🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1991May6.223859.17925@visix.com> amanda@visix.com (Amanda Walker) writes:
>In article <gmwD25w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
>
>   What exactly do you mean by an "out-and-out copy"?
>
>The interface presented by GEM 1.0 was almost identical to the Macintosh
>interface--so much so that casual passersby, in my experience, often
>thought they were looking at a Macintosh.

We must have used a different GEM 1.0. The one I used wasn't very similar at
all. Could you give some examples of the "almost identical" features of GEM
and the Mac OS?

>   At the moment, we have to rely on Apple's good will, and hope that
>   they are only going after out-and-out copies of the Mac UI.
>
>True enough.  So far, they seem to be showing that good will.  If they
>turn out not to, I'll be up there arguing with the rest of you...  I'm
>just not willing to comdemn them pre-emptively.

Well, it's really very simple for Apple to get the goodwill of computer
users. Just get them to make a formal statement that they will not be
pursuing slightly-similar user interfaces like Windows 3.0, Motif, and so on.
We'll all be reassured, and we can dash out and buy Macs. Fair enough, eh?

>   OS/2 2.0 might draw some attention from Apple. Apart from that, I
>   really don't see that any of them are competing with Apple to
>   anything like the sort of degree Microsoft is with Windows. Apple
>   didn't even have UNIX until quite recently.
>
>I dunno.  Baby UNIX boxes are competing with Macs a lot these days,
>especially Sun's SLC&IPC, and assorted 386 boxes running Motif...

Right. But you go after the biggest targets first.

>   So you support the idea that only Apple should be allowed to have a
>   pull-down menu bar at the top of the screen?  What other sort of
>   menu presentation is suitable for small computers with limited
>   screen space?
>
>How about menu bars per window?

They take up too much space. If you have three or four windows tiled
vertically in Windows 3.0, that can be about a quarter of your screen taken
up vertically with menu bars in some resolutions.

>                                Popups from the background (a concept
>which only has to be taught once, just like the Mac's menubar)?

Then you have to be able to get at the background. If you've got a small
screen and lots of windows open on it, getting at the background can be a
real pain.

>                                                                Besides,
>fewer and fewer machines these days have "limited screen space"...

Portable computers will have limited screen space for the forseeable future.

>   Right. Well let's be specific then. *I* want any windowing system I use to
>   have expanding boxes and drag-and-drop file deletion via a wastebasket icon.
>   Is there some reason why I should be forced to buy only Apple products as a
>   result of my design preferences?
>
>I want to drink my soda out of red cans with white and silver script on them,
>with nice curvy wavy shapes as accents.  Is there any reason I should be
>forced to buy Coca-Cola products as a result of my preferences?

That's not an interface description. Your analogy would hold if I was
demanding that windowing systems all have little Apple logos in the top left
corner and use Chicago font, but I'm not. In your analogy, I'm demanding that
my soda cans all have ring-pulls and be the same size and shape; so that I
can always know how to open a can and drink from it, and so that the cans
will always fit in my refrigerator neatly alongside each other.

>I want to read descriptions of algorithms written by Donald Knuth.  Is there
>some reason I should be forced to buy them from Addison Wesley?

Again, I'm not demanding that all user interfaces be written by Bill
Atkinson. In your analogy, I'm demanding that I should be able to buy
reference works containing algorithms, but written by some other author; and
that the books should have indices and chapters, just like Knuth's books do.

>More to the point, I want my stereo to have no visible controls and be
>flat and sleek.  Why should I be forced to buy it from Bang & Olufsen?

No reason at all. Hitachi make flat, sleek hi fi systems, as do several other
manufacturers.

>The Mac is the result of design and implementation done at Apple.  If you
>want a Mac, they'll sell you one.  If you don't, then don't buy one.  No
>one's forcing you.  If you want to buy something just like a Mac from
>someone else, why should Apple be required to let you benefit from their
>investment of time and money?

Firstly, I don't want something just like a Mac. I want a machine which can
easily fit in a briefcase but which has a windowing user interface. Now, if
that's "just like a Mac" please point me at the variety of Mac which I should
be looking at, because for the life of me I can't find one.

I also want a machine which I can do Clipper/dBASE development on, which will
run OS/2 and MS-DOS, but which has a windowing user interface. Now, again, if
that's "just like a Mac" I'd love to know which Mac it is just like.

>Do you believe in such a thing as intellectual property?

Yes.

>   Why should computers be different?
>
>They *shouldn't*.  In any other industry, manufacturers try to make their
>products *different* from anyone else's.

Yes, in stylistic appearance but not in functionality or interface. I don't
care if Apple prosecute everyone who uses Chicago font, little Apple logos or
rounded-edged buttons. Let them go ahead. What I object to is their
prosecuting people who want to use a menu bar at the top of the screen and
have the user activate it with a mouse click.

>                                         Even "knockoffs" are generally
>distinguishable from the originals.  When they aren't, they get into trouble,
>as in the case of "clones" of designer handbags, etc...

There the legal objection isn't based on whether the handbag has straps and
clips on it, it is based on the exact colours and styles used. That's fine.
Protect styles by all means; but don't protect interfaces.

>   So saying "You can build cars, but you're not allowed to use a steering
>   wheel" just necessitates a little extra design work?
>
>I'm getting a little tired of this steering wheel analogy--it's more analogous
>to someone claiming sole rights to the mouse.  But anyway...

Okay. Let's suppose the Fnord motor corporation obtains a user-interface
copyright on the idea of having the indicator status of the car shown by using
two flashing lights with arrows marked on them, one to the left and one to
the right of the steering column.

Other car manufacturers are forced to make their lights stay on rather than
flashing, and appear one above the other rather than to the left and right.

Would that be reasonable?

>   You think that having every manufacturer's car steer a different
>   way -- some with a joystick, some with a wheel, some with a
>   horizontal bar -- would be a sensible state of affairs?!
>
>It's hard for to guess, but I certainly woulnd't mind trying it.  As I have
>said before, I hardly think a steering wheel is the ideal control device for
>a car.  Its sole advantage is its familiarity.

To some people, familiarity is a BIG advantage; perhaps outweighing any
other. Look at the number of people who continue to use QWERTY keyboards on
portable computers, even though there are much better alternatives!

Personally, I cannot cope with more than two or three different user
interfaces. I re-bind all the keys on the editors I use so that they all use
the same keystrokes for their commands, and I use (doubtless illegal)
programs to customise the desktop on STs, Macs and Windows systems to try and
make them work similarly to each other. (I have an ST program which makes the
GEM menus pull-down rather than drop-down. Naughty naughty, eh?)

Suppose I am a Lotus user. I have spent years learning the Lotus keystrokes
by using the program day in, day out. I don't want to have to learn a
different set of keystrokes when I'm using Excel just because Lotus has
claimed a copyright on its keystrokes.

Similarly, I am very fast at using a mouse-based windowing interface. I often
select menu options before the machine has even had a chance to draw the text
-- just by feel!  When I try to use a machine which handles double-clicks
differently, or has the menu bar drop down in a different way, it slows me
down and irritates me.


mathew