Xref: utzoo comp.sys.apple:5531 comp.sys.ibm.pc:14564 comp.windows.misc:470
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!decvax!mandrill!neoucom!wtm
From: wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.windows.misc
Subject: Re: Apple Lawsuit (was BOYCOTT APPLE, etc.)
Message-ID: <1112@neoucom.UUCP>
Date: 17 Apr 88 14:53:02 GMT
References: <292@unicom.UUCP> <663@csm9a.UUCP> <4283@dandelion.CI.COM> <10420@steinmetz.ge.com>
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Lines: 45
Keywords: Microsoft, HP New Wave, Xerox, Lawsuit
Summary: Apple without merit  (from a Windows user's viewpoint)


Hi,

Winodws 386, which contains as a subunit, Windows 2.03  (one types
just "win" to get 2.03, while "win386" get '386).  The above
software is running on the PS/2-80 where I am typing at this very
instant, using the Windows terminal emulator, in fact.

I was surprised when I first heard of Apple's suit, since
operationally, Windows is very, very different from the Macintosh
interface  (yes, I've used them both).  What upsets me is that the
"evidence" photos are pretty well doctored-up -- at least so it
would seem by what comes up on my screen when I run windows.  The
default icons don't look anything like the icons on the Macintosh
and the way that windows are moved, sized, incon-ized, etc. happens
much differently than it does on the Macintosh.

It would seem that the only leg that Apple has to stand on is the
visual similarity of the doctored photos.  Note that the photos
I've seen in Infoworld and PC Week really do cheat since apple was
careful to photograph the color display of Windows on black & white
film to make sure that it would look more Macintosh-like.

I think that if Apple really thinks it can win, that it must be
hoping that a jury of computer neophytes will believe that the two
products have substantial visual similarity based on the photos,
and probably the screens of computers that are dragged into court
to show off the programs.

My test would be to sit a random citizen down in a room with a
screen, keyboard and mouse for a PC and a Mac sitting on a table
and have the person try it out.  Finally, ask the citizen if it
feels that the two displays are made by the same type of machine.
I'd bet that most people would say, "no".

It really would appear that Apple is just using IBM's F.U.D. (fear,
uncertainty, and doubt) to keep its developers from abandoning ship
for what could be the potentially more lucrative IBM market.  By
throwing some uncertainly on the introduction date of Presentation
Manager, developers are going to have to be pragmatic and continue
writing for the environment where they are assured of getting sales
(i.e. the Mac).  I'd be a little nervous about writing for the OS/2
and/or windows environment right now -- especially if all my
former efforts had been in the Mac arena.

--Bill