acmfiu@serss0.fiu.edu (ACMFIU) (04/23/91)
From kluge!uflorida!caen!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!isis.cs.du.edu!kreme Tue Apr 23 01:08:31 EDT 1991 . . i think i responded to this before but i can't remember. anyway, here it . is. . > = acmfiu@fiu.edu (ACMFIU) = me (kreme@nyx.cs.du.edu) [ I send I approved of apple, did not approve of Nintendo ] > i disagree. if you dislike one companies practicies and say that for you > to dislike another company it must have _the exact same_ practices, that is > mere folly. The fact is that Nintendos practices are ILLEGAL, IMMORAL, and completely contrary to every fair trade law ever written. The fact is also that Microsoft STOLE code from Apple and hired a former Apple employee (who just happened to be involved in the system software for the mac) to head up their Windos 3.0 project. Microsoft broke the law and stole ideas from Apple that Apple has ALWAYS religiously defended as their own. . . did you also know that one of the guys working on the ASIC chip belonged . to the RocketChip project. personally, i'll never buy another Zip product . (not that i ever bought one) just because of their lawsuit over Rocket. . sure, Rocket probably stole the technology. but if someone from Zip came . to work at Rocket, then what is he suppose to do with what he learned. . boycott Zip. . . if Microsoft stole apple code, this doesn't mean apple has to try and . copyright it's interface. they should bring microsoft up on criminal . charges. . > also, i take the apple v microsoft lawsuit as an isolated case. i, as a > programmer, should be able to use whatever software is available at the > time to make my programs better. however, if apple wins this lawsuit, then > it will become clear to the software community that other ideas, such as > program languages, can be copyrighted. and that will inhibit me as a > programmer. i'm talking about me as a programmer not only for myself but > maybe for a company. now, if i happen to like the interface on the apple or > the mac, i _should_ be free to use it. You should be able to use someone elses code, call it yours, and sell it? I think you will find that if you write a comercial program in Turbo C, or MIcrosoft C, or Lightspeed C, or Orca C, you have to tell people that parts of the program are owned by the company that makes the compiler. This is fairly standard. What you are saying is that if someone else has a good idea on how to do something you can steal this idea and call it yours. This is just not how the law works. . . please. that's not what i said. all i want is to be able to use _any_ . interface that pleases me. and, if i like the way someone does something . in their program (like the way a dialog looks), i should be able to copy . it. take another look at why copyrights are placed. you will see that . apple's copyright for it's user interface has no place being copyrighted. . and of course i'll give credit to any code/feature i copy. . > if apple wins, then they will surely go after protection in other areas. > i can guarantee you that lotus will be in court with anyone who seeks to > emulate their pathetic 123 interface. but that's the way these "businessmen" > work. and if they won't listen to my letters. then they will listen to > my lack of money. granted they won't feel me leaving apple, but they will > feel me and thousands of other people leaving apple. i hope this happens and > apple falls. Lotus clones have been around for longer than Lotus itself. Lotus took its interface from Visicalc. Every spreadsheet program uses the same basic interface and always has. This is certainly not, nor has it ever been, the exclusive property of one company. Apple's Windowing environment with its destinct "look and feel" has never belonged to anyone but Apple. Apple is not suing over Icons, it is suing over the fact that Microsoft took specific ideas unique to the macintosh and market them as their own. . . oh yeah, then why did lotus sue AND WIN its lawsuite against Paperback . Software. they didn't steal _any_ code from lotus, only the 1-2-3 commands. . and when lotus won this lawsuit, they turned their focus on Borland with . it's Quattro spreadsheet. . . apple's windowing environment is not proprietary. it was not originated . at apple. . > apple is seeking to stifle the productivity of programmers. now, if you want > to know why the programmer should be so dependent on one interface, well he > should not. but apple is an isolated case. multiply this and you should get > the picture. No, apple is seeking to protect it's property from corporate theft. The human interface guidlines are available for anyone to use, using Apple system soft- ware. The fact is Nintendo broke the law and Microsoft broke the law. Both lost. Both deserved to lose. As for stifiling programmers, you don't see Apple suing Microsoft for using the desktop interface for Microsoft Word, now do you? Who's stifiling whom? I think Apple is justified in their actions and I support them. I do not think Nintendo is. When I found out about Nintendos actions, I stopped buy- ing carts for the Nintendo and bought a Lynx instead. Better machine anyway. . . just because the human interface guidelines are available for everyone . doesn't mean that it's "ok". only if you are on an apple computer. and i . sure hope apple would want it's interface consistent among mac programs . (although i will never have a desktop-based program that emulates the . standard "apple" interface). . . apple is not seeking to protect "its" property. it stole ideas from Xerox. . and just because Xerox was foolish not to market their computer heavily, . does that make apple less of a criminal. i don't think so. . . if microsoft broke the law, then let the law punish microsoft. that's . what it's for. -- | kreme@nyx.cs.du.edu |The Coven BBS (303) 777 2911 PCP via CODEN Stalr*nk too| |---------------------|100 Megs of storage. Areas for IBM/MAC/Apple. Games. | | It is the spectator and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde | . . albert chin
toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (04/23/91)
acmfiu@serss0.fiu.edu (ACMFIU) writes: >. did you also know that one of the guys working on the ASIC chip belonged >. to the RocketChip project. personally, i'll never buy another Zip product >. (not that i ever bought one) just because of their lawsuit over Rocket. >. sure, Rocket probably stole the technology. but if someone from Zip came >. to work at Rocket, then what is he suppose to do with what he learned. >. boycott Zip. Albert, I serious feel like slapping you. The guy in question was hired as a contractor by Zip, and he was working with Zip's PATENTED caching technology. His decision to do the RocketChip and attempts to sell it to AE (wonder what happened to the Transwrap II, eh?) were in blatant violation of Zip's patent and the guy declared bankruptcy to escape having to pay damages to Zip. As of yet Zip has not been able to collect any real damages from the whole affair. If anybody, the ASIC 65816 should be boycotted, but I won't because I want one too much. The tech dude at Zip I visited (Steve Meadows) said they have nothing against the chip itself, but they really wish it wasn't being co-developed by that jerk (I can never remember his name, he's the one besides Tony Fadell). Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu P.S. Next time check your facts before you announce a boycott, Albert.
sb@pnet91.cts.com (Stephen Brown) (04/25/91)
toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) writes: >acmfiu@serss0.fiu.edu (ACMFIU) writes: [cut right here] >Albert, I serious feel like slapping you. The guy in question was hired >as a contractor by Zip, and he was working with Zip's PATENTED caching >technology. His decision to do the RocketChip and attempts to sell it >to AE (wonder what happened to the Transwrap II, eh?) were in blatant >violation of Zip's patent and the guy declared bankruptcy to escape having >to pay damages to Zip. As of yet Zip has not been able to collect any real >damages from the whole affair. > [cut] > >Todd Whitesel >toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu > [one more cut] Too bad the Rocketchip was a better product, both in terms of performance and reliability. I have heard various things about the whole dirty affair. The impression I was left with was that most of the "players" were small people (in terms of their behaviour) and an alternate solution could have been reached if all parties hadn't been so petty. The Apple II community is the loser in this fight... :( +---------------------------------------------------------+ | Stephen Brown Toronto, Canada | | Internet: sb@pnet91.cts.com UUCP: utzoo!pnet91!sb | +---------------------------------------------------------+ | Apple II Forever !!! | +---------------------------------------------------------+ | Like my new .signature. ? Too bad. | +---------------------------------------------------------+