Apple IIGS vs. iPhone 3G S
Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 1:31PM Apple's newest handheld, iPhone 3G S, is for sale this month. I thought it would be interesting to compare iPhone 3G S with one of Apple's desktop computers from 20 years ago, Apple IIGS. The "GS" in IIGS stood for graphics and sound. However, it's clear that today's iPhone is much better with graphics and sound. The "S" in 3G S stands for speed. Compared to IIGS, 3G S certainly is the speedier computer. The similarities of these two computing devices pretty much stop at their names.
I think the most telling fact above is the number of software applications. The Apple IIGS could run software written for Apple II machines, which were produced for 17 years. iPhone was just opened up to programmers in 2008 and there are there are already 5 times as many apps as compared to what was available for Apple II computers. The number of iPhone/iPod touch apps is set to double by year's end.
The bottom line: you can do a lot more with an iPhone/iPod touch than you could ever do with a IIGS. Sure, it's wonderful that iPhone can access the Internet 50 times faster, has 250 times more RAM and runs at 214 times the megahertz. But really, it's about the usefulness of the computer, and with 50,000+ apps, iPhone is certainly useful.
Apple IIgs photo from flickr.com/photos/quagmirez31/3547583644
Reader Comments (15)
WOW That is so cool. Interestingly I just laid to rest the IIGS I boought fresh out of college...over 25 years ago (I bought this instead of a car:) Even better we still were using it with a strength training program for my husband so we actually went online to find one on ebay. But they were still worth more then buying the new software.
Lisa P
So interesting. The GS was my first computer purchase, too. Amazing to see the differences.
I don't really see how having 50,000+ apps makes the iPhone useful.
What it speaks to, more, is that the iPhone can't interact with websites normally, and so each thing that would otherwise be a website, now must be a specialized (proprietary, commercial, approved) app.
@Downes: huh? How on earth does it say that?
I can't think of any iPhone apps that I have for accessing specialised areas of the web, except possibly Facebook and Twitter clients, but I am just as able to use the web sites themselves.
I use the Net quite a bit from my iPhone and granted it can't do everything as per a desktop, but it does a lot more than any other mobile phone I've ever owned.
If it speaks of anything, it's of a lot of poor quality apps that do very similar things.
@Downes: I think the 50k+ apps number is misleading precisely because of the billions of websites that you can access from your iPhone, which remain perfectly usable, and are infinitely more accessible because of the portability of the iPhone.
56kbps modem? In 1986? Really??
The IIGS was released in 1986--and yes, 56k modems weren't around then. But the IIGS was produced from 1986-1992, so there might have been some folks using 56k modems with IIGS. More likely they connected using a modem much slower--like 12kbps. Either way, 56k or 12k, it was slow! Luckily modems only had to deal with mostly text back then. :-)
I spent over a year mowing lawns and saving up to purchase my first computer, the Apple IIgs. I was ecstatic when I bought it in the early 90s…until the company (was it Scully?) decided they would discontinue the Apple II line and focus on the McIntosh exclusively. At that point I was devastated, although I continued to use my IIgs through college and my first years of teaching. The machine currently resides in my garage and I plan on keeping it to use/showcase as technology continues to evolve.
The iPhone/iPod Touch or handheld computers we have today are quite different in their interactive nature and open source software platform. I can see how unwrapping the design that Apple had kept so secret back in the day, allows more fervent application development. I’m still contemplating the transition from my Blackberry to iPhone this summer, but with RIM & Outlook Web Access incompatibility, I’m just about ready to do such.
Thank you, Tony, for taking the opportunity to compare these two gems of Apple development history. I often wonder what we’ll be comparing as the next generation evolves. My daughter clamors to listen to her books in the car (a hand-me-down iPod Mini I originally given to my wife for a wedding anniversary), but at other times begs to borrow my iPod Touch or my wife’s iPhone to learn/play. What an amazing time to be alive and an educator.
Happy Father's Day & Summer Solstice!
When the IIgs came out, it was not the state of the art PC, it wasn't even state of the art for Apple.
The Lisa, Mac, and Apple III had already been introduced. It was a me-too upgrade on the Apple II plus.
It's still cool to see the differences between what we have today and what we used back then.
Wow, what an interesting comparison, did make me laugh a bit.
10K COMMERCIAL apps for the Apple II was a conservative estimate in 1983. There were OBVIOUSLY far more than that, considering all the personal, free and shareware programs of the late 80s and 90s.
Shouldn't it be 256K, not 246K?
And in 1986 it would probably be a 300baud modem (maybe 1200 if you had the money). By 1992 you'd be going at 14.4K if you were lucky! (These kids nowadays with their 7mbps cable modems...)
The Apple IIGS could display 4096 colors. It also had 16 voice sound with a built in Ensoniq Synth chip.
If you're in uncomfortable position and have got no money to move out from that point, you would need to take the credit loans. Because it would help you for sure. I get small business loan every time I need and feel good just because of this.
Uh, FYI, the Apple IIGS was far more powerful than the Apple III or Lisa, and yes, even the Mac of that time (which would have been the Macintosh Plus). What exactly did the Mac have over the GS, a higher vertical resolution--342 lines versus 200 lines, that's really it. The fact that you call it a "me-too" upgrade to the Apple II Plus shows how misinformed you are.
Sadly, the GS was probably the most underrated computer....ever. Hah, it was even vastly preferable over the Macintosh LC which tried to replace it some 5 years later.