Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!lsr
From: lsr@Apple.COM (Larry Rosenstein)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: (Various Symantec Policies) Re: Not another NeXT defector???!!!
Message-ID: <46355@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 7 Nov 90 02:51:41 GMT
References: <1990Nov5.191813.20961@news.clarkson.edu> <4607@husc6.harvard.edu> <1990Nov6.230519.17674@agate.berkeley.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Future Stuff, Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 23

In article <1990Nov6.230519.17674@agate.berkeley.edu> knrgroup@garnet.berkeley.edu (Raymond group) writes:
>>...it is highly illogical for a pure software house to perceive a new
>>hardware vendor as a threat.
>
>This must make Bill Gates highly illogical :-).  Actually, the impression I
>have from the media is that Gates would rather program in Cobol than do
>anything that would help NeXT and Steve Jobs become a success.

Microsoft don't write only applications; they also write system software.
In that area, they do compete with NeXT (to the extent that NeXT tries to
promote their system software as an industry standard).

>   Symantec may have approached NeXT with the idea of creating a
>   software development environment centered on THINK C or some other
>   Symantec product.  NeXT might have said, "Are you kidding?!  The
...
>   Symantec may have then sputtered, gotten red in the face, and then
>   stomped off NeXT's premises, metaphorically speaking.
>
>Is this just a fairy tale, or does it hit close to the truth?

Sounds like a fairy tale to me.  If Symantec wanted to do THINK C for the
NeXT they would just do it.  They don't need NeXT's blessing.