U5569462@ucsvc.unimelb.edu.au (DAVID CLUNIE) (06/27/89)
The recent heated discussion concerning the alleged distribution of source code to some part of the Macintosh ROM set, raises an interesting question. Why has no one cloned the Macintosh ROM's ? The IBM PC family ROM's have been independently cloned many times over. I appreciate the fact that the complexity of the Macintosh ROM's are at least an order of magnitude greater, but surely this should not deter an enterprising programmer. I have heard it said that the definition of the interface to the ROM's is not sufficiently clearly defined to allow this to be done. Surely however, close examination of the behaviour of existing Macintosh programs, and the code within the ROM's, should clarify any questions in this regard. It amazes me that no one has ever widely distributed an annotated disassembly of the Mac ROM's. While I suspect (though do not definitely know) that distribution of such might be a breach of copyright, the act of dissassembly, and the subsequent use of the knowledge thereby obtained, may well be quite legal. Any moral or ethical considerations are of course irrelevant, given the vast profit that the first MAC ROM clone makers will net if they can survive the inevitable legal onslaught from Apple. The most sensible approach would probably be to do this in some country out of reach of Apple's legal tentacles eg. Taiwan. (The IBM clone makers got away with it despite IBM's vast resources). Regretably, I cannot really afford the time to embark on this myself. I don't use Mac's, and I can't afford them given the relatively low performance of the hardware. Many of my initially less computer literate colleagues do however, and it is said to watch them eagerly devouring the friendly user interface, but suffering under the burden of poor performance due to an over loaded processor driving slow disks on a tiny (and frankly ugly) monochrome screen. What is needed is a Mac IICX clone that costs as little as comparably equipped IBM clone. All we need is a MAC ROM clone to achieve this end ! So go to it Mac programmers ... and if you don't want to worry about the legal hassles, develop it and give it away anonymously. Then the hardware clone makers will flourish, and you will be secure in the knowledge that although you didn't make any money out of it, you were responsible for bringing the Macintosh to the millions around the world who would really like one but just can't justify the exorbitant cost. Beats wasting your time writing yet another file compression program, or icon editor, or animation program, etc. There are already plenty of those. But please, please, don't get to carried away with the social engineering bit and become another Richard Stallman. Spare us that. Regards ... David
dorourke@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (David M. O'Rourke) (06/28/89)
This guy's real good, un-informed, but none the less good.... In article <142@ucsvc.unimelb.edu.au> U5569462@ucsvc.unimelb.edu.au (DAVID CLUNIE) writes: >Regretably, I cannot really afford the time to embark on this myself. I don't >use Mac's, and I can't afford them given the relatively low performance of >the hardware. Many of my initially less computer literate colleagues do >however, and it is said to watch them eagerly devouring the friendly user >interface, but suffering under the burden of poor performance due to an over >loaded processor driving slow disks on a tiny (and frankly ugly) monochrome >screen. What can you afford that has better performance than the Macintosh in the same price range, Mac's are expensive, but compared with what's out there it's not a bad. I don't consider a DOS clone in the same catagory of mac performance so that doesn't count. If you haven't used them please don't make judgements. Even used an 80286 running windows?? Not too much faster, and a fast Sun workstation doing X-Windows can also appear slow at times. >What is needed is a Mac IICX clone that costs as little as comparably >equipped IBM clone. All we need is a MAC ROM clone to achieve this end ! And who's system software will we run??? Apple seems to be rather aggresive in their resolve to follow through on the licence agreement not to allow the system software to run on anything other than "Apple" equipment. I don't think big business would risk the legal hassels of purchasing a clone. >So go to it Mac programmers ... Sound's like he's addressing children.... >and if you don't want to worry about the >Beats wasting your time writing yet another file compression program, or >icon editor, or animation program, etc. There are already plenty of those. I'll waste my time on what I choose to waste it on. This is a very well hidden mac bash article. I didn't like the tone... >But please, please, don't get to carried away with the social engineering >bit and become another Richard Stallman. Spare us that. Forgive me, but would someone inform me who Richard Stallman is. And why are you talking about us, when you don't use Macs then you are not us.. spare us please. >Regards ... David Another David, but no regards. -- \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\|///////////////////////////////////////// David M. O'Rourke____________________|_____________dorourke@polyslo.calpoly.edu | God doesn't know, he would have never designed it like that in the first | |_ place. ____________________________________________________________________|
mnkonar@gorby.SRC.Honeywell.COM (Murat N. Konar) (06/29/89)
In article <142@ucsvc.unimelb.edu.au> U5569462@ucsvc.unimelb.edu.au (DAVID CLUNIE) writes: >The recent heated discussion concerning the alleged distribution of >source code to some part of the Macintosh ROM set, raises an interesting >question. Why has no one cloned the Macintosh ROM's ? > [stuff deleted about how all us Mac programmers should work on cloning Mac ROMs so that this PC guy can have his cake and eat it too] >Beats wasting your time writing yet another file compression program, or >icon editor, or animation program, etc. There are already plenty of those. But it does not beat going out there and comming up with somthing better than a Mac does it? Why waste all that time, energy, and talent on cloning something? That's about as glamorous and rewarding as being in a cover band (for you non-musicians, that's a band that plays only other artists material). I'd rather do what Jobs did and come up with a new machine that IMPROVES on existing technolgy rather than simply cloning it. Don't be a boob. Bring something new into the world. I feel better now. ____________________________________________________________________ Have a day. :^| Murat N. Konar Honeywell Systems & Research Center, Camden, MN mnkonar@SRC.honeywell.com (internet) {umn-cs,ems,bthpyd}!srcsip!mnkonar(UUCP)
barry@eos.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (06/30/89)
In article <12164@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> dorourke@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (David M. O'Rourke) writes: > What can you afford that has better performance than the Macintosh in the >same price range Why, an Amiga, of course. Kayembee