Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site gould9.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!cbosgd!gould9!joel
From: joel@gould9.UUCP (Joel West)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: MacDraw 1.9 (3rd party software)
Message-ID: <240@gould9.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 26-Dec-85 15:26:37 EST
Article-I.D.: gould9.240
Posted: Thu Dec 26 15:26:37 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Dec-85 01:13:42 EST
References: <1743@trwrba.UUCP> <1@mit-vax.UUCP> <4297@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Organization: CACI, Inc. -- La Jolla, Calif.
Lines: 41
Summary: a wise business decision

In article <4297@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>, rubin@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Mike Rubin) writes:
> General question.... why does Apple only sell software that's low on features?
> I know the rumor about MacWrite being deliberately crippled so as not to
> compete with Microsoft Word, but why have they never fixed MacPaint to use
> normal scroll bars or let you select beyond screen boundaries, or MacDraw to do
> the stuff MacDraft does, or MacTerminal to work properly?  

Examining it from a business standpoint, Apple has divided up the software 
turf with its third party developers, and has promised not to cross that line,
in exchange for their investment in the cost of software development.

This is a bit ridiculous at times; for example, every Fat Mac should include
a RAMDisk utility--particularly since one is in the p.d.  On the other hand,
how would you like to have spent money to develop and market a RAMDisk
utility, then Apple cut out your feet underneath you?

Incidentally, IBM does this all the time--stands aside waiting until a
market becomes interesting, then attempting to grab it for itself.  But
Apple needs more developer loyalty, since investing in the Mac market
is more speculative than for an IBM PC.

So, the standard answer from Apple is, if you don't like
	MacWrite	buy MS-Word
	MacTerminal	buy Versaterm, etc.
I've heard a rumor there's even a 3rd-party MacPaint coming out.
Now if only there were a 3rd-party MacWrite, since MS-Word has such
a mediocre WYSIWYG user interface.

> (As I've heard it,
> Apple wouldn't let Columbia University GIVE them Kermit protocol for
> MacTerminal unless Columbia paid for a MacTerminal source license!)

Now this seems dumb.  I don't even use my MacTerminal any more, because
MacKermit is better (except on bold-face and 132-column).  It seems
stupid that they wouldn't even take advantage of this to improve
their basic product (XMODEM protocol behaves badly on noisy lines).
-- 
	Joel West	 	(619) 457-9681
	CACI, Inc. Federal, 3344 N. Torrey Pines Ct., La Jolla, CA  92037
	{cbosgd,ihnp4,pyramid,sdcsvax,ucla-cs}!gould9!joel
	gould9!joel@nosc.ARPA