pfr654@csc.anu.oz (06/15/90)
To Alex Pournell and anyone else who might wish to clone the Mac: How much money do you need? Can we buy shares in your company? I would love to see a standard Mac SE clone with HD and A4 or other larger screen for Apple's price of a Mac Plus. Recent IBM compatible ads in Australia say "Buya clone and we'll throw in Windows 3.0: get Mac funcionality without the cost!" Now we know that this isn't really true, but the suckers in this world believe it. Why can't we have a REAL clone of the Mac? *====*===*===*===*===*===*===*===*===*===*===*===* Phil Ryan ANU Department of Physics and Theoretical Physics Canberra, Australia pfr654@csc.anu.oz phone:(61-6) 249 4678
ken@hotlips.COM (Ken MacLeod 3584) (06/16/90)
In article <2240.2678cb13@csc.anu.oz> pfr654@csc.anu.oz writes: >I would love to see a standard Mac SE clone with HD and A4 or other >larger screen for Apple's price of a Mac Plus. > >Recent IBM compatible ads in Australia say >"Buya clone and we'll throw in Windows 3.0: get Mac funcionality without >the cost!" > >Now we know that this isn't really true, but the suckers in this >world believe it. Why can't we have a REAL clone of the Mac? Simple, a clone and Windows 3.0 is a very good example of why you can't have a REAL clone that costs less than the Mac: if you don't put the money and time into making a product as good, it won't be as good. If you _do_ put the money and time into making a product as good, it will cost just as much. >To Alex Pournell and anyone else who might wish to clone the Mac: I missed the original post, but I wish them luck if they attempt this. If they make a graphically and functionally similar interface (same look and feel), they're looking at duplicating a few hundred K of fairly to very well coded assembly code, of which many internal functions are not documented and a few are patented (one of which, if I remember correctly, is the "region" implementation of graphics drawing and clipping that is the basis of the Mac's round-edged controls and windows). Much of the current code is about to be replaced with System 7.0, so add on the time to figure out what the new system does and how it does it. If one believes that graphics and functionality (look and feel) of a user interface is an implementation of an idea and falls under copyright or other protection, and/or Apple continues in their desire to protect their implementation of a user interface, then one is looking at a huge investment in research and development, trial and error and user testing to make an interface that works as well as the Mac's does and works with the applications that currently run on the Mac, without looking and feeling like a Mac. There are examples in the computer field of interfaces that are different, but very few that have had as much user testing and refinement as the Mac's shows. If I were asked to manage the team to re-write the Window Mgr (WDEFs), Control Mgr (CDEFs), Dialog Mgr, Menu Mgr (MDEFs), and TextEdit, _and_ to make it as easy to use and complete as the Mac's, I`d estimate $5 mil for the first three years. It's _not_ the programming time that's costly, it's coming up with ideas, designing them, prototyping them to a high level of functionality, test them with users, and start all over again to find the best things that all work together. Personally I think people's effort would be better spent trying to convince Apple to license their OS and user interface. Or better yet, if it's decided to put in the research and development effort then jump past the Mac as the Mac jumped past the PC. Now that the processing power is available, we should go back to what Xerox PARC was doing with SmallTalk, yet use a friendlier language (HyperTalk?). The object (pun intended) is you don't have things called "applications" (monolithic unchangeable user modes). Instead, you have "formats" or "styles" which themselves contain other "formats". A "spreadsheet" is a format that contains things in row/column pattern, a word processor is a format that contains things in mostly vertical printed-page based pattern, a free-form format (like ???-Draw), etc. The "calc" portion of a conventional spreadsheet is in this system an "agent" that runs through objects in any format and performs operations on groups of them (i.e. an invoice designed in free-form format). [side note: this concept is very much like GNU Emacs' major and minor modes, and would have similar self-documenting, customizable, and extensible features applied to "objects" instead of text.] Sigh. Instead of trying to blatantly copy 7-8 year old work done by someone else, thereby making a step sideways, why don't we try to take a step _forward_? Oh well, so much for idle day dreaming... -- Ken -- Ken MacLeod -*-Don't-*-Mode-*-Me-*-In-*- ken@snowhit.att.com +1 816 995 3584