🚀 go-pugleaf

The basenote is discussing Apple ROMs and what happened when IBM was cloned.

	I had an interesting talk with an Apple market-intelligence person at
Comdex. What it boiled down to is there's a third factor here: 3rd party
software developers. If there were a cheap clone-Mac available, those
developes would probably see an increase in their sales, and this would
thus benefit them.

	Yes, it's not 1985, when Mac developers were starving. However, the
Mac is still having to compete with reams of MSDOS Clones, and there's
plenty of companies who look at installed base (Mac vs. MSDOS), ease of
development (the learning "cliff"), and potential market, and don't do Mac
products ... or do limp ports of PC products.

	Obviously I'm not unbiased in this. However, I would like to see
Apple license out its 64K, possibly its 128K technology, to clone makers under
tight control, to produce an inexpensive Mac. Given that Tramiel can sell
a 520 ST for under $300 (if I have that right -- if not, it's close), this
would help encourage third party software development for the Mac. A case
history would have to be the Commodore 64. Get enough installed, and
development
will happen, as developers see the potential market.

	Probably such a machine would have to be configured not to compete
with "classic" Mac products like the SE. (I have been told the Plus has
gone out of manufacture, so it's irrelevant). Perhaps limits on the clock
speed,
RAM availability, or no System 7 compatibility would reassure Apple that
clone sales would not damage Mac sales. And those clone royalty checks
certainly are not going to hurt anything -- if I heard right, Apple made
a mint off Adobe stock.

	Obviously this is tentative and speculative. What's interesting
is that these were the opinions of the person I was talking to! 

	Maybe, perhaps Apple is realizing there's more than one way to
"have it all".

	-- thanks, Dave / Gadgets