Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:14232 comp.windows.misc:354
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!well!rogue
From: rogue@well.UUCP (L. Brett Glass)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.windows.misc
Subject: Re: Credit where credit is due
Message-ID: <5484@well.UUCP>
Date: 20 Mar 88 16:25:01 GMT
References: <1624@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <1121@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> <1750@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <5464@well.UUCP> <46046@sun.uucp> <46170@sun.uucp> <46191@sun.uucp>
Reply-To: rogue@well.UUCP (L. Brett Glass)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 20
Keywords: window human computer interface

> Nope. In fact one of the more interesting things about the suit is taht they
> went after HP, but not IBM. I doubt that was an accident.

It sure wasn't. Apple would have a much harder time taking on IBM directly.
Apple's strategy in the past was to go after the stragglers (DRI). Now,
they are still attacking the smallest entities they can.

> Remember, IBM is not doing the development for OS/2 and the PM. Microsoft is.

Wrong. The graphical interface is being developed by IBM's Hursley labs,
with Microsoft's help.

> In fact, it's be hard for IBM to get involved in the case directly,
> since their technology isn't at risk.

Wrong. IBM's SAA, which includes a common user interface on all machines,
requires all environments to have a "look and feel" similar to that of
the Presentation Manager. If Windows is found to infringe on Apple's
purported copyright, IBM is at great risk. As are Amiga, Atari, Sun....

<rogue>