Gates threatens Apple over OpenDoc
Brian Knotts
Bullied It on Lawsuits")
During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
said.
Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
eh?
_____________________________________________________________________
Brian Knotts <bkn...@northcoast.com> Team OS/2
Use your favorite web browser to get my PGP public key and
an assortment of other (useful and useless) information at:
http://redwood.northcoast.com/~bknotts/bknotts.html
ALEXANDER, DYLAN FLYNN
>(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
>Bullied It on Lawsuits")
> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> said.
Damn, I *wish* Gates would drop his Mac business! Chrismas in February!
He'll never do it, of course, he makes far too much money on Mac
applications.
Mark Hendriks
> (From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
> Bullied It on Lawsuits")
> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> said.
Saying that OpenDoc competes with OLE is an enormous complement to OLE. OpenDoc
is true object technology, not the "I can stick a window from from this app into
that app" object-wanna-be that OLE is.
However, I am definitely not suprised to see this kind of behaviour from
Microsoft.
#------------------------------ Mark H. Hendriks ------------------------------#
|\ |\ |
_ _ || || | o
/|/ |/ | ||__ ||__ __ _ __| .__.
| | | |/ \ |/ \ |__| /|/ | / | | | | @descartes.uwaterloo.ca
| | |_/| |_/| |_/\___/ | |_/|_/|_/ |_/|
-- If you are smart enough, you can overcome your own stupidity.
#------------------------------ Mark H. Hendriks ------------------------------#
Alan Dail
:(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
:Bullied It on Lawsuits")
:
: During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
: threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
: keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
: competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
: said.
:
:Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
:eh?
:
I wish Microsoft would get out of the Mac market. Maybe then we would
have some decent spreadsheets amung other things.
Alan
--
+Alan Dail - Developer--+--/-\--+-"The journey is the reward" - S.Jobs--+
|804/867-7202 | \_/ | "The best way to predict the future |
|AppleLink: AlanDail | j-+-{ | is to invent it" - Alan Kay |
|Internet ad...@infi.net| -|- | "Hate is not a family value" - Anon |
+-----------------------+---V---+"Race,in the space I mark Human"-Prince+
Ashley Gerard Perrien
: eh?
Maybe now we can start chipping away at the giant and break its
stranglehold! Personally, I couldn't care less if MS decided not to fling
any of it's shit software to the Mac. Good work Apple! Don't back away
from OpenDoc, it's the future, don't let the past slow you down.
Ashley Perrien
Dark Mutant
>(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
>Bullied It on Lawsuits")
>
> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> said.
>
>Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
>eh?
This strikes me as not a good time for making those threats. Opendoc
is an OS technology, yet Microsoft is threatening to hurt Apple from an
application developer's viewpoint. Given the current rejection of the
DOJ investigation by Sporkin, and a possible reinvestigation, this is
a direct piece of evidence that Microsoft gains an unfair advantage by
having its application and OS divisions in the same company.
Opendoc does mean important things for application developers, but its
hardly an attack on them. Well, it is to the extent that it threatens
the current lot of monolithic applications, but they can always port
to Opendoc (and gain an excuse for yet another upgrade to charge
consumers) and distribute viewers all over the place as free
advertising.
Opendoc is an attack on Microsoft's OS division, challenging the
OLE/COM standard that Microsoft is pushing. If there was no real
linkage between the application division and the OS division, why
should the application division be used as a blunt weapon against
Apple's upgrading of their OS?
Yes, it does mean a pain for Microsoft's "same code everywhere"
strategy. Microsoft has done this strategy to the detriment of the Mac
since it came out, but since there were no obvious problems from the
user perspective, they were able to get away with it. Opendoc gives a
nice tool-based approach which could allow Wordperfect and other
companies to have a demonstratable difference with real advantages for
conforming to Apple guidelines. (and Opendoc guidelines as well)
I don't think Microsoft can really afford to dump their Macintosh
line. If they do, it makes them look even more monopolistic than
before. (which is pretty bad even already) Also, the only reason that
no one produces Mac spreadsheets is that Excel is there. If Excel is
no longer there, Lotus might get back into the Mac market with 1-2-3
again, since their sole roadblock will be out of the way. Especially
since IBM and Apple will both be using Opendoc, which will help set a
common codebase for OS/2 and Mac products.
--
Martin Terman, Mutant for Hire, Synchronicity Daemon, Priest of Shub-Internet
Disclaimer: Sticks and stones may break my bones, but flames are just ignored
mfte...@gnu.ai.mit.edu ter...@pupgg.princeton.edu an17...@anon.penet.fi
"Sig quotes are like bumper stickers, only without the same sense of relevance"
Steven Marcotte
(ALEXANDER, DYLAN FLYNN) wrote:
I think if he did, we would see some fiesty competition especially in
the spreadsheet market. What would you think of Novell, Lotus and Claris
pulling out all the stops to quickly become number 1?
Steven Marcotte
sdo...@cis.ksu.edu
Alex Morando
Brian Knotts <bkn...@northcoast.com> wrote:
>(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
>Bullied It on Lawsuits")
>
> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> said.
>
The first time was when Apple wanted to release a Mac version of BASIC
The second time was when Apple was considering granting Mr. Bill a
license for Windows 1.0.
Let's hope Apple is smarter *this* time around.
>Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
>eh?
>
Maybe - from the beta versions I've seen, OpenDoc is something
you'd expect from Apple, not Microsoft.
>
--
! Alex Morando, Space Systems Engineering | Reorganization sucks!
! a...@netcom.com,amo...@aol.com
! My employer does not usually agree with the views given above.
Charles Bouldin
Yah, and it would be a terrific thing if Megasloth *would* stop developing
for the Mac! Just imagine how much new, innovative quality software would
be produced if the Micro$oft stranglehold was released! It would probably
be cheaper too...
Jonathan Sir Hendrey
I find the actual chances of Microsoft pulling out of Mac production to be
very low, especially since Microsoft effectively gave up on attempts to
stifle development of OpenDoc at the programmer level by saying that
developers could indeed use OpenDoc to provide OLE capability, and have
their finished product bear the accursed "Windows 95" label. If indeed
Bill is now making these noises, then that would seem to indicate a
turnaround in Microsoft strategy. It does make sense: OpenDoc is truly a
cross-platform format, and Novell and IBM are about to begin the port of
OpenDoc to the Wintel platform. By the close of the year, Apple will have
effectively brought the battle home to MS, and implemented a compound
document strategy on their home turf. And since OLE is going to be a built
in subset of OpenDoc, and since parts will work seamlessly within the
framework of OLE, Microsoft is facing some very interesting choices. If
indeed Microsot Macintosh development stops, it will NOT be a bed of roses
-- if I were a network manager whose company depended on Microsoft Excel,
then Macs would become very devalued coinage in my workplace. However,
with the new advances in document translation (a la DataViz) and the value
of cross-platform compatibility, a transition is doable - after all,
ClarisWorks 3.0 opens Excel docs just fine. So....let the Object Wars
begin. I think Microsoft is in for a lesson in cutthroat technical
competition.
John Hendrickx
ad...@infi.net (Alan Dail) writes:
>In article <3ik56e$o...@redwood.northcoast.com>, bkn...@northcoast.com
>(Brian Knotts) wrote:
>
>I wish Microsoft would get out of the Mac market. Maybe then we would
>have some decent spreadsheets amung other things.
entirely and post crap like this. MS makes some of the best apps in their
class, and there are _no_ replacements ready if MS were to pull out. In
fact, the success of the Mac in 1984/1985 was due to a considerable
extent to Word and Excel, business applications that proved the value of
wysiwyg, menus, the mouse. Microsoft is tops in spite of the efforts of
Claris, Novell/Wordperfect, Insignia (Wingz -- remember it?). The Mac
community depends on Microsoft applications -- that's why this anti-trust
suit is so important. Microsoft's position as a manufacturer of OSes and
application software give it an unfair advantage in developing apps for
its own platforms and discourages it from supporting alternative
platforms like the Mac and OS/2. For this reason, it should be split
into a software division and an OS division (it might even make more
money that way). But its succes is also due to playing the game of
modern capitalism so well: quality products, low prices. It taught
Apple a lesson or two about the latter (I'm writing this on a Performa).
John Hendrickx
u21...@vm.uci.kun.nl
soc...@fswx1.fsw.ruu.nl (preferred)
Mad, adj.:
Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence ...
