slot is not a replacement for Slot 0. The upper 16k of motherboard memory and—more to the point—its associated soft-switches in the Slot 0 i/o space are the replacement. The Aux Slot is a whole separate animal.

The Auxiliary Slot is also not actually associated with Slot 3, other than causing the machine to bank-switch some of its own firmware onto the Slot 3 firmware space, if there is a memory card in the Aux Slot. The 80 column display hardware and firmware are actually on the motherboard; all that is lacking is the memory. (The RGB card, on the other hand, provides its own video hardware, as well as memory.)

(Side note, Slot 3 is actually usable alongside an Aux Slot memory card—with some issues having to do with the aforementioned bank switching. Amusingly, a language card (RAM or ROM) would be perfectly happy there, for the same reason that it's happy in the firmware-less Slot 0 of the ][ and ][ plus—with the hitch that its bank switches would be in the Slot 3 i/o space, instead of Slot 0's. A Z-80 card can also live there. It's also possible for software to switch Slot 3's firmware in or out—regardless of the presence of an aux memory card.) —überRegenbogen 16:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

1982?

Did the IIe come out in 1982? All sources I have seen state 1983, but I have a "Apple presents...Apple" intro diskette for the IIe, and it's dated 1982. I also came across a IIe brochure with a 1982 copyright date on it. Unless the copyright is referring to the printed materials, and the actual machine was introduced in 1983. Correct me if I am wrong. Maybe we should drop in a mention of that in the article. Iamdigitalman 17:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

The article says that the machine was introduced in January of '83. It would make some sense that some of the printed material and software would be copyrighted prior to that. --Rehcsif 18:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

The official introduction date of the Apple IIe was indeed January 1983 (offhand, I don't remember the specific day of the month). The reason for copyright dates prior to its release date was the project was delayed/shelved for several years, as Apple thought the Apple III (and eventually the Lisa) would be the future of the company--not the Apple II line. It was only after the Apple III miserably failed that Apple resurrected the shelved project to enhance the Apple II. As a matter of fact, the prototype motherboard for the Apple IIe (which is virutally identical to the final model) has a 1981 copyright date! It's similar to how Atari shelved the Atari 7800 until 1986, when it was ready to launch back in 1984. By the same token, Apple IIGS development projects were shelved because Apple decided the Macintosh would be the future of the company (there were enhanced machines built that were never released). --Apple2gs 18:34, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Apple Model Navigation IIe vs. III

I'm moving the II Plus "Preceeding Family Model" back to III, since the purpose of this navigational table is to help those who are unfamiliar with the Apple model development navigate through the timetable of hardware introductions. THe Apple III is clearly a member of the Apple II family, just like the Apple I is. They are Apple operating systems versus Lisa or Macintosh. Lisa is the precursor to the Macintosh from which much is derived and Lisa is listed as such on the Mac 128K page. The fact is the III is based on the original AppleDos, designed to be backward compatible with the II Plus and the subsequent developments that went into the III's Apple SOS ultimately were folded back into the IIe's ProDos (in the same way the IIGS isn't really a II due to it's GS/OS but is otherwise backwards compatible). That is the trail a prospective reader needs to follow. That is why it should be the next logical Family member, rather than listing the IIe as the successor model and family member which doesn't help the reader at all. These navigational menus should help the uninformed follow the path of hardware development and the respective relationships between them, not just groups the obvious families together in a static way. Anybody who disagrees strongly and forms a consensus between the editors is welcome to put it back.--Mac128 (talk) 05:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Once again, For those who have never heard of an Apple II before, the navigation box is an extremely useful guide through a historical development of a product. Wiki is littered with links and if someone does not have guide from model to the next they have no course to follow. I'm not going to get into an UDO war with anyone, but MANY have worked on these pages and I would certainly like to see a few more opinions here.--Mac128 (talk) 04:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

FYI – Steven Weyhrich's article on the Apple IIe, gives the best UNBIASED historical perspective of the relationship between the two computers I've read. The Wiki article should strive for this level of clarity and lose some of the highly biased language and seek more citeable references. I just went through this on the PowerBook 100 and Macintosh Classic pages and trust me when I say, none of the Apple II family articles come close to meeting Wiki standards.--Mac128 (talk) 17:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Apple IIe: 3 MODELS or just minor revisions?

As it stands the Apple IIe is listed as one model with three minor revisions. The QUESTION Here is what qualifies as an independent model and what constitutes a mere revision? If Apple marketed a computer with new features, different packaging, etc. Isn't that a new model? The Mac 128K & 512K were identical except one had more memory, yet Macintosh marketed them with two new names, so they were two models - yet they were as identical as any IIe revision. In more recent times, the PowerBook G3 series became a source of confusion because Apple chose to make dramatic improvements to the G3 PowerBook from one model to the next (though the case design was identical) yet insisted on marketing them as simply PowerBook G3. So, given that this constitutes the exact same situation as the IIe and IIc for that matter, should the PowerBook G3 series simply be thought of as revisions of the same model? Again, I think not. At a minimum the IIe Platinum model is clearly a new model, based on appearance alone. Even the box was changed to reflect the new model. Saying it is not is like saying the 512Ke was not a new model, but rather a 512K revision with 128K ROMs and an 800K drive. (sorry for the Mac references, but I'm a Mac guy). Don't known the complete story here, but there is no perspective for the way the Apple family is currently being presented for the uninformed.--Mac128 (talk) 04:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

If you asked anyone in the Apple II community (both past and present) how many models there were in the Apple II line, you'd always get the same answer: six. There were of course minor variations those models, but nothing that would qualify any one of these variants as a completely new model or design concept. As far as the Apple IIe is concerned, just as I mentioned when I wrote the article, it remained relatively unchanged from 1983 to 1993. If I could magically time travel a Platinum IIe back to a IIe user living in 1985, apart from the slight new look of the machine, they'd find it functionally identical to what they were already using. I look at the Platinum IIe in the same way I look at the Platinum Macintosh Plus--Apple or Mac users never considered it a new model of the Mac line, it was just a cosmetic update (okay, the Platinum Plus did have an updated firmware from what I recall and an improved SCSI protocol, but even still it was not a new model).

Keep in mind the Macintosh 128, 512 and 512e, while virtually identical, Apple in this case did officially designated a new model name complete with different name badge. They never did that for the Apple IIe. As far as stores and marketing were concerned, there was no "Apple IIe revision B", or "Apple IIe Enhanced" or "Apple IIe Platinum"--it was just the "Apple IIe". I guess we're going mostly by what was made official by Apple Computer, not what we consider what logically could or should have been a new model. Even so, if I could revise history, I still don't consider the Platinum IIe a new model, any more than I consider the Platinum Mac Plus a new model. Same with the Enhanced IIe, it was just a firmware update. I wouldn't create a separate Wikipedia article for the Platinum IIe or Enhanced IIe, if that's what you're questioning. New firmware or a different color case doesn't make a new model. Unofficially Apple users called it "The Platinum IIe" just like Commodore users called the updated (circa 1986) C64 the "Commodore 64c".Apple2gs (talk) 17:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Apl III link

In the chart of the apple family timeline, there's a link that goes to Apl. III, it should probably go to the Apple III but I don't know how to fix it... Someone who does, please do... 12.184.155.34 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2009 (UTC)