🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2117@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> desdemona!vita@steinmetz.UUCP (Mark F. Vita) writes:
>Anyways, what I actually said was that Apple should not be trying to
>make money off their development services as a whole (not just
>licensing fees).  Since you were careful not to deny this, and I am
>trying to win this argument :-), I will take this as an admission that
>the converse is in fact true: i.e., Apple does indeed make a profit
>from their development services.  Herein lies the crux of the
>argument.  I argue that such a policy, while it may make perfect
>fiscal sense to a lot of myopic bean counters at Apple, in the long
>run, is bad for the Macintosh and thus bad for Apple.  Apple should
>concentrate on selling boxes, which is where the real money is, and
>supply the support software which adds value to the machine at their
>cost.  In this latter category I would put both system software and
>development tools/services.  Apple has a commendable policy with
>respect to the first item, and a mixed record on the second: they give
>some things away from free (i.e. ResEdit, tech notes), but gouge for
>other things (i.e., MPW shell/compilers, MacApp, ACL).


This pretty much sums up what I was talking about in the first place -
Apple is clearly gouging the development arena in a very inconsistent
way, despite what Larry has to say.  The charge for some things and
not for others and it is pure BS that when one compiles with MPW's
compilers that no Apple code is included: Mark correctly points out
that libraries and the like are linked in.  I remember some earlier
compilers that tried to charge licensing fees for using their
compilers - they aren't around anymore.

Apple tried to make it clear that they are not in the software
business when they spawned Claris.  Most of the tools that Apple
distributes as developer aids were home-brew things in the first
place, developed internally for internal use (presumably generated on
some overhead budgetary allotment).  Someone got the great idea that
"if they helped up, they can help others" and wanted to distribute
them.  Why charge more than the distrubution costs then?  This is why
APDA was great - a small-time developer could get good, useful tools
and packages ("Programming with MacInTalk", $10) for a really good
price.  I remember when the Mac first came out you could become a
registered developer for only $2500 a year - wow what a deal for some
tech notes, software updates and free phone calls. :^)

This scenario reminds me of a cartoon with the Defense Department
shaking hands with the General Public saying "We are here to serve
you" with the other hand in the Public's pocket.  "We are here to save
you from the Big Blue evil empire..."

Apple, stick to selling boxes.  You make enough overhead on those
alone to remain EXTREMELY solvent.  Help the people writing the
software. 

--
                Jeffrey A. Hallett, PET Software Engineering
                    GE Medical Systems, W641, PO Box 414
                            Milwaukee, WI  53201
          (414) 548-5163 : EMAIL -  hallett@positron.gemed.ge.com