SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (01/06/88)
As a marketing professional, Apple (and by extension Claris) reminds me of Henry Ford's famous remark "You can have any color you want as long as it's black." The point is, Ford (and Apple) was a sometimes (ONLY SOMETIMES) marketing genius who piddled away a humongous natural advantage by thinking he was smarter than his customers (and when Ford started, GM was neither big nor blue). There's no evidence to support the notion that anyone at Claris knows anything about Open-Apple (published by Tom Weishaar) either. More's the pity. I haven't the time to summarize the discussions about Apple- Works in the last two issues, but if the folks at Claris don't have it memorized by now, they are kissing revenue opportunities in the 7 to 8 figure range goodbye. I don't use AppleWorks. I've seen it, and for my purposes it's an elephant gun when all I have to hunt is rabbits. In that sense, I'm a disinterested third party. Frankly, Apple is NUTS not to get a 12MHz expansion board for the IIgs, a 16-bit version of AppleWorks, and a Mac with 68030 on the market pronto. The enemy is PS/2 and the Amiga 3000 (Apple's darn lucky Commodore hasn't the resources to beat their brains out with that little beauty that's better hardware for fewer bucks than the Mac II); there's nothing that the IIgs can do to hurt the Mac that IBM won't do (gladly) first, BUT the IIgs has a potential market niche that's a potential bonannza (and will do more to clobber the PS/2 models 25 and 30 than the Mac can). I'm not sure which trade pub I read it in (I really should attribute, but alas I've lost the source), but I subscribe to the notion that Apple's primary problem is hubris. --------------------- ARPA: sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu Murphy A. Sewall BITNET: SEWALL@UCONNVM School of Business Admin. UUCP: ...ihnp4!psuvax1!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL University of Connecticut
halp@TCGOULD.TN.CORNELL.EDU ("Bruce P. Halpern") (01/07/88)
RE: 16 Bit AppleWorks I don't have it in front of me, but the current Open Apple (came in our mail, perhaps by dog-sled, yesterday) has a letter (?Randy Brandt) stating that AppleWorks 2.0 is already 16 bit. Specificall, the SEG.XXX file used by the ][gs is 16 bit. The letter also indicated which SEG.XXX was used for what purpose, allowing one to delete (from a copy, of course) those that are not needed on a particular system disk. ****DISCLAMER: My comments, etc., are my own shakey opinions ******** | Bruce P. Halpern Psychology & Neurobiology & Behavior Cornell Ithaca | | ARPA: halp@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu | | BITNET: HALP@CRNLTHRY D57J@CORNELLA D57J@CRNLVAX5 | | PHONE: 607-255-6433 Uris Hall, Cornell U., Ithaca, NY 14853-7601 |
LLi.ESCP8@XEROX.COM (01/07/88)
Re: "Apple's darn lucky Commodore hasn't the resources to beat their brains out with that little beauty that's better hardware for fewer bucks than the Mac II" I'm not that familiar with Amiga, but in the area of graphics the Mac II has 640x480 noninterlaced, while Amiga has only 640x400 interlaced. I'd buy an Amiga here and now if only they would upgrade their graphics capability to that of MAC II and PS/2. Leonard Li.
CS656@OUACCVMB.BITNET (01/07/88)
If APPLE really wanted to develop and improve their Apple // software they'd hire the OPEN-APPLE people. Their newsletter is indispensible.
gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) (01/07/88)
In article <8801060128.aa02493@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET writes: >Frankly, Apple is NUTS not to get a 12MHz expansion board for the IIgs, a >16-bit version of AppleWorks, and a Mac with 68030 on the market pronto. I've heard rumors that they're working on all the above. It's also been rumored that they're porting HyperCard to the IIGS; this would be an outstanding move (so long as it doesn't cost too much). I'm not so enthusiastic about AppleWorks as is Weishaar, but then I thought Lotus 1-2-3 was pretty poor software too. It's quite true that the Apple II (now IIGS) competition is not the Mac, although people looking for a nice home system may be better able to afford a IIGS than a Mac II. The real Mac competition in business is IBM, fer sure.
mdavis@pro-sol.cts.COM (Morgan Davis) (01/08/88)
Doug Gwin writes: > It's also rumored that [Apple's] porting HyperCard to the IIGS; > this would be an outstanding move (so long as it doesn't cost too > much). I agree completely. HyperCard is a wonderful idea. But, I don't it will cost very much -- not when the Macintosh version retails for less than $50, and is readily available at Apple dealers for around $39. Apple is going to be (or already is) bundling HyperCard with the new Macintoshes being sold. I would assume they would do the same for new IIGS's when then IIGS version is completed. (when and *if*, of course).
CS656@OUACCVMB.BITNET (09/22/88)
>Claris took a lot of heat on the Apple II neglect issue, and I can tell >you from the people that I know at Claris that the Styleware move >was partially intended to rectify that problem. So give these guys a >break while they come up to speed. I've just noticed another angle to the Claris setup. Apple promised it's dealers that they would only sell their products through dealers. Since Claris took Appleworks it's showing up in more and more mail order adds, most noticabl y (by me, that is) Programs Plus and Silicon Express.
wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey) (02/07/90)
In article <1990Feb6.035151.19342@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> cs122aw@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Alfter) writes: >In article <WOMBAT.90Feb5134454@claris.com> wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey) writes: > > GSWorks cum AppleWorks GS (AWGS).) Claris and Apple are not one and the > > same; Apple owns Claris, but it is a separate legal entity. For example: > I thought Claris was completely spun off of Apple into its own company. > Shortly after that happened, Claris ran ads saying that such was true. I could > be wrong, though--after all, you work for Claris! I'm not sure what your point of confusion is... the completeness of the spin- off? Claris is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple, but it is a subsidiary, not a division of Apple. At some time in the future, Claris will probably have a public stock offering, at which point Apple will probably remain a substantial stockholder. I could type in Claris's charter, but that would only succeed in boring hundreds of news readers (and myself while transcribing). In short, yes, Claris was spun off into its own company, but it is answerable to Apple's board of directors. On a daily working basis, Apple is a totally separate beast from Claris. Scott Lindsey | I dig iguana in their outer space duds Claris Corp. | saying, "Aren't you glad we only eat bugs?" ames!claris!wombat| DISCLAIMER: These are not the opinions of Claris, Apple, wombat@claris.com | StyleWare, the author, or anyone else living or Dead.