Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Article #26459Concepts Apple might claim
From: Bob Burch
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1988 04:45
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1988 04:45
85 lines
4847 bytes
4847 bytes
The following is from my old buddy Ted Holden over at HTE. The
views contained herein are not necessarily my own and in no way
represent any policy of IMS's.
...............................................................
It should be obvious to anyone who has followed recent
events that Apple has no legitimate claim to the mouse-icon
interface, and that their present atempts at intimidating
MicroSoft and Hewlett Packard are probably going to turn out
about as badly as Iran's recent attempts to intimidate the U.S.
Navy. I would like to suggest to Apple, that they could succeed
in life to a significantly greater extent ( i.e. win more
courtroom cases, since I can't really picture Apple succeeding in
the world of business) if they were to concentrate their legal
activities on defending notions and developments which are
palpably and provably their own. The following short and partial
list should get them (Apple) started on the right track:
1. Toy keyboards which look like something you'd expect
from Toys R Us or Kmart. Atari, which actually sells
at Toys R Us, uses real keyboards.
2. The 4" by 5" screen, the so-called "look and feel of a
1946 TV set".
3. The idea of using 70% of a 68000 chip's compute power
to maintain screen graphics, as a means of achieving
new levels of slowness, as well as whatever they did to
achieve the remarkable slowness of their diskette
drives.
4. Slowness generally. While it is true that Sperry and
IBM invented this concept, Apple could claim to have
refined the actual implementation of it to new levels,
and then be in a position to extract legal tribute from
several entirely new classes of victims rather than
just micro users; most notably, from all manufacturers
of Ada compilers.
5. The true "look and feel" of the original MAC and LISA
computers, i.e. <dumb and ugly>. If Apple could
establish a precedence on the concept of marketing such
products generally, they would be in a position to
extract tribute from all manner of victims, including
Swedish automotive firms, many clothing manufacturers,
most American house-building firms..... the only limit
on this one would be their own imaginations. In
particular, patenting this concept would put Apple into
an admirable position for suing the denizens of Borneo,
the Australian outback, and a number of like places
when these later begin to manufacture computers, since
those computers will undoubtedly resemble the MAC.
6. The concept of an assembler requiring two computers for
its use. This was an Apple exclusive and represented
the only way for anyone other than Apple to program the
MAC for the first two years.
7. The concept of making a mouse-icon interface the only
way of doing anything whatsoever with a computer,
rather than simply an intelligent handle on graphics
programs as per GEM, Windows, DeskView etc. all of
which make sense.
Like I said, this is a rather short and obviously incomplete
list, to which other USENET viewers with more Apple experience
than mine could probably add a great deal. I regard Apple as bad
for the American computer industry in general, and am glad that
they have finally shown their true colors to the world, so that
nobody who reads at all could possibly be under any further
illusions regarding them.
Ted Holden
HTE
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<102@imspw6.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!imspw6!bobShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!imspw6!bob From: bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.apple Subject: Concepts Apple might claim Message-ID: <102@imspw6.UUCP> Date: 22 Apr 88 04:45:42 GMT Organization: IMS Inc., Rockville, MD Lines: 85