Article View: comp.sys.next.misc
Article #3483Re: NT / NeXT trivia
From: jfr
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 03:54
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 03:54
59 lines
3713 bytes
3713 bytes
In article <1992Sep27.150705.2142@lkba.uucp> uunet!lkba!lkb writes: >In article <1992Sep27.191416.762@prim> prim!dave@germany.eu.net (Dave >Griffiths) writes: >> >> It's a lot of work to supply DOS and Windows capability for NS486, and >it's >> my guess that it's too much for NeXT. We'll probably have to buy a special >> new version of SoftPC. That's why NeXT can promise that the ability to >> run Windows programs will be there, but become coy on details. > >Not only would it be "a lot" of work, but it just might be illegal too. >I'm not a lawyer, but I can't imagine that anyone could get away with >selling their own implementation of Windows, running on the native hardware, >without being subject to the "Look and Feel" litigation of todays computer >software business. It is ok to BUY MS-DOS and MS-Windows to run under the >SoftPC emulator but is it ok to write a look-alike for these programs? >I'd love to hear comments about this from any lawyers out there... Well, I am not a lawyer (although I am legally trained) and this is an issue that is still very far from final determination by either the courts or the legislatures. In fact, within the past couple of months, Federal District Courts have ruled in exact opposite ways on this very issue, in cases involving Lotus (favored Lotus over Borland on the "look" issue involving Quattro's duplication of the 1-2-3 menu style) and Microsoft/Apple (refuted Apple's claim that Microsoft's Windows infringed on Apple's "look and feel"). Although there are differences in all cases, there is still no real settlement of this issue. Executor is a "clone" of the Macintosh running on a NeXT and they have not, to the best of my knowledge, been challenged by Apple. However, Microsoft very well might try to protect their interest in Windows. BTW, an interesting product (I don't know the name of it or the company) exists on several Motif platforms that supports execution of Macintosh programs. The trick is that it uses Motif objects to emulate Mac objects. Therefore, the code is Mac code but the "look" (if not the "feel") is Motif, not Mac. The question here is: do people want to use a familiar environment or run a popular program? And the answer is, it depends. If you expect to put your Mac-trained clerical assistant to work using MS Word on a NeXT, MS Word better look EXACTLY like the assistant is used to or you have a learning curve. On the other hand, if you have a highly trained professional who simply wants the FUNCTIONALITY of a product like MS Excel, maybe code emulation with GUI substitution is perfectly acceptable (as opposed to having nothing, or a native mode program with no compatibility with the documents you have been using on the old platform). Jon Rosen jfr@redbrick.com ----------------------------------------------------------------- "Where is the wisdom? Lost in the knowledge. Where is the knowledge? Lost in the information." -- T.S. Eliot "Where is the information? Lost in the data. Where is the data? Lost in the #@$%?!& database." -- Joe Celko -----------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Sep28.035453.9422@RedBrick.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!spunky!jfrReferences:
<1992Sep27.191416.762@prim> <1992Sep27.150705.2142@lkba.uucp>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!spunky!jfr From: jfr@RedBrick.COM () Subject: Re: NT / NeXT trivia Message-ID: <1992Sep28.035453.9422@RedBrick.COM> Sender: usenet@RedBrick.COM Nntp-Posting-Host: glitter.redbrick.com Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA References: <1992Sep27.191416.762@prim> <1992Sep27.150705.2142@lkba.uucp> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 03:54:53 GMT Lines: 60