Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.system:3696 comp.sys.mac.misc:9942
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!wb3ffv!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake
From: shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Apple Computer wins ruling against 'Windows'
Message-ID: <271@raysnec.UUCP>
Date: 21 Mar 91 17:52:39 GMT
References: <46873@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <1991Mar15.101202.1@csc.anu.edu.au> <1991Mar19.154536.31566@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1991Mar19.165550.6081@midway.uchicago.edu> <1991Mar20.151055.45860@vaxb.acs.unt.edu>
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.system
Organization: IRS/CI - Technical Solutions Branch
Lines: 20

cirby@vaxb.acs.unt.edu (((((C.Irby))))) writes:

>More than that- Apple's stock price has DOUBLED in the last few months.

	Let's not lose the context of the stock price rise. As Gantz 
points out in a recent InfoWorld column, quite a number of high-tech
companies have seen their share price rise, including AST, Compaq, *and*
Microsoft. These advances began with the market's general advance, which
itself began the day after the war began. Now, what conclusions do you
draw from *that*?

	Let's also be careful how we respond to the court's ruling. One
article (InfoWorld) headlines "Court Rules Apple's Copyrights are Valid",
while an article in PC Week specifically states the court did *not* rule
on the validity of Apple's copyrights. Some of us look forward to a proper
analysis by someone who has actually *read* the ruling and understands
its implications.

-----------  
uunet!media!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake				shwake@rsxtech