Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!cmcl2!esquire!sbb
From: sbb@esquire.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: MacApp Licensing Fee
Message-ID: <82@esquire.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-May-87 11:59:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: esquire.82
Posted: Mon May 11 11:59:01 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 14-May-87 01:45:45 EDT
References: <3113@sunybcs.UUCP> <174400030@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu> <727@apple.UUCP> <81@esquire.UUCP> <3115@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU>
Reply-To: sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten)
Organization: DP&W, New York, NY
Lines: 37

In article <3115@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU> jww@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU (Joel West) writes:
 ... a good defense of the MPW tools and programming environment, and he
 correctly points out that MacApp is unique in the marketplace ...

>If there were a competing product to MacApp without royalties, I'd be
>interested, but right now it offers unique advantages.
>
>Don't forget, Apple needed a serious development system for their
>own use and their major developers, to replace the Lisa Workshop.
>That's what MPW was intended for.
>
>If it's too expensive or bulky for many hobbyists, that's actually
>fine.

Well, you're right, but I was never arguing that MacApp and MPW weren't fine
products.  Apple is, of course, entitled to charge what they wish and impose
any sort of licensing agreements their lawyers construct.  My original point
was, however, that to force developers to pay a license fee on top of an
already steep purchase price just seems to me wrong.  Not illegal, but wrong.
And in particular, to justify it by saying (as David Goldsmith said) that
Apple has to charge "something" to make the agreement legally binding is almost
insulting.  That may be what Apple would like us to believe, but it just isn't
true.

There are a lot of "hobbyists" out there who would like to benefit from MPW
(and MacApp in particular), Joel, and to say that well, if you can't afford
it, don't use it is kind of arrogant.  Because that's the same response you'll
get when you ask Microsoft/IBM why their pascal compiler is so expensive.  And
attitudes like that distress me, especially when they come from companies that
are successful today not because of a couple of major software houses (witness
the Jazz debacle), but because of a thriving development community.  And even
though you ably defended MPW and MacApp, the fact remains that Borland, Think,
TML, etc. all seem to be able to produce useful and clever products, sell them
for reasonable prices, and still make money.  Except for that "real developer"
vs. "hobbyist" arrogance, why can't Apple?

- Steve