-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Brandon Lucas
Too bad I'm afraid that if microsoft did drop out of mac business good luck
trying to convince major corporations to adopt macs....Macs I believe will be
up shits creek without a paddle...
Brandon Lucas
Blu...@ucs.indiana.edu
Chik
mhhe...@descartes.uwaterloo.ca (Mark Hendriks) wrote:
> From: bkn...@northcoast.com (Brian Knotts)
> > (From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
> > Bullied It on Lawsuits")
>
> > During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> > threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> > keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> > competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> > said.
>
Is there a way for us Mac users to convince Apple to try to convince
Microsoft not to make anymore software for Macintoshes?
I would like to send email to Apple to do just that.
Please, if MS people are reading this, leave us alone.
Foo Chik Chuan.
u92...@postoffice.utas.edu.au
Anthony Schlemmer
I guess you haven't tried Word 6.0 for the Mac. It has been reported to me
personally by some of my friends that it takes literally "minutes" to load
a document on some Macs. It apparently is a bloated pig of an app. This
is the "quality" Microsoft is delivering to the Mac platform? There was
also an article in PcWeek a week or two ago by Jim Seymour who was reporting
the same thing my friends were telling me. Some of my friends are switching
to WordPerfect for the Mac which they say runs quite well.
-Anthony
-- This message brought to you by TIA and the OS/2 Warp IAK --
bo...@trystero.com
|In article <3ik56e$o...@redwood.northcoast.com>, bkn...@northcoast.com
|(Brian Knotts) wrote:
|
|> (From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
|> Bullied It on Lawsuits")
|>
|> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
|> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
|> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
|> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
|> said.
|> Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
|> eh?
|>
|
|for the Mac! Just imagine how much new, innovative quality software would
|be produced if the Micro$oft stranglehold was released! It would probably
|be cheaper too...
Well, since government agencies are specifying opendoc as a
requirement, OLE should have a tough time becoming the de facto
standard.
Bob (http://www.trystero.com/kirwaido.html)
" if you can't understand it, then fight it: if you understand it
but don't like it, then ridicule it: if you understand it and see the
advantages, then embrace it!" --GS Davies
Mark Hendriks
> >(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
> >Bullied It on Lawsuits")
> >
> > During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> > threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> > keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> > competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> > said.
>
> > Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
> > eh?
> Sounds like they really dont want the competition.
> Hmmmm... a large company with a near stranglehold on the market for apps
> doesnt want competition, and is actively pursuing possibly illegal business
> strategies to maintain its stranglehold...
> What practices might this company be guilty of and what laws ought to be
> used to protect the customers interests?
> Monopolistic practices, and antitrust laws.
> Folks, its time MS was broken up into and OS and
> an apps division.
Nooo!!!! That would provide MS with an excuse to be allowed to *survive*!
We must make every effort to purge our world of this demon! MS must remain as
one in order for it to be destroyed! When Mr. Gates' monopolistic practices
are finally revealed to the Department of Justice, Microsoft must be entirely
vanquished! Go to the temple, and make your sacrifices to the Judges, that they
will have the divine wisdom....
Sorry, got a little carried away. I do hope this DOJ thing finally goes
through, though. Lack of competition is definitely stifling the computer
market.
John Nagle
> I think if he did, we would see some fiesty competition especially in
>the spreadsheet market. What would you think of Novell, Lotus and Claris
>pulling out all the stops to quickly become number 1?
Lotus dumped the Mac months ago. I don't think Novell even sells
a spreadsheet.
John Nagle
david raoul derbes
You are completely correct that MS was essential to the early success of
the Mac, specifically Word and Excel. No question about it.
Now, look me in the CRT, and tell me: are you *really* using Word 6.0?
You're NOT?
:-)
David Derbes [lo...@midway.uchicago.edu]
Mike Forester
>This strikes me as not a good time for making those threats. Opendoc
>is an OS technology, yet Microsoft is threatening to hurt Apple from an
>application developer's viewpoint. Given the current rejection of the
>DOJ investigation by Sporkin, and a possible reinvestigation, this is
>a direct piece of evidence that Microsoft gains an unfair advantage by
>having its application and OS divisions in the same company.
The whole point of this news story is that this is the letter Apple sent
to Judge Sporkin re the Microsoft consent decree. Sporkin
*specifically* refused to consider the letter in his opinion; it was
also much too little, much too late.
==========================================================================
Mike Forester Internet: fore...@netcom.com / CIS: 71301,1435
The Irrelevant BBS - Jackson, Mississippi
(601) 956-8215 / (601) 957-0843
==========================================================================
JJirvine
I think if he did, we would see some fiesty competition especially in
the spreadsheet market. What would you think of Novell, Lotus and Claris
pulling out all the stops to quickly become number 1?
Steven Marcotte
sdo...@cis.ksu.edu
Jerry: Click your heels together, order a mac/unix server in August and
say "Claris/opendoc/wordperfect/123/Notes bundle.
You wont be in Redmond anymore.
Jerry
Insight beyond all rights.
JJirvine
and 486 boxes are swapped out with "babyAT" compatible Macintosh boards
from clone makers. All peripherals will be reuaeable and it will add PCI
to the box. That's all. Nevermind the better, but still
DOS-file-compatible interface. Wouldn't it be cool if they also ran OS/2
simultaneously?
Jerry
Apple sells every box they can make. They're building a new factory and
selling systems via firmware sales. Good goin.
Tom Krotchko
mfte...@phoenix.Princeton.EDU says...
>OLE/COM standard that Microsoft is pushing. If there was no real
>linkage between the application division and the OS division, why
>should the application division be used as a blunt weapon against
>Apple's upgrading of their OS?
Microsoft has never said there is a "chinese wall" between applications
and OS. They've never apologized for it either.
Wouldn't MS be really really dumb not to use that as an advantage? Why
should MS's applications be as badly programmed as Lotus's or Wordperfects?
>Yes, it does mean a pain for Microsoft's "same code everywhere"
>strategy. Microsoft has done this strategy to the detriment of the Mac
>since it came out,
If it weren't for MS, the Mac would be the answer to a trivia question
in the computer bowl.
>I don't think Microsoft can really afford to dump their Macintosh
>line. If they do, it makes them look even more monopolistic than
>before. (which is pretty bad even already)
MS is a small pototoes company. Go check revenues for last year and
get a feel for the relative size and strength of companies. MS is
a company roughly the size of oracle. They're far smaller than Apple.
They're a flea compared to IBM.
>no one produces Mac spreadsheets is that Excel is there. If Excel is
>no longer there, Lotus might get back into the Mac market with 1-2-3
>again,
Given their previous efforts (Jazz), perhaps you're trying to scare
the Mac user base?
>since their sole roadblock will be out of the way. Especially
>since IBM and Apple will both be using Opendoc, which will help set a
>common codebase for OS/2 and Mac products.
Now there's something I would love to have IBM and Apple leading the
way in computers. Two companies known for their openness and adherence
to existing standards.
William Bush
is this more bullshit Net hyperbole/hyperactivity based on a fantasy post?
Aidid Chee Tahir
> In article <adail-24029...@h-gazelle.infi.net>
> ad...@infi.net (Alan Dail) writes:
>
> >I wish Microsoft would get out of the Mac market. Maybe then we would
> >have some decent spreadsheets amung other things.
> I have no patience with Mac advocates who lose their sense of reality
> entirely and post crap like this. MS makes some of the best apps in their
> class, and there are _no_ replacements ready if MS were to pull out. In
> fact, the success of the Mac in 1984/1985 was due to a considerable
> extent to Word and Excel, business applications that proved the value of
> wysiwyg, menus, the mouse. Microsoft is tops in spite of the efforts of
> Claris, Novell/Wordperfect, Insignia (Wingz -- remember it?). The Mac
Yes, it is true that Microsoft made it's success on the Mac platform with
the introduction of Word and Excel..
Unfortunately that was back in 1985. This is 1995....
Your second point is in part true and in part false. Yes, it is true that
Claris and Lotus failed to compete with Microsoft in the spreadsheet
market (which is probably why Resolve and 123 was axed).
However, there are instances when Microsoft has been beaten...
Claris has beaten Microsoft in the integrated works market while Novell's
Wordperfect is now a very attractive option to people using Word 6.
