🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <7585@tank.uchicago.edu> gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>There are two problems with Apple licensing low-cost clones:
>
>OK, but let's say CCC gets their QC together.  But uh-oh: they either weren't
>following Apple's rules, or else they just made a mistake: System 7.5 won't
>run on the CCC machine.  So now: Apple has to redesign their System software 
>to be compatible with CCC's machines (or else screw half a million CCC 
>customers). 
>A) That's a pain, and B) it's money, money that Apple has to spend to 
>fix CCC's mistake.
>

[Robert, I realigned your quote, leaving the content intact.  sns]

Whoa!  CCC designs a Mac clone, doesn't get it right ("...weren't following
Apple's rules, or else they just made a mistake...") and APPLE has to 
redesign the computer?  

The way I see this, CCC would be at fault, and would have to correct their
machine TO "APPLE'S RULES" so that it would run System 7.5.  Of course, I
am assuming that in CCC's contract with Apple it was stated that CCC would
"...follow Apple's rules..." so that future Apple system software would run
on CCC Mac-clones.


-=-
Stephen N. Spencer      |"For a successful technology, reality must take
ACCAD, 1224 Kinnear Rd. | precedence over public relations, for Nature
Columbus OH 43212       | cannot be fooled."     - Richard P. Feynman
spencer@heinlein.cgrg.ohio-state.edu OR spencer@cis.ohio-state.edu