Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!tortoise.cis.ohio-state.edu!meekins
From: meekins@tortoise.cis.ohio-state.edu (timothy lee meekins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: A2R&D vs. Apple
Message-ID: <108667@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 17 Apr 91 00:00:24 GMT
Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Computer and Information Science
Lines: 84

In article <1991Apr16.173306.25759@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes:
>In article <1991Apr16.123324.21596@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) writes:
>
>[various quotes]
>
>[stuff re the Apple Microsoft lawsuit]
>
>[gives reason why, in his opinion Apple suing MS]
>
>>The people who think Apple's suit is bad would like to HURT Apple.  Not buying
>>Apple's products and not developing software for Apple products would
>>be one way of doing that.
>
>I do not want to hurt Apple, and I personally feel that this lawsuit is
>unacceptable( as are many other "look and feel" ones).
>
>Please consider that most R&D in the computer industry is basically
>the "D". Scientists and mathematicians have been working on many of
>the problems which commercial vendors then go on to refine in an attempt
>to market the items. In one case, people are interested in pushing
>forth Man's understanding of Nature, while on the other side CEO's
>and bean counters are looking at margins.
>
>Apple has lost a lot of goodwill over this lawsuit.
>
>Just my 2cents' worth( canadian which is less than 2centsUS).
>
>Philip McDunnough
>philip@utstat.utoronto.ca
>[my opinions,etc...]


I don't understand why so reecently people have been against Apple for their
suit. I think Apple has every right to that suit. Apple developed a very unique
interface. Certainly, much of the research was performed at PARC, but we all
know Xerox's track record on marketing. Apple borrowed the idea and gave it
to the masses. Apple is not suing over the idea!!! Apple is suing about certain
small details. There are now hundreds of windowing systems out now, none of
which are being challenged by Apple. Why? Because they didn't BLATENTLY steal
what Apple had developed. I have seen advertisements in magazines for 
applications running under both Windows and the HP windowing system. When
I first saw these ads, I actually thought they were Macintosh ads because
it was an almost exact duplicate. Sheesh, almost everything about the interface
was copied from Apple. IBM, Microsoft, and HP saw that Apple had a good thing
and instead of developing an alternative, they simply copied what Apple had
done. Surprise, Surprise. Right after the suit was filed we find out the
chief engineer of Windows *just happened* to have worked at Apple when
the Macintosh was developed. Microsoft's/HP's biggest defense in the case
is that Apple's way is the intuitive approach and the only approach to
windowing systems, therefore they (Apple) cannot own it. All I know, is that
my Sun SLC 4/20 and HP 9000/370 at school are running at least 3 different
*excellent* windowing systems which work very well, yet in no way are
trying to steal what Apple did. Face the facts, Microsoft has not shown
one inch of creativity or originality in developing Windows.

This brings me to the second point in the lawsuit that everyone seems to
be ignoring. Microsoft actually had a contract with Apple so that they
could borrow certain ideas from Apple. Microsoft then developed Windows
3.0 (or some such vers) and voided the contract. Apple contends it is just
an improvement and must continue to abide by the contract. Apple was until
then making money from every copy of Windows being sold.

In conclusion, I believe Apple has EVERY RIGHT to sue Microsoft and HP
since they blatantly have copied what Apple has done. More recently,
dozens of other companies have developed windowing systems which show that
there are excellent alternatives to Apple's system. So, why did Microsoft/
HP create a carbon copy of Apple's? It certainly isn't becuase it's
the only way to do it.

On an aside, after Apple sued Microsoft/HP, Xerox got interested and tried
to then sue Apple. Xerox had to drop suit since it was quickly shown
that Xerox never tried to protect anything they developed. In other words,
they didn't try to stop Apple when they released the Mac, but only jumped
on the bandwagon when the suits started.

-tim



--
+---------------------------S-U-P-P-O-R-T-----------------------------------+
|/ Tim Meekins                  <<>> Snail Mail:           <<>>  Apple II  \|
|>   meekins@cis.ohio-state.edu <<>>   8372 Morris Rd.     <<>>  Forever!  <|
|\   timm@pro-tcc.cts.com       <<>>   Hilliard, OH 43026  <<>>            /|