🚀 go-pugleaf

In <H.ea.vYTmPkf3y_6@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca writes:

>  In <1992Oct5.182842.16054@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> S_TITZ@iravcl.ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz) writes:
>  
>  >I agree that those {Amiga,Atari} Mac emulators based on 64k Mac Plus
>  >ROMs make no sense today. (And I think a real Mac Classic with 9"
>  >peephole doesn't either.)
>  
>      Actually, the Atari emulator, and I beleive the Amiga emulator as well,
>  use the 128k roms. 

When those emulators first came up, they used 64k ROMs while the state
of the art at Apple's was 128k. Now they're using the 128k ones (long
after Apple introduced them), and Apple has 256-512k. (Not the size
really matters, but what is inside, of course :-)

>  Apple has made the 256k rom set impossible to obtain, 
>  as ayone who wants to upgrade has to turn in their old roms, which the
>  dealers must return to Apple, and Apple will cut off any dealer selling
>  the 256k roms without obtaining a trade-in set. Which is exactly the issue

Exactly that did they with the old ones as well, but apparently the
turn-in process got screwed up one time, and some (much!) leaked out.
The reason was three upgrades closely following each other. The first
64k emulators had to use ROMs that were (at least apparently) illegaly
copied. (Here in Germany, the emulators got shipped with no ROMs but
the documentation told addresses in Luxemburg and the Netherlands
where you could get them.)

>  that started this thread. Apple obviously realises that use of their legal
>  roms to make a clone would endanger their sales, and refuses to allow this 
>  to happen.

They may do that if they want to. After all, they did design and
implement their OS. The problem is if someone *redesigns* the software
and makes a Mac-compatible machine, Apple will surely sue him. And
that is the problem IMHO: Our freedom to design software is challenged
when someone forbids us to make programs that look like his own ones.

Remember when the first IBM clones came out: Any company that sold PCs
with bootlegged IBM BIOSes would surely get sued by IBM. Who just
built IBM-like hardware and equipped it with own BIOSes could do that.
Redesigning BIOSes after IBMs originals has become a major business
today. AMI and Phoenix are companies that make their living from
IBM-lookalike software redesigning, but not from copying IBMs code.
Now imagine AMI redesigning the Macintosh ROMS ;-)


MfG,
        Olaf
-- 
    o     Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student - univ of karlsruhe - germany
 _ /<_    s_titz@iravcl.ira.uka.de - uknf@dkauni2.bitnet - praetorius@irc
(_)>(_)   +49-721-60439 - did i forget something?
Wenn Sie trockenen Wein m"ogen und haben nur zwei halbtrockene,
 sch"utten Sie die zusammen, das ist dann ganz trocken.
 - Thomas Gottschalk