Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:14132 comp.sys.mac:14804 comp.sys.apple:5168 comp.sys.atari.st:8859 comp.sys.hp:684 comp.sys.amiga:17240
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!nuchat!peter
From: peter@nuchat.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.apple,comp.sys.atari.st,comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Apple Challenges HP New Wave, MS-Windows, Potentially OS/2 PM
Message-ID: <890@nuchat.UUCP>
Date: 5 Apr 88 13:36:46 GMT
References: <8643@eddie.MIT.EDU>
Distribution: na
Organization: Public Access - Houston, Tx
Lines: 50
Followups-to: comp.windows.misc


In article <8643@eddie.MIT.EDU>, zrm@eddie.MIT.EDU (Zigurd R. Mednieks) writes:
> The two arguments I have seen in this newsgroup and in the press
> against Apple's suit are 1) That Apple should allow the industry to
> standardize around a Macintosh-like user interface, and 2) That user
> interfaces are so alike that all usable, efficient user interfaces
> look like the Macintosh user interface.

The two arguments I have seen on the net and in the press in favor of
Apple's suite are 1) That Apple has the sole right to determine what is
or is not a copy of their Desktop, and 2) that Microsoft Windows is such
a copy.

> Balderdash to both these arguments. Apple's lawsuit is appealing to
> me because it states that if you don't have the basic guts to try to
> do Apple one better, then you deserve to be sued. Microsoft certainly
> have the talent and the wherewithal to create a next-generation user
> interface tool and not a "derivative work." Why don't they use it?

Balderdash to both these arguments. Apple's lawsuit is appalling to me
because it states that if you have the guts to try to do Apple one better,
then Apple will still turn around and sue you. I'm amazed that Microsoft
has done such a good job of implementing a windowing system: in many ways
it is superior to Apple's, I never thought they had the talent and
resources.

> Apple's intellectual property rights would not then be violated and we
> the users might be much better off.

Apple's intellectual property rights have not been violated by Microsoft.
I am willing to give Apple the benefit of the doubt on HP's New Wave Office,
since it looks like a copy of the Finder, but holding Microsoft responsible
makes no more sense than suing Ford because the guy who rear-ended you was
driving a Taurus.

>                               Except for Apple's timing, which seems
> calculated to further increase the FUD factor surrounding OS/2, I see
> no reason why Apple should not go after gratuitous copying when equal
> and better alternatives are available.

The crux of the biscuit is the apostrophe.

I find Microsoft Windows to be a pretty amazing product. I never would have
believed an 8088 could support an application like that. Even more amazing,
it's a well-behaved application. You can actually run Microsoft Windows in
a partition under DoubleDos! Much as I dislike Microsoft, I have to give
them credit where credit is due.
-- 
-- a clone of Peter (have you hugged your wolf today) da Silva  `-_-'
-- normally  ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter                U
-- Disclaimer: These aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.