Talk:Macintosh II

Steve Jobs opposed color

"The Macintosh II project was begun by Dhuey and Berkeley during 1985 without the knowledge of Apple co-founder and Macintosh division head Steve Jobs, who opposed features like expansion slots and color, on the basis that the former complicated the user experience and the latter did not conform to WYSIWYG, since color printers were not common." reference for this claim is link: http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/taouu/html/ch02s07.html If you read it, you will see that there is no SINGLE word that would support claim that Steve opposed to color Macintosh (or any other color computer) on the basis that it will not not conform to WYSIWYG. I suggesting to delete this statement about Steve opposing to color Macintosh since reference does not support this claim. --Calimero (talk) 18:40, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

No Music?

I was hoping to find what kind of music the Mac II could create, but it does not list a sound chip. Does it not include a sound chip? - Theaveng 11:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The Mac II has an Apple ASIC sound chip with 256 bytes of 8-bit samples. I believe its max frequency was around 22.05 kHz.Potatoswatter 19:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I know what 8-bit is, but what does "256 bytes" mean? It could only take 256 samples & then it ran out of memory? I'm confused. ----- In any case, it sounds very similar to how the Commodore Amiga's Paula chip operates (8 bit ADC and DAC + PCM generator). Does the Mac II come with a PCM or triangle or sawtooth or other generator? - Theaveng 20:32, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

There was also a square wave generator. Yes, after 256 samples it ran out of memory. Potatoswatter 21:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC) I'm not 100% sure, if you really need to know I can look it up. Potatoswatter 21:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Here is info on the sample rates (Mac II supported rate22khz and rate11khz, and maybe another lower), and here is a vintage article mentioning the buffer size (1024 bytes = 512 samples = 1 sound interrupt per 23 ms). I've worked on the Sound Manager if you have more questions. Potatoswatter 20:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC) And the "Sony chip" it mentions is just an amp, which functions as a square wave generator because Apple connected an "extra" square wave to its enable input. Potatoswatter 20:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the "256 byte" thing would most likely be its sample buffer size. So, you dumped 256 bytes into it at high speed (or whatever amount it took to refill a partially-emptied buffer), dedicating all of the CPU and bus time to the task (at 25Mhz on a 16-bit bus, that's probably about 5.12 milliseconds), then let that play through at whatever rate you'd set whilst the computer did other things - for, e.g., the next 11609.98 milliseconds at 22.05khz 8-bit mono. Much the same way you'd use a synth sound chip - just with a greater proportion of the bus time given over to data transfer (ooh, 0.04% instead of whatever even tinier fraction the synth commands took up) - or the same way you'd use the Amiga one but with the ability to use much greater transfer granuality so the chip isn't grabbing single bytes (or words/DWords) over DMA/interrupt several thousand times a second as-and-when it wants to shove the next one (or pair, or quartet) into its DAC. 193.63.174.208 (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Edited out "less capable"

Edited out "less capable" Mac OS...less capable? That is why Apple is still shipping Mac OS products and SGI is out of business, amirite?

Not to mention "less capable" in the IT context is ... subjective at best. Mac OS was actually "more capable" for the average user and it sold in far higher volume with more software than SGI's Irix and other systems. Irix was really only more capable with 3D and that wasn't a title it would hold on to for long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.145.82.117 (talk) 01:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

That was a solid edit; no need to defend yourself. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:49, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Irix was also more capable in staying operational and not freezing completely. And Apple's current Mac OS (X) products architecturally resemble Irix far more than the old Mac OS. Mac OS was less capable than Irix. The application programs for it may or may not have been.

Which graphics card shipped with it?

I assume the Mac II shipped with a graphics card already installed? Which one, and what were its capabilities? Or was there a choice of several card models right from the factory? -- 77.7.165.35 (talk) 09:55, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

According to Macintosh Family Hardware Reference and Designing Cards and Drivers for the Macintosh Family, the II shipped with a NuBus card with 256K or 512K of double-ported memory (depending on whether bank B is depopulated), a 768-byte CLUT with 1-, 2-, 4-, and 8-bit lookup modes, a movable framebuffer, fixed 640x480 67Hz VGA resolution, and drivers in ROM for QuickDraw and A/UX. Potatoswatter (talk) 17:54, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

What monitor did you need for 640x480?

It only says here that the 12" models maxed out at 512x384 ... what size / type did you need for the VGA-a-like resolution? (Only it's not actually "VGA" is it? They arrived at the resolution and colour depth by similar means, but the refresh rate and palette are different, and it had the ability to do 8-bit colour from the off... it's more like an unaccelerated version of PGC than anything. So it's not necessarily just going to be a "VGA" monitor. Especially as actual VGAs could be quite fussy about having the correct scan rate supplied.) 193.63.174.208 (talk) 18:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

You needed the Apple 13" color monitor to do 640x480@75Hz VGA-class graphics. These were not multi-scan rate monitors, the rez and frequency were fixed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.250.4 (talk) 21:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Why is it claiming 32-bit color?

In the article it states "With its pioneering support for 32-bit color[3] Mac II was the first ..."

what is the 32-bit claim based upon? You only need 24-bits to use 16,777,216 colors.

I'm not a Mac expert, but I suspect this was added by a non-technical person. Thanks 140.146.206.8 (talk) 22:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

It supported an 8-bit alpha channel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.209.224 (talk) 02:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Macintosh II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20120908022711/http://www.krsaborio.net/research/1980s/88/880919_c.htm to http://www.krsaborio.net/research/1980s/88/880919_c.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:47, 11 January 2018 (UTC)