Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!oliveb!amdahl!JUTS!duts!kls30
From: kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Mac is software - why not on NeXT?
Message-ID: <58hW02XR03Gy01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
Date: 8 Nov 90 18:33:49 GMT
References: <1990Nov6.114141.3280@csc.anu.oz.au> <1990Nov6.160855.864@vax5.cit.cornell.edu>
Sender: netnews@ccc.amdahl.com
Reply-To: kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 28

In article <1990Nov6.160855.864@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> q4kx@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Joel Sumner) writes:
>In article <1990Nov6.114141.3280@csc.anu.oz.au>,
>pfr654@csc.anu.oz.au writes:
>> The thing is that Apple's Macintosh is SOFTWARE. The hardware/software
>> combination is put together reasonably well, byut we all know that we can
>> buy cheaper hardware elsewhere.
>>
>> Why can't we purchase "Macintosh" for NeXT, IBM, Suns, VaxStations etc?
>> Apple system software and Apple ROMs could not be more than say 20% of the
>> cost of a Mac, say $250, freeing all users to run Mac software on whatever
>> platform they liked?
>
>Simple, because then Apple would lose a HUGE market share.  Look at the IBM
>clone market.  IBM allowed other people to manufacture the BIOS and other
>components of IBM systems, so people did the obvious thing, buy the separate
-stuff deleted-

IBM did *NOT* let anyone manufacture its BIOS or any other part of the
IBM PC.  The compatible BIOSs (sp?) were done with a clean room approach
dont get that confused.  This is why IBM was/is so pissed of at clone
makers.
                 KeNT - I want a NeXT VeRY BaD.

--
/*  -The opinions expressed are my own, not my employers.    */
/*      For I can only express my own opinions.              */
/*                                                           */
/*   Kent L. Shephard  : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com   */