>   CK> After the IIci, they're my favourite useful classic
>     > Mac...
> 
> I was looking through some old notes earlier today while I
> was thinking about what machine to buy.  The IIci seemed to
> make more sense than the IIsi, and should be faster than a
> IIcx.  The IIvx doesn't appeal to me and I don't know much
> about the IIvi.  It might be interesting to pick up a IIci
> along with the Q700, just for comparison.

The IIci makes a lot more sense than any of them, definitely. It has 32-bit
clean ROMs, three NuBus expansion slots plus lots of processor upgrades and
cache options, lots of space inside, and they're also easy to stack :-) I
have a IIci workstation running 7.1 sitting atop my NetBSD IIci.

> Out of interest, what makes you prefer the IIci to the Q700?

Mostly cost. The magic numbers 0-4-0 and the magic word "Quadra" cause
sellers to see dollar signs. IIcis can be had for a song (I buy 'em for
around $5-$10 apiece fully loaded).

>   CK> (my favourite use*less* classic Macs are the Plus and
>     > IIsi ;-)
> 
> I've been given a Mac SE that I may use as a serial
> terminal.

A good use for one and compact as well.

My affection for the IIsi is purely nostalgia -- my first Mac that I owned
myself (I've been using them since the Mac Plus) was a IIsi. It had only
5MB of memory, but it was my baby. I'm now restoring it to its former, uh,
glory. :-P (Of course, since I use a Commodore 128 most of the time, I
suppose I can't make any complaints about the memory, but the C128 still
manages to get a lot more done in 128K than most modern systems in 128MB.)

-- 
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
 Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser@stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- Talkers are no good doers. -- Shakespeare ----------------------------------