Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!van-bc! From: lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: One world, One CPU, One OS Message-ID: <1401@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> Date: 12 Apr 90 13:30:57 GMT Lines: 73 Return-Path: To: van-bc!rnews In <93.26244db9@desire.wright.edu>, demon@desire.wright.edu writes: > > It would be nice if these users could all have one unified operating >system. (Yes, there is UNIX but not everyone has 4-8 meg of ram and 80+meg >hard disks.) What does Apple have to lose by liscensing the Mac OS to >Commodore and Atari? It would be nice to have a unified OS, but the problem is, no OS would please everyone. Apple could license anything it wanted to Commodore, but it won't make people want it just because it's there. My reaction would be "That's nice, the folks that like the Mac OS will be happy. Now I'll go back to Amigados." If Amigados could be ported to a Mac, how many Mac owners do you think would run out and buy it? Same thing. > Not much. Some sales to be sure, but not enough to erode their profit >levels. After all, people have proven they don't mind paying Apple's prices >by buying Macs in the first place. Some people have. A lot haven't. Not all users without Macs are in that position because of price. Hard as you may find this to believe, there are a lot who just don't like the Mac OS, and if they were faced with using it, would seek alternatives. > What they have to gain is enormous. They could double their installed >base of Mac machines (making software production more viable) while having low >cost Macs (from Atari) available without watering down the current Mac line. I don't want a Mac OS at any price, and I am not alone. That is proven out by the fact that for under $500, I could have Amax, complete with a Mac floppy drive, that will run the Mac OS and most Mac programs on an Amiga, faster than the Mac equipped with a comparable processor, yet I do not have Amax. I would not have it at half that price, nor would I have it as a freebie. Please note that this is not a flame against the Mac or its OS, but is only a statement of my position in regard to the usefulness of the Mac OS to me. I have deep-seated objections to the entire philosophy inherent in the Mac OS, and don't have time to muck about with it, even as a diversion. > In addition, the Mac OS would become the second leading OS, behind DOS >and in front of UNIX (which Commodore and Atari will have to go to otherwise). Commodore is not 'going to have to go to' Unix. They will be offering one, it's true, but it is not the only choice for a user. >OS/2 will not be viable for PC's. (Arguments against that statement should be >directed to comp.sys.msx :) No disagreement on that one. > Making a mistake like IBM did? Clone wars to follow? Of course not. >They wouldn't be liscensing Mac computers, just the Mac OS. The other machines >would still be Amigas and STs. I don't know if it would be a mistake on Apple's part or not, and I don't really care. Just don't make the mistake of thinking that just because an OS is available for another machine, that it would automatically mean that all owners of the machine would flock to it. > Well? Please, discussion only. Flames should be directed to >alt.flame, where they belong. No flames from me. I will post this response only to the Amiga group though, because I am sick of getting hate mail from the terminally stupid who take umbrage at innocuous and non-inflammatory postings. -larry -- Entomology bugs me. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+