I think it might be a little too premature to say that the loophole left
by MS could not be filled. Claris could always upgrade Clarisworks into a
full blown office. (There's in fact an article on this in MacWorld). They
already have programs that can be ported into Clarisworks such as Macwrite
Pro, Claris Draw, Claris Resolve, Claris Impact and Filemaker Pro. And
with the advent of Open Transport and Open Doc, it is possible for Claris
to sell Clarisworks as a base application. Users wanting more advance
modules would buy them individually and plug them into Clarisworks.
Finally, I can't honestly say that the Mac application market would have
been better off without Microsoft. All I can say is, it would have been a
very different market.
barryn on BIX
:Does anyone have a source citation for when Gates actually said this?
From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, 'Apple Alleges Gates
Bullied It on Lawsuits': "During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a
'thinly veiled' threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh
if Apple keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle said."
Barry Nance
author, "Using OS/2 Warp", "Introduction to Networking",
"Client/Server LAN Programming", "Networking Windows for Workgroups",
and "Connecting with LAN Server".
Raymond Shwake
:(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
:Bullied It on Lawsuits")
:
: During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
: threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
: keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
: competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
: said.
:
:Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
:eh?
If this incident is true, it provides yet more justification for
splitting Microsoft into two corporations - one providing OS, the
second providing applications. Of course, the same folks couldn't
own or run these two corporations.
The report is, indeed, quite credible as Microsoft tried earlier to
pressure Novell to drop Open Doc. It's also consistent with Microsoft's
efforts to set standards it can control (witness the Windows ABI)
and which it can best exploit.
ad...@infi.net (Alan Dail) writes:
>I wish Microsoft would get out of the Mac market. Maybe then we would
>have some decent spreadsheets amung other things.
On this I must disagree. Simply dropping support for the platform
would signal that the Mac platform just doesn't matter any longer,
and other vendors would surely follow.
Currently, their OS developments favor their applications efforts,
and the applications effectively sanction or legitimize an OS. Were
the applications group split off, that group would seek out *all*
the major environments, like the Mac and OS/2, and support them as
their installed base merits.
--
uunet!mimsy!bogart!irscscm!nearside!shwake shwake@rsxtech
Patrick McKinnion
Lotus recently announced that they were getting back into the Mac
market, w/ a version of Lotus 1-2-3 for PowerMac. Also, Borland may be
making a version of Quattro Pro for Mac. (We'll see.)
- Patrick McKinnion
--
... Brought to you by "Ouchies" the sharp prickly toy you bathe with........
sydney K. Gillman
: Saying that OpenDoc competes with OLE is an enormous complement to OLE. OpenDoc
: is true object technology, not the "I can stick a window from from this app into
: that app" object-wanna-be that OLE is.
I think you have SOM2 DSOM confused with OpenDoc, SOM2 DSOM are the
object tech, OpenDoc is the Document Standard/Tech.
Joe Landman
>(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
>Bullied It on Lawsuits")
>
> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> said.
>
>Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
>eh?
Sounds like they really dont want the competition.
Hmmmm... a large company with a near stranglehold on the market for apps
doesnt want competition, and is actively pursuing possibly illegal business
strategies to maintain its stranglehold...
What practices might this company be guilty of and what laws ought to be
used to protect the customers interests?
Monopolistic practices, and antitrust laws.
Folks, its time MS was broken up into and OS and
an apps division.
This is going too far.
>Brian Knotts <bkn...@northcoast.com> Team OS/2
Joe
Alex Stephens
Officially. Unofficially, they were never in it. They released 1-2-3 for
Mac, didn't market it much, never managed to make a dent in Excel's market
share, and left it without ever making any upgrades (I think there was
bug fix version, or something, though). Basically, Lotus discovered that
a product which is barely marketed and never upgraded can't compete with a
program with 96% market share which is heavily marketed, and frequently
upgraded (or, these days, the latest version is ported from Windows).
Lotus isn't much of a factor in the Windows market either. They're just
clinging to their old DOS market, which is quickly disappearing.
Regarding Novell, they don't sell a spreadsheet for Mac, but their recent
purchase of Quattro Pro has led some to speculate that a Mac version is in
the works.
--
Alex Stephens
e-mail - ale...@ccnet.com
WWW - http://ccnet.com/~alex900)
Jason Untulis
>Well, since government agencies are specifying opendoc as a
>requirement, OLE should have a tough time becoming the de facto
>standard.
Hunh? How can they be specifying something that doesn't exist in final
form yet as a requirement? That would be a US government moving far more
quickly than it ever has...
Not that it wouldn't be cool (from a strange POV), I just really doubt this...
--
#include <std/disclaimer> (C) 1995. All rights reserved.
Jason Untulis untulis@ (netcom.com) (tower.tandem.com)
2<S/N: Scientology CoS Kibo C&S Green Card CyberSell
<next grepper enter name here>
This space to be filled by a fortune or Internet Config's Random Signatures.
Tom Derby
>Bullied It on Lawsuits")
>
> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> said.
>
>Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
>eh?
>
>an assortment of other (useful and useless) information at:
>http://redwood.northcoast.com/~bknotts/bknotts.html
>
Well, it looks to me like MS is counting on their appeal of Sporkin's
ruling (about the consent decree) succeeding. If Judge Sporkin gets the
case back in *his* courtroom, I think he'll find this a very intersting
further demonstration of Microsoft's monopoly tendencies.
Thomas M. Derby
de...@cs.colorado.edu
Greg Smith
: I have no patience with Mac advocates who lose their sense of reality
: entirely and post crap like this. MS makes some of the best apps in their
: class, and there are _no_ replacements ready if MS were to pull out. In
: fact, the success of the Mac in 1984/1985 was due to a considerable
: extent to Word and Excel, business applications that proved the value of
: wysiwyg, menus, the mouse. Microsoft is tops in spite of the efforts of
: Claris, Novell/Wordperfect, Insignia (Wingz -- remember it?). The Mac
: community depends on Microsoft applications -- that's why this anti-trust
: suit is so important. Microsoft's position as a manufacturer of OSes and
: application software give it an unfair advantage in developing apps for
: its own platforms and discourages it from supporting alternative
: platforms like the Mac and OS/2. For this reason, it should be split
: into a software division and an OS division (it might even make more
: money that way). But its succes is also due to playing the game of
: modern capitalism so well: quality products, low prices. It taught
Read: ILLEGAL licencing, and heavy handed monopolistic tactics.
--
_______________ ___
| regards, Greg Smith | Procrastinate / // // // | / |
| gr...@avonhead.equinox.gen.nz | NOW! / // // // |/ |
| smi...@kaka.lincoln.ac.nz | / // // // /| /| |
BMW M Power - Aus Freude am Fahren /__//__//__//__/ |__/ |__|
John Hendrickx
gr...@avonhead.equinox.gen.nz (Greg Smith) writes:
>John Hendrickx (U21...@vm.uci.kun.nl) wrote:
>
>: platforms like the Mac and OS/2. For this reason, it should be split
>: into a software division and an OS division (it might even make more
>: money that way). But its succes is also due to playing the game of
>: modern capitalism so well: quality products, low prices. It taught
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Read: ILLEGAL licencing, and heavy handed monopolistic tactics.
>
over to the other side, perhaps). Nice companies don't become market
leaders.
fors...@onramp.net
>Microsoft has never said there is a "chinese wall" between applications
>and OS. They've never apologized for it either.
They most certainly did. It was several years ago when the FTC was
investigating them. Apparently the claim was believable enough to help
stall the FTC probe.
>Wouldn't MS be really really dumb not to use that as an advantage? Why
>should MS's applications be as badly programmed as Lotus's or Wordperfects?
A main pillar of the test for "monopoly control" is whether or not it's
reasonable to believe that a product of "similar quality" has a fair chance
of gaining market share from the alledged monopoly product. If Microsoft's
applications benefit from inside knowledge of the OS, it raises serious
doubt about the ability of other vendors to release a product of "similar
quality."
>If it weren't for MS, the Mac would be the answer to a trivia question
>in the computer bowl.
I'm not a Mac user, but all the Mac users I know are dedicated to the
platform for it's graphic arts applications -- they couldn't care less about
Microsoft apps.
>MS is a small pototoes company. Go check revenues for last year and
>get a feel for the relative size and strength of companies. MS is
>a company roughly the size of oracle. They're far smaller than Apple.
>They're a flea compared to IBM.
MS has 80% of the OS market worldwide on all platforms. This may not be
enough to make them as big as GM, but to call it small potatoes is simply
absurd.
I don't know what you are trying to prove with these assertions except,
possibly, that your understanding of the small computer software market is
pretty much nonexistant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Forsythe fors...@onramp.net "Thankyou for playing Usenet."
