Talk:Apple IIGS

message: I feel the Apple IIgs article could use some major clean up work, so I'm starting by adding some of the sections missing that are now present and have become standard in the other Apple II family articles (which, by no coincidence, I wrote up and started--I think we need a standard layout for all the different Apple II computers). So, you'll notice the beginnings of a technical specifications, international versions, hardware revisions sections. There's also the new trivia section I added below it. I reworked the introductory paragraph some time ago, so it's just the middle that now needs tweaking.
I feel many of the existing sections need to be reworked and merged together, and of course more new sections added. For example, a whole section can be written about prototypes that were never released, like the Mark Twain. The article is also in desparate need of photographs, though I can provide most of that like I did for the IIc Plus article (I can probably take some screen shots with my Video Overlay Card plugged into a PC capture card).--Mitchell Spector /Apple2gs 00:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Apple IIgs article redesign

message: Oh yeah?  Well I remember it as "Apple IIGS," so there! ;-)  You know, it'd be really keen to have a photo of this short-lived home computer.  Anyone got one lying around?  Have a friend with one using it as a doorstop?  — Frecklefoot | Talk 20:59, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)
::I think it was pronounced "two gee ess" as II is Roman numeral for two. It was the first computer I had. I was one of the first people in my little town to have a personal computer and I got my IIGS when they first came out I guess. (Although it may have been 1987 that I got it, but I don't think so) It lasted longer then any computer I think I ever had. It was pretty good with games.--T. Anthony 09:16, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Image of the IIGS

message: 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 10:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Binary prefixes 

message: Is anyone going to take the time to embed all the trivia items into the article? The goal on Wikipedia is to eliminate trivia sections. Groink 22:02, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I attempted to merge the trivia, but it was reverted by another user, who believed that the original version was better because "all you've done is squeeze everything into one long paragraph (less clear)". I don't think that is an accurate representation of what I did, because I integrated almost twenty items into a variety of sections and paragraphs (some newly created), so I have reverted that revert. I think the extremely long trivia section detracts from the article, and these items better serve the article through integration into other sections. That said, if I've integrated some trivia facts into poor places, then feel free to move them around (or even remove them), but do not just revert my entire good faith attempt at improving the article. --Nick Penguin 19:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: Added better pics.
Also, we need a better pic of the Apple IIgs logo badge without the "macgeek" spam.
--cbmeeks (talk) 16:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added better photos of the Apple IIgs 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Strong Oppose Absolutely ridiculous. Article titles aren't formatted to "look better" - this is an encyclopedia. JPG-GR (talk) 08:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Well, it's obviously more accurate as well as looking better. Potatoswatter (talk) 11:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Looking better" has nothing to do with anything, as I've already stated. "More accurate" is relative, especially since you've provided no source that would even remotely imply that it is so. JPG-GR (talk) 20:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The only thing I propose to change is the page title, which presently uses big caps, unlike the faceplate or Apple literature. I don't propose any changes to the article text. So when viewing the article, your window title and browser history will appear as when you click here, which does match Apple's styling. This is the only change I suggest and it won't affect a single pixel within the window. Does that clarify anything? Potatoswatter (talk) 22:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's nothing to be clarified - I understand completely what you are proposing and it is a violation of our naming conventions. Just because Apple stylizes something in a fancy way doesn't mean that is how it should be displayed in an encyclopedia. JPG-GR (talk) 23:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want to be a pain here, but which section? You've pointed at the entire article naming guide and Xanzzibar at the entire trademarks guide, which are large documents that don't appear to me to cover this at all. They both discourage use of non-alphanumeric characters, but ɢ is not such a case. I don't see any relevant capitalization rules, and don't propose changing caps anyway. If the body does it one way, why shouldn't the title follow suit? Potatoswatter (talk) 02:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NC#Avoid non alpha-numeric characters used only for emphasis - and yes, that is the case. Your little GS are special characters by the very definition that they can't be made using a single keystroke on the common keyboard. JPG-GR (talk) 05:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that is not the definition of alphanumeric. Good day. Potatoswatter (talk) 06:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're missing the whole idea behind the naming conventions. Regardless, I have said my part. JPG-GR (talk) 00:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

text: *Note that as rules don't differentiate between title and text, making title match existing text should be a win. (Assuming only relevant part is "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official"," which is all I see.) Potatoswatter (talk) 15:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

text: *Since when does loosing readability not break anything?  Vegaswikian (talk) 18:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: I object to the rendering of the product name in small caps, this: II. It should be simply IIGS. Why on Earth are the small caps used? Is there a style guide to this effect?
This encyclopedia is written in English, and standard English usage allows for the use of small caps in certain circumstances. Trying to ape the graphic presentation of corporate logo design and advertising departments is not one of these. Whatever typefaces the Apple Corporation may or may not have used in its promotional materials etc. is supremely of no interest to this encyclopedia. For instance, our article Macy's is not titled Macy*s, notwithstanding that Macy's Corp. uses the star in the logos, ads, and other promotional material.
See here for a complete education on this issue.
Barring any objection, or unless someone can point me to a style guide allowing or mandading this type of typography, I will shortly undertake a global replacement of the small caps version of this product name in this and all other articles with the correct version. Herostratus (talk) 05:11, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please provide a link into that website. Searching for "small caps" on the homepage returns nothing. Potatoswatter (talk) 01:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless. It is just a website. The point is that I am correct by accepted convention. On the other hand, on reflection, I don't care that much about this actually. I will leave it as it is even though it is wrong.Herostratus (talk) 02:09, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

text: The logo uses small caps, that's why, so it's actually NOT wrong, and there's nothing that says we should do otherwise. So why object to it for no good reason? 174.23.96.21 (talk) 07:28, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objection to small caps 

message: Is this section legit? I know the Mark Twain was prototyped but I don't recall it ever being officially released by Apple and tThe section it is under specifically states it only describes the revisions officially released from Apple. That said, I do think there should be a section that describes the Mark Twain so maybe it should be under a different section? --50.20.4.163 (talk) 15:05, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Apple IIGS Plus? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Apple IIGS. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://emulation.victoly.com/apple2/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:51, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The Apple IIGS (styled as IIGS)  I'm not sure what default web page fonts are used, but in 2022, the logo and the "stylized" logo look exactly the same.  I suppose there's subtle differences in how roman numeral 2 gets displayed as upper case "II" (ii). And there was apparently some discussion 15 years ago about whether the GS should be smaller (half-height?) than the II. But at least on all monirots I've seen by default (Windows 10 and various linux distros) the two look the same. I'm not sure how this should be dealth with, but it probably should be. 75.71.166.197 (talk) 00:46, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Apple IIGS (styled as IIGS)