Alan Dail
Krotchko) wrote:
:MS is a small pototoes company. Go check revenues for last year and
:get a feel for the relative size and strength of companies. MS is
:a company roughly the size of oracle. They're far smaller than Apple.
:They're a flea compared to IBM.
I think earnings and profit margins are a better indication than revenue.
Alan
--
+Alan Dail - Developer--+--/-\--+-"The journey is the reward" - S.Jobs--+
|804/867-7202 | \_/ | "The best way to predict the future |
|AppleLink: AlanDail | j-+-{ | is to invent it" - Alan Kay |
|Internet ad...@infi.net| -|- | "Hate is not a family value" - Anon |
+-----------------------+---V---+"Race,in the space I mark Human"-Prince+
MANOHARARAJAH VALAVAN
Furthermore, Microsoft apps are sloppily written. E.g. try a 100 page
document in word....see what happens!! I ran Microsoft word when I had
4 megs on my PC, when I get too complicated, it would crash.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
man...@ecf.utoronto.ca | 2nd year Comp Eng., University of Toronto
Valavan Manohararajah | OS/2 Warp "Operate at a higher level",C,C++
-----------------------------Team OS/2 Member----------------------------------
David A. Kurtz
> In article <adail-24029...@h-gazelle.infi.net>
> ad...@infi.net (Alan Dail) writes:
>
> >In article <3ik56e$o...@redwood.northcoast.com>, bkn...@northcoast.com
> >(Brian Knotts) wrote:
> >
> >I wish Microsoft would get out of the Mac market. Maybe then we would
> >have some decent spreadsheets amung other things.
>
> I have no patience with Mac advocates who lose their sense of reality
> entirely and post crap like this. MS makes some of the best apps in their
> class, and there are _no_ replacements ready if MS were to pull out. In
> fact, the success of the Mac in 1984/1985 was due to a considerable
> extent to Word and Excel, business applications that proved the value of
> wysiwyg, menus, the mouse. Microsoft is tops in spite of the efforts of
> Claris, Novell/Wordperfect, Insignia (Wingz -- remember it?).
I (unfortunatley) bought Word 1.0 for my Macintosh sometime in 1985. This
program was a piece of smelly fecal matter. It followed none of the
guidelines set forth by Apple (guidelines followed by virtually every
developer that survived in the Mac market). Word did *not* save the
Macintosh. The LaserWriter and Pagemaker saved the Macintosh. Excel was
sort of discovered by most people (most people I knew) after they already
had their Macs and their Laserwriters and Pagemaker. To this day, I have
seen Word improve by only small increments. It has only gotten more
resource-hungry and feature-happy. Most people I know prefer MacWrite Pro
(which has just about every feature that a person needs for incredibly
spectacular looking documents and then some) or WordPerfect (which is not
quite as slick as MacWrite Pro, but offers a high-end package without
being bloated or slow). No one I know would suffer a great loss if Word
vanished from the Mac market.
As for spreadsheets, Claris makes an excellent one that is bundled with
their ClarisWorks. It would do even better if they were to improve it to
the point of being "high-end" and selling it as a stand-alone app. Call
it something cool, like Resolve or something. Every speadsheet that has
failed on the Mac has failed because people were always drawn in by
Microsoft's clever marketing and feature check-off lists. With the
Windowed serpent Excel gone, there would be plenty of room for smaller
developers to make excellent spreadsheets that sell.
Name the last product from Microsoft that could be described as
'innovative'. Or even 'fun to use'.
--
dku...@lightside.com
David A. Kurtz
http://www.lightside.com/ (Lightside, Inc.)
http://www.lightside.com/SpecialInterest/AboutUs/dkurtz.HTML (Me)
Joseph Coughlan
>Does anyone have a source citation for when Gates actually said this? Or
>is this more bullshit Net hyperbole/hyperactivity based on a fantasy post?
The original letter form APPLE was sent to Judge Sporkin and recently
released or leaked to the public.
MS's reply was last week and was to Apple and the public in response to
Apple but it's not in the Judge's hands. A white paper.
Both are available on line at the San Jose Mercury News's AOL service
and perhaps from their BETA WWW site. Being that I do NOT have the
paper handy and do not surf the net I cannot post the WWW site URL from
my present location.
ANYONE ? Mike Timbol would know. He's a local. Enter the WHITE PAPER
thread and ask him.
--
"What do you want to wait for today?"
Replies are welcome at jcou...@gaia.arc.nasa.gov
Matt Peterson
na...@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes:
Lotus has announced that it is reentering the Mac market. It has
something to do with being one of the original OpenDoc collaborators.
Matt Peterson - University of Kansas, Experimental Psychology
e...@shore.net
>Name the last product from Microsoft that could be described as
>'innovative'. Or even 'fun to use'.
Fortran-80 for CP/M
73 Eric e...@shore.net
Chad Irby
: Operating on the edge of the legal and the ethical (sometimes crossing
: over to the other side, perhaps). Nice companies don't become market
: leaders.
Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream.
--
Chad Irby / My greatest fear: that future generations will,
ci...@gate.net / for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
Kyle Elisabeth Overstreet
: John Hendrickx (U21...@vm.uci.kun.nl) wrote:
: : Operating on the edge of the legal and the ethical (sometimes crossing
: : over to the other side, perhaps). Nice companies don't become market
: : leaders.
: Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream.
Levi Strauss
The Gap
The Body Shop
Aveda Products
Lotus (they did better under M. Kapor, with his corporate-responsibility
ethic, than they have since he left...)
Procter and Gamble
and several hundred other companies, all of which I try to give my business.
Lawson English
: In <bouldin-2402...@async198.nist.gov>, bou...@enh.nist.gov (Charles Bouldin) writes:
: |In article <3ik56e$o...@redwood.northcoast.com>, bkn...@northcoast.com
: |(Brian Knotts) wrote:
[everything that has gone before, snipt]
: |Yah, and it would be a terrific thing if Megasloth *would* stop developing
: |for the Mac! Just imagine how much new, innovative quality software would
: |be produced if the Micro$oft stranglehold was released! It would probably
: |be cheaper too...
: Well, since government agencies are specifying opendoc as a
: requirement, OLE should have a tough time becoming the de facto
: standard.
This is BIG news. Where did you hear this?
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawson English __ __ ____ ___ ___ ____
eng...@primenet.com /__)/__) / / / / /_ /\ / /_ /
/ / \ / / / / /__ / \/ /___ /
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Newquist
[about ClarisWorks]
: My prediction: this is the OpenDoc future. Apple will ship Clarisworks is
: a base application for almost free. Apple and others (except MS) will
: offer more advanced modules to upgrade to Office (and beyond) capabiltiy.
Absolutely. MS specializes in big apps that operate well together, and
with the OS (in some cases). OpenDoc is a direct threat to the MS
purpose. It's like you can actually hear the board room discussions a
few years back. They were asking what MS does best--why they have
market--and where they're going, and then wanted to do something that
would *directly* undermine that strategy. Probably not this tidy, but it
sure as hell looks like it.
: OpenDoc is a (MS) killer.
Which is to say, it empowers the garage software developer (guy who does
one thing and does it well). I'm all for this. Talk about re-energizing
an industry... OpenDoc is single tools-based, whereas MS is application and
suite based. Which is better for the end user? You decide.
However, it should be pointed out that OpenDoc is a superset of OLE, not
a direct competitor. Although, since we're talking about Microsoft,
we're also talking about industry standards, and that is a war that is
all but religious.
--
.............. ........ ......................
Jason Newquist UC Davis jrnew...@ucdavis.edu
If people knew how hard I worked to achieve my mastery,
it wouldn't seem so wonderful after all. --MICHELANGELO
John Hendrickx
If you like apps from other manufacturers better than MS apps and
they can get the job done, best of luck. However, it's just not true
that MS is irrelevant to the future of the Macintosh. MS apps have been
top sellers up to now and I've heard no evidence that this is changing,
despite the unsatisfactory performance and system requirements of Word
and Excel. In the windows market, WordPerfect users are switching to
Word, not the other way around. Microsoft's present suite of apps is
resource hungry, but so are those of other manufactures -- check out
e.g. Quickdraw GX.
What I'm concerned about is that Mac versions of
MS products have lower performance or higher requirements than Windows
versions -- this is (deliberate) sabotage! And I'm concerned about this
*because* MS is THE major Mac application manufacturer. Slow development
and disappointing performance of PowerMac versions is a major threat
to the PowerMac's succes. Don't kid yourself.
Raymond Shwake
>Well, since government agencies are specifying opendoc as a
>requirement, OLE should have a tough time becoming the de facto
>standard.
Well, NIST established OSI and X.400 standards under the GOSIP
umbrella, and declared these *mandatory* components for Federal installations.
GOSIP's requirements for OSI were widely ignored, given their complexity and
limited offerings, and have since been abandoned. TCP/IP, already and
increasingly the defacto standard, has since been rolled into GOSIP.
--
uunet!mimsy!bogart!irscscm!nearside!shwake shwake@rsxtech
Matt Peterson
> Does anyone have a source citation for when Gates actually said this? Or
> is this more bullshit Net hyperbole/hyperactivity based on a fantasy post?
Thursday's (+/- 1 day) Wall Street Journal.
Joe Ragosta
st00...@brownvm.brown.edu (Aidid Chee Tahir) wrote:
>
> However, there are instances when Microsoft has been beaten...
>
> Claris has beaten Microsoft in the integrated works market while Novell's
> Wordperfect is now a very attractive option to people using Word 6.
Not to mention Quicken which absolutely demolished Microsoft Money.
--
Regards,
Joe Ragosta
doc...@interramp.com
100% Chemical -- and proud of it.
Microsoft Network is prohibited from redistributing this work in any form, in whole or in part. Copyright, Joseph Ragosta, 1995
License to distribute this post is available to Microsoft for $1000. Posting without permission constitutes an agreement to these terms.
david raoul derbes
John Hendrickx <U21...@vm.uci.kun.nl> wrote:
>and Excel. In the windows market, WordPerfect users are switching to
>Word, not the other way around. Microsoft's present suite of apps is
I am not sure this is still true. And certainly, in multi-OS businesses
where it is important to switch between Mac and Intel, the recent move
to WordPerfect Mac from <shudder> MS Word 6 can exert some pressure to
move to WordPerfect for Windows from Word for Windows.
>
>What I'm concerned about is that Mac versions of
>MS products have lower performance or higher requirements than Windows
>versions -- this is (deliberate) sabotage! And I'm concerned about this
>*because* MS is THE major Mac application manufacturer. Slow development
>and disappointing performance of PowerMac versions is a major threat
>to the PowerMac's succes. Don't kid yourself.
I don't think it is deliberate sabotage; it is merely arrogance. Windows
is the king, so MS has decided to move all its Mac code to Windows code.
Can't you just wait for Excel 6?
>John Hendrickx
>u21...@vm.uci.kun.nl
>soc...@fswx1.fsw.ruu.nl (preferred)
>Mad, adj.:
>Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence ...
>-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
David Derbes [lo...@midway.uchicago.edu]
Paul Clarke
>
> [snip]
>wysiwyg, menus, the mouse. Microsoft is tops in spite of the efforts of
>Claris, Novell/Wordperfect, Insignia (Wingz -- remember it?).
I remember Wingz, but I don't remember Insignia producing it.
Informix, possibly?
Christopher Robato
: MS is a small pototoes company. Go check revenues for last year and
: get a feel for the relative size and strength of companies. MS is
: a company roughly the size of oracle. They're far smaller than Apple.
: They're a flea compared to IBM.
Tom, I suggest you wake up and check the real universe.
: Now there's something I would love to have IBM and Apple leading the
: way in computers. Two companies known for their openness and adherence
: to existing standards.
Just as Microsoft adheres to fair business practices, timely deliveries,
and promotes innovation.
Brian White
Brian Knotts <bkn...@northcoast.com> wrote:
>(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
>Bullied It on Lawsuits")
>
> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> said.
Interesting. One _big_ question that comes to mind is whether Bill would
actually do this or if he is bluffing.
+ Pulling out would reduce the weight and acceptance of OpenDoc as the Mac
marked decreased. However, the Mac would not die.
- MS would lose some part of its revenues. How much of a part?
- MS would open up a market for competitors to grow. These competitors
would eventually want to expand beyond the Mac.
- Pulling out looks bad in the current light of the DOJ investigation.
Based on business reasons alone, I'd guess it wouldn't be in MS's best
interests to abandon the Mac. However, I can see Bill going ahead
just to make a point that he will carry through with his threats.
Such an action, while a detrimental at the moment would add significant
weight to any future threats he would make.
Remind me never to play poker against this guy.
Brian
( bcw...@bnr.ca )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not.
Shawn V. Hernan
eng...@primenet.com (Lawson English) writes:
> : Well, since government agencies are specifying opendoc as a
> : requirement, OLE should have a tough time becoming the de facto
> : standard.
>
> This is BIG news. Where did you hear this?
Actually, I don't think this is even noteworthy news. the government
has declared all sorts of "standards" that never go anywhere. Remember
GOSIP? All 11 users of OSI still claim that its the future, and that
the 10 million TCP/IP users out there just haven't seen the light.
The government really has little effect in the computer arena, it would
seem. Amen to that, brother.
Shawn
Shawn Valentine Hernan |
The University of Pittsburgh | Dump the RICO Laws
vale...@pitt.edu |
412-624-6425 |
Tom L. Davis
st00...@brownvm.brown.edu (Aidid Chee Tahir) wrote:
> Claris has beaten Microsoft in the integrated works market while Novell's
> Wordperfect is now a very attractive option to people using Word 6.
>
> I think it might be a little too premature to say that the loophole left
> by MS could not be filled. Claris could always upgrade Clarisworks into a
> full blown office. (There's in fact an article on this in MacWorld). They
> already have programs that can be ported into Clarisworks such as Macwrite
> Pro, Claris Draw, Claris Resolve, Claris Impact and Filemaker Pro. And
> with the advent of Open Transport and Open Doc, it is possible for Claris
> to sell Clarisworks as a base application. Users wanting more advance
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> modules would buy them individually and plug them into Clarisworks.
My prediction: this is the OpenDoc future. Apple will ship Clarisworks is
a base application for almost free. Apple and others (except MS) will
offer more advanced modules to upgrade to Office (and beyond) capabiltiy.
If Apple and others can offer Word and Excel features and compatiblity
with OpenDoc modules, then MS will be in real trouble. I'm sure that this
is Apple's plan. I don't know how Office 4.2 has been received in the PC
community, but if it's anything like for Macs, then many are ready for
some viable alternatives to MS.
MegaWatt
>(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
>Bullied It on Lawsuits")
>
> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
> said.
Even if Apple pulled out of the OpenDoc development, who is to say that
the others involved would?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MegaWatt |
| _____ _____ _____ _ _
- AKA - | |__ / | ___ || ___ \ | | | |
| / / | |_| || |_/ / | | | |
Aaron L. Bratcher | / /__ | ___ || __/ |_| |_|
University of Chicago | |_____||_| |_||_| (_) (_)
mega...@noproblem.uchicago.edu |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I think it's a good thing Bill Gates is getting married, because then
he may find out there's more to life than working on computers!!"
-- Richard Finkelstein, President, Chicago based Performance Computing
david raoul derbes
johnson s <srjg...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>bill...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (William Bush) writes:
>
>>Does anyone have a source citation for when Gates actually said this? Or
>>is this more bullshit Net hyperbole/hyperactivity based on a fantasy post?
>
>check the original post.
>
> S. Johnson
>
Barry Nance published the reference. I saw it, but didn't have the time
to post it. I am pretty sure it is Thursday 23 Feb Wall St Journal, page
A3.
Certain of WSJ, pretty certain p. A3, reasonably certain of date. :-)
David Derbes [lo...@midway.uchicago.edu
Robert Cassidy
mega...@noproblem.uchicago.edu (MegaWatt) wrote:
[snip]
>
> Even if Apple pulled out of the OpenDoc development, who is to say that
> the others involved would?
>
The others would. OpenDoc needs system level support - only Apple can do
that well. OpenDoc wouldn't work on a Mac if Apple wasn't involved.
Without the Mac support OpenDoc is dead.
--
Bob Cassidy
UC Irvine
Jason Untulis
: In article <nagleD4...@netcom.com>
: na...@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes:
: > Lotus dumped the Mac months ago. I don't think Novell even sells
: > a spreadsheet.
: Lotus has announced that it is reentering the Mac market. It has
: something to do with being one of the original OpenDoc collaborators.
Does anyone (including Matt and the other person on the thread who said this)
have a reference or citation? Lotus said that they were going to use OpenDoc,
but that doesn't necessarily entail having a Mac version.
(I don't think Lotus is an original OpenDoc partner; they are a part of
CILabs and a contributor.)
--
#include <std/disclaimer> (C) 1995. All rights reserved.
Jason Untulis untulis@ (netcom.com) (tower.tandem.com)
2<S/N: Scientology CoS Kibo C&S Green Card CyberSell
<next grepper enter name here>
This space to be filled by a fortune or Internet Config's Random Signatures.
ETX-T-BEA Fahller Bjorn
: I remember Wingz, but I don't remember Insignia producing it.
: Informix, possibly?
Yes, definitely Informix. At least the OpenWindows (or whatever) version I
just checked with.
_
/Bjorn.
--
etx...@kk.ericsson.se | Ericsson Telecom AB | OO and RT Developer.
bj...@algonet.se | kk/etx/t/bea | Hater of flowcharts.
phone: +46 8 7199620 | S-126 25 Stockholm/SWEDEN | User of OS/2 Warp 3.0
type "echo bj...@algonet.se | mail k...@Four11.com" for certified PGP Key.
johnson s
Bruce Hoult
> > However, there are instances when Microsoft has been beaten...
> >
> > Claris has beaten Microsoft in the integrated works market while Novell's
> > Wordperfect is now a very attractive option to people using Word 6.
>
> Not to mention Quicken which absolutely demolished Microsoft Money.
If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em.
Daniel Say
Apple Computer says top Microsoft official Bill Gates threatened Apple CEO
Michael Spindler last month with withholding access to the beta version of
Windows 95 unless Apple withdrew its lawsuit against San Francisco Canyon
Co., a small firm that allegedly gave some software code copyrighted by
Apple to Intel and Microsoft. According to a witness's sworn declaration,
Gates described his decision as "cause and effect." In an unusual move,
antitrust chief Anne Bingaman then got on the phone and asked Gates to
change his mind, although Microsoft's executive VP now says Gates' decision
to relent "had nothing to do with the Justice Department." (Wall Street
Journal 2/23/95 A6)
VIRAL ALERT FOR CONFERENCE GOERS
More than 200 software developers may have had their computers contaminated
by a virus after Microsoft inadvertantly distributed infected disks at a
seminar in London. Microsoft said yesterday the subcontractor that copied
the disks was also responsible for carrying out virus checks, and had been
sacked because it had "cut corners.'' A spokeswoman said a developer
spotted the virus after the seminar. "We immediately telephoned all the
developers who attended and warned them,'' she said. Microsoft has also
written to them all and apologized. It is believed only a few disks
continaed the virus. (The Guardian 2/23/95 p.9)
:x
Aaron Bergman
Coughlan) wrote:
:Both are available on line at the San Jose Mercury News's AOL service
:and perhaps from their BETA WWW site. Being that I do NOT have the
:paper handy and do not surf the net I cannot post the WWW site URL from
:my present location.
:
<http://www.sjmercury.com>, I think
Aaron
--
Aaron Bergman
Tom Krotchko
cro...@kuentos.guam.net says...
>
>Tom Krotchko (to...@access.digex.net) wrote:
>
>: MS is a small pototoes company. Go check revenues for last year and
>: get a feel for the relative size and strength of companies. MS is
>: a company roughly the size of oracle. They're far smaller than Apple.
>: They're a flea compared to IBM.
>
>
>Tom, I suggest you wake up and check the real universe.
I suggest you read the Wall Street Journal. Check the listings
that show revenues and net earnings for the last 4Q's. You may
be in for a bit of a shock. Some companies to check: IBM, MS,
Apple, HP, Sybase, CA, Novell and Lotus.
Just because the PC on your desktop boots up something from MS,
doesn't mean they control the universe.
There are viable alternatives to MS software if you care to use them.
In fact, if you think MS is doing business unethically, aren't you
behaving unethically yourself if you continue to buy and use their
products?
--
Tom Krotchko
<to...@access.digex.net>
Andreas Wuertz
Ragosta, doc...@interramp.com writes:
>Microsoft Network is prohibited from redistributing this work in any form, in
>whole or in part. Copyright, Joseph Ragosta, 1995
>
>License to distribute this post is available to Microsoft for $1000. Posting
>without permission constitutes an agreement to these terms.
:-)) Great signature! Beat them with their own weapons :-)))
Andy (wue...@tik.ee.ethz.ch)
========================================================================
The only person who got all his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe.
========================================================================
rhy...@chattanooga.net
Gerard Perrien) wrote:
> : Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
> : eh?
>
> Maybe now we can start chipping away at the giant and break its
> stranglehold! Personally, I couldn't care less if MS decided not to fling
> any of it's shit software to the Mac. Good work Apple! Don't back away
> from OpenDoc, it's the future, don't let the past slow you down.
>
> Ashley Perrien
I'm hoping it's time for a lot of smaller, speedier, smarter companies
(sharks) to start ripping hunks out of the Microsoft whale. I think they
can smell blood in the water. Things look bad for Bill. And that's got to
be good news for Macintosh users.
rhygin bwai
Karl Thoroddsen
>to...@access.digex.net (Tom Krotchko) writes:
>>Microsoft has never said there is a "chinese wall" between applications
>>and OS. They've never apologized for it either.
>They most certainly did. It was several years ago when the FTC was
>investigating them. Apparently the claim was believable enough to help
>stall the FTC probe.
To my knowledge MS has never stated there exists a chinese wall between
the application and OS divisions.
>I'm not a Mac user, but all the Mac users I know are dedicated to the
>platform for it's graphic arts applications -- they couldn't care less about
>Microsoft apps.
Microsoft's influence is *much* greater in the Macintosh application market
than in the Windows section.
Microsoft was the only major player to support the Mac in the early
days and now they're harvesting the fruits of that wise decision.
>MS has 80% of the OS market worldwide on all platforms. This may not be
>enough to make them as big as GM, but to call it small potatoes is simply
>absurd.
Agreed.
>I don't know what you are trying to prove with these assertions except,
>possibly, that your understanding of the small computer software market is
>pretty much nonexistant.
--
Karl Thoroddsen | Email: kar...@rhi.hi.is
Gerdakot 4 225, Iceland | Phone: 354 5653704
----------------------- | Fax: 354 5653704
Joe Ragosta
> In article <docjoe-2702...@ip198.wilmington.de.interramp.com> Joe
> Ragosta, doc...@interramp.com writes:
> >Microsoft Network is prohibited from redistributing this work in any
form, in
> >whole or in part. Copyright, Joseph Ragosta, 1995
> >
> >License to distribute this post is available to Microsoft for $1000. Posting
> >without permission constitutes an agreement to these terms.
>
> :-)) Great signature! Beat them with their own weapons :-)))
Thanks--the flames from Microsoft have started, BTW.
--
Regards,
Joe Ragosta
doc...@interramp.com
100% Chemical -- and proud of it.
Microsoft Network is prohibited from redistributing this work in any form, in whole or in part. Copyright, Joseph Ragosta, 1995
Tom Haapanen
>: John Hendrickx (U21...@vm.uci.kun.nl) wrote:
>:: Operating on the edge of the legal and the ethical (sometimes crossing
>:: over to the other side, perhaps). Nice companies don't become market
>:: leaders.
k...@netcom.com (Kyle Elisabeth Overstreet) writes:
> [...]
> Lotus (they did better under M. Kapor, with his corporate-responsibility
> ethic, than they have since he left...)
> [...]
Hmmm. Would you call Lotus' look-and-feel lawsuits against Paperback
Software and Borland something a "nice company" does? I certainly
wouldn't. But maybe part of Mitch Kapor's code of ethics was to keep
the lawyers well fed ...
--
[ /tom haapanen -- to...@metrics.com -- software metrics inc -- waterloo, ont ]
[ "language design is not a cure for social problems." -- bjarne stroustrup ]
Stephen F Cawley
: (From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
: Bullied It on Lawsuits")
: During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
: threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
: keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
: competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
: said.
That could be one of the best things that might happen to Apple. The M$
applicatiopns are all dogs, and growing older by dog-years.
--
//
// Stephen F. Cawley
// sca...@osf1.gmu.edu
//
Christopher Robato
: In article <1995Feb27.1...@kuentos.guam.net>,
: >
: >Tom Krotchko (to...@access.digex.net) wrote:
: >
: >: MS is a small pototoes company. Go check revenues for last year and
: >: get a feel for the relative size and strength of companies. MS is
: >: a company roughly the size of oracle. They're far smaller than Apple.
: >: They're a flea compared to IBM.
: >
: >
: >Tom, I suggest you wake up and check the real universe.
: I suggest you read the Wall Street Journal. Check the listings
: that show revenues and net earnings for the last 4Q's. You may
: be in for a bit of a shock. Some companies to check: IBM, MS,
: Apple, HP, Sybase, CA, Novell and Lotus.
I don't know it that's good news or bad news. Maybe that means they're
not making enough money from NT---you can only make so much money from
cheap preloads of DOS and Windows software. And G*D help us if bullies
like MS get to be the size of IBM, or even Apple.
I don't have that issue of the Wall Street Journal, but if Fortune's top
1000 listings come along, I will check that and get back to you later.
: Just because the PC on your desktop boots up something from MS,
: doesn't mean they control the universe.
No, they just control my desktop computer, which to me is my entire
universe until I get a life :)
Let me rephrased that---they used to control my computer; OS/2 liberated
it. Now Windows is at its proper place---in a cage inside a VDM, not
free to mess up my machine.
: There are viable alternatives to MS software if you care to use them.
: In fact, if you think MS is doing business unethically, aren't you
: behaving unethically yourself if you continue to buy and use their
: products?
: --
: Tom Krotchko
: <to...@access.digex.net>
Nah, I have stopped buying MS products. I still have MS software, bought
when I thought differently. Never upgraded them. Even if I didn't have
ethical objections, I would still stop buying MS products. Before they
are fast, lean and optimized. Now they're slow fat pigs.
I'm perfectly happy now with my WordPerfects and Quattro Pro. In my non
MS systems---a Mac and a PC with Warp.
Have you ever considered that the entire MS trust is to eliminate all
alternatives and competition? Frankly, I want to keep the alternatives
alive.
BTW, on an unrelated topic, do you still have your Amigas? I saw your
post in the Amiga advocacy. I once owned an Amiga but not as many as you
did, though.
Barry Brindisi
: Lotus recently announced that they were getting back into the Mac
: market, w/ a version of Lotus 1-2-3 for PowerMac. Also, Borland may be
: making a version of Quattro Pro for Mac. (We'll see.)
Eh, the last that I've heard, Quattro Pro is now owned by Novell
WordPerfect Corp.?
Sincerely,
Barry Brindisi
pha...@indirect.com
Jens Alfke
> Hmmm. Would you call Lotus' look-and-feel lawsuits against Paperback
> Software and Borland something a "nice company" does? I certainly
> wouldn't. But maybe part of Mitch Kapor's code of ethics was to keep
> the lawyers well fed ...
This is more an issue of one's interpretation of intellectual property
rights than it is one of "niceness". If one believes that the look and
feel of a program are as distinctive as its algorithms -- which seems
self-evident to me -- there's nothing un-nice about asserting your rights
to ownership of them. Even if you deny those rights, you must give others
the express their beliefs, in court if necessary.
There's a difference between trying to protect one's rights vs. trying to
kill all competitors simply because they stand between you and 100% market
share.
Jens Alfke_________OpenDoc Geometer_____...@powertalk.apple.com
OpenDoc info: FTP to CILabs.org
Visit Scenic Flood Control Dam No. 3.
David Gutierrez
(Patrick McKinnion) wrote:
> Lotus recently announced that they were getting back into the Mac
> market, w/ a version of Lotus 1-2-3 for PowerMac.
Would you buy it? I wouldn't. Lotus has no commitment to the Mac market.
> Also, Borland may be
> making a version of Quattro Pro for Mac. (We'll see.)
Ditto for Borland, but I thought they sold that to someone else?
--
David Gutierrez
d...@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu
"Only fools are positive." - Moe Howard
Christopher Robato
: sdo...@cis.ksu.edu (Steven Marcotte) writes:
: > I think if he did, we would see some fiesty competition especially in
: >the spreadsheet market. What would you think of Novell, Lotus and Claris
: >pulling out all the stops to quickly become number 1?
: Lotus dumped the Mac months ago. I don't think Novell even sells
: a spreadsheet.
It's called Quattro Pro for your information. Yeah, I know, Borland
wrote it, but Novell has the rights to market it. There are rumors of
a Mac version, but I don't know if its true.
: John Nagle
Alexander the great
> In article <nagleD4...@netcom.com>, na...@netcom.com (John Nagle) wrote:
>
>> sdo...@cis.ksu.edu (Steven Marcotte) writes:
>> > I think if he did, we would see some fiesty competition especially in
>> >the spreadsheet market. What would you think of Novell, Lotus and Claris
>> >pulling out all the stops to quickly become number 1?
>>
>> Lotus dumped the Mac months ago. I don't think Novell even sells
>> a spreadsheet.
>
> making a version of Quattro Pro for Mac. (We'll see.)
>
I thought Novell or someone bought Quattro pro? Altho, I know I read in a rag
that they were planning on a Pmac version cause of the RISC factor.
>
> --
> ... Brought to you by "Ouchies" the sharp prickly toy you bathe with........
Craig A. Kingston
>
>Not to mention Quicken which absolutely demolished Microsoft Money.
And then Microsoft bought the product....
John Woods
>In article <3isprv$2...@usenet.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, vale...@pitt.edu (Shawn
>V. Hernan) wrote:
>< Actually, I don't think this is even noteworthy news. the government
>< has declared all sorts of "standards" that never go anywhere. Remember
>< GOSIP? All 11 users of OSI still claim that its the future, and that
>< the 10 million TCP/IP users out there just haven't seen the light.
><
>provided by the government.
Considering the dining habits of graduate students versus the dining habits
of ISO standards committee members, I strongly suspect that more government
money went into devising OSI than went into TCP/IP. (Maybe, just *maybe*,
less US government money, though.)
C J Silverio
[followups limited]
shw...@nearside.UUCP (Raymond Shwake) writes:
|ad...@infi.net (Alan Dail) writes:
|>I wish Microsoft would get out of the Mac market. Maybe then we would
|>have some decent spreadsheets amung other things.
| On this I must disagree. Simply dropping support for the platform
| would signal that the Mac platform just doesn't matter any longer,
| and other vendors would surely follow.
I disagree. I read in NewsBytes last week that revenue
from PC sales beat Mac sales 7:1, but the margin is only
3:1 for software revenue. I'm not sure why this is-- are
Macintosh users more likely to pay for their software? more
likely to purchase expensive packages? I suspect Microsloth
pulling out would leave a nice opportunity for better app-writers
to move into a profitable market.
I've removed Microsloth from my Macintosh life, with the
exception of Word 5.1, because people tend to fling around
a lot of Word documents. (Not Word 6. Oh my goodness, no.)
I don't miss it.
---
C J Silverio ke...@meer.net ce...@well.sf.ca.us ce...@genmagic.com
<a href="http://www.spies.com/ceej/ceej.html">my home page</a>
-- netcom account to vanish in a couple of months --
sawa...@nuee.nagoua-u.ac.jp
Untulis) wrote:
> Matt Peterson (mat...@stat1.cc.ukans.edu) wrote:
> : In article <nagleD4...@netcom.com>
> : na...@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes:
>
> : > Lotus dumped the Mac months ago. I don't think Novell even sells
> : > a spreadsheet.
>
> : Lotus has announced that it is reentering the Mac market. It has
> : something to do with being one of the original OpenDoc collaborators.
>
> Does anyone (including Matt and the other person on the thread who said this)
> have a reference or citation? Lotus said that they were going to use OpenDoc,
> but that doesn't necessarily entail having a Mac version.
>
> (I don't think Lotus is an original OpenDoc partner; they are a part of
> CILabs and a contributor.)
I don't know about being an OpenDoc Partner, but they released this feel-good
press release indicating at least some collaboration:
ORLANDO, Florida--January 23, 1995--To better address the needs of
customers in enterprise-computing environments, Apple Computer Inc.,
and Lotus Development Corporation today announced that they have
signed an agreement to bundle Lotus Notes Express with appropriately
configured Apple Power Macintosh and PowerBook computers.
The two companies also disclosed, as part of a broadening
relationship, plans for joint development, marketing and support for
their complementary collaboration services; plans by Lotus to deliver
the next-generation--Release 4.0--of Lotus Notes for the Power
Macintosh platform; and Apple's commitment to ensure better
interoperability between Lotus Notes and the Apple PowerTalk
software....
complete text on:
ftp://ftp.info.apple.com/Apple.Support.Area/Apple.Press.Releases/Releases-1995.January/23Jan95-Apple&Lotus.Bundle.txt
Peter Hacke
--
Sawaki Lab. Nagoya University
Robert L Maynard
"Financial World 500"
from Financial World magazine. It ranks the top 500 U.S. companies by
total dollar PROFIT, NOT Sales. Makes VERY interesting reading.
Bob
Steve Wall
< In article <3irn0k$c...@news.primenet.com>
< eng...@primenet.com (Lawson English) writes:
<
< > : Well, since government agencies are specifying opendoc as a
< > : requirement, OLE should have a tough time becoming the de facto
< > : standard.
< >
< > This is BIG news. Where did you hear this?
<
< Actually, I don't think this is even noteworthy news. the government
< has declared all sorts of "standards" that never go anywhere. Remember
< GOSIP? All 11 users of OSI still claim that its the future, and that
< the 10 million TCP/IP users out there just haven't seen the light.
<
An interesting statement since TCP/IP was mostly developed with funding
provided by the government.
--
Steve W.
Graeme Gill
>In <dkurtz-2602...@user54.lightside.com>, dku...@lightside.com (David A. Kurtz) writes:
>>Name the last product from Microsoft that could be described as
>>'innovative'. Or even 'fun to use'.
>Fortran-80 for CP/M
The M80 assembler for CP/M wasn't bad either.
Graeme Gill.
Gunnar Helliesen
Yeah, but still: How many people actually use OSI as compared to those
who use TCP/IP?
Just look at DEC. They're pushing OSI like crazy (just look at VMS, DECnet
is now DECnet/OSI, same goes for OSF/1). What do people do? Buy TGV
Multinet (3.rd party TCP/IP) for their VMS systems, that's what they do.
OSF/1 users scrap DECnet and go with the included TCP/IP instead.
I work at a systems-integration company, 99% of our customers are moving
from <whatever> to TCP/IP, the remaining 1% haven't got any network
strategy (yet).
Remember a couple of years ago? Everybody and his cousin were talking
about OSI and putting it in their strategy plans, but nobody was
actually _doing_ anything. It was a wait-and-see situation. In the
meantime the Internet and TCP/IP got a lot of attention and OSI was
blown right out of the water.
I guess the people behind OSI had good intentions, but that doesn't help
much when the product is too little, too complicated, too late.
The problem with committees designing standards is that the market is just
too impatient, if there exists something that works _today_, is more or
less free and definitely _open_, the market will start using it in
a big way _before_ the committee has reached anything looking like
a standard (just look at what happened to SCSI and SCSI 2).
(Ahh, I needed that! ;-)
Getting back on topic (OpenDoc): I hope the good guys win this time. We
sure don't need another Micro$oft stranglehold on the market. However,
I'm pessimistic (see above). OLE 2.0 is out now, people are using Windoze
and other MS products by the millions, what does it all add up to? Another
good intention (and in this case, superior product) used by 11 people?
Time will tell.
Gunnar
--
-- __ _
Gunnar Helliesen | This .sig is | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice
Systems Consultant | stolen property! | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU
gun...@bitcon.no | Vicki who?? | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation
Brian Knotts
>bill...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (William Bush) writes:
>:Does anyone have a source citation for when Gates actually said this?
>
>'thinly veiled' threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh
>if Apple keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
>competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle said."
According the the Wall Street Journal article I cited, the allegations
were contained in a letter from Apple general counsel Edward Stead to
Judge Stanley Sporkin.
According to that letter, Gates personally made the threat in a
January 13 meeting with Apple Chief Executive Michael Spindler.
This was in a sworn declaration by David Nagle, an Apple senior
vice president who was at that meeting.
_____________________________________________________________________
Brian Knotts <bkn...@northcoast.com> Team OS/2
Use your favorite web browser to get my PGP public key and
an assortment of other (useful and useless) information at:
http://redwood.northcoast.com/~bknotts/bknotts.html
Turlough O'Connor
(MANOHARARAJAH VALAVAN) wrote:
> In article <2f5013e7.415...@avonhead.equinox.gen.nz>,
> Greg Smith <gr...@avonhead.equinox.gen.nz> wrote:
> >John Hendrickx (U21...@vm.uci.kun.nl) wrote:
> >
> >: I have no patience with Mac advocates who lose their sense of reality
> >: entirely and post crap like this. MS makes some of the best apps in their
> >: class, and there are _no_ replacements ready if MS were to pull out. In
> >: fact, the success of the Mac in 1984/1985 was due to a considerable
> >: extent to Word and Excel, business applications that proved the value of
> >: wysiwyg, menus, the mouse. Microsoft is tops in spite of the efforts of
> >: Claris, Novell/Wordperfect, Insignia (Wingz -- remember it?).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(Sorry to take this up so long after the original post; my news server's a
bit on the slow side...)
Anyway, speaking as an ex-Insignoid, I can state with certainty that
Insignia (who do SoftWindoze and SoftPeeCee) had no connection whatsoever
with Wingz, which was a fairly good spreadsheet when it first arrived
(1988?) I think it was done by Informix.
From what I can remember of the reviews at the time, Wingz appeared to run
most (simple) spreadsheet benchmarks faster than Excel. I believe that
Claris eventually ended up with the rights to Wingz (which they repackaged
and marketed as _Resolve_, R.I.P. ???)
Enough of my rambling reminiscing...
Have fun!
--turly
--
Is it really just coincidence that jGNEFilter == 666?
turlough_o'con...@qmgate.corp.apple.com tu...@applelink.apple.com
Steven Boal
> Insignia (who do SoftWindoze and SoftPeeCee) had no connection
whatsoever
> with Wingz, which was a fairly good spreadsheet when it first arrived
> (1988?) I think it was done by Informix.
>
> From what I can remember of the reviews at the time, Wingz appeared to
run
> most (simple) spreadsheet benchmarks faster than Excel. I believe
that
> Claris eventually ended up with the rights to Wingz (which they
repackaged
> and marketed as _Resolve_, R.I.P. ???)
Yes WingZ was/is an Informix product. Still marketed as
HyperscriptTools, cross platform (mac,unix,windows). The nice thing
about this application is the seemless ability to connect to a database
(Informix SQL) and create forms and "applications" within the
HyperScriptTools environment. Claris did buy the rights to the WingZ
engine, and re-package as Resolve. WingZ is faster, but Resolve had
more error checking.
-Steven
Steven Boal
Steven Boal
Alexander the great
> In article <3ik56e$o...@redwood.northcoast.com>,
> Brian Knotts <bkn...@northcoast.com> wrote:
>>(From the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/95, A3, "Apple Alleges Gates
>>Bullied It on Lawsuits")
>>
>> During the same meeting, Mr. Gates issued a "thinly veiled"
>> threat to stop developing software for the Macintosh if Apple
>> keeps developing OpenDoc, a new software technology that
>> competes with a Microsoft technology called OLE, Mr. Nagle
>> said.
>
>
> actually do this or if he is bluffing.
>
> + Pulling out would reduce the weight and acceptance of OpenDoc as the Mac
> marked decreased. However, the Mac would not die.
>
> - MS would lose some part of its revenues. How much of a part?
>
> - MS would open up a market for competitors to grow. These competitors
> would eventually want to expand beyond the Mac.
>
> - Pulling out looks bad in the current light of the DOJ investigation.
>
>
> Based on business reasons alone, I'd guess it wouldn't be in MS's best
> interests to abandon the Mac. However, I can see Bill going ahead
> just to make a point that he will carry through with his threats.
> Such an action, while a detrimental at the moment would add significant
> weight to any future threats he would make.
>
> Remind me never to play poker against this guy.
>
Reality check time by Poli Sci major :) Consider, over the past 20 years, the
technologically driven companies that have decided to get arrogant and think
themselves big enough that NOONE can touch them. IBM and AT&T. IBM was tied
up for so long by the gov't in anti-trust and various other motions that it was
severely crippled. IBM learned from that, diversified, is working WITH the
industry and developing intiatives and cross-platforms standards left and
right, in short, they are playing "nice". (note the quotes, I'm using it as a
relative here)
AT&T, same thing. Gov't decided they were too big for their own god,
and were playing nasty. Now, they are still the largest LD provider in the
world and US, but they are doing it nice, with ruthless (and expensive)
advertising.
If Bill Gates and MS think they can take on Uncle Sam they've another
thing coming. Recall Uncle Same has all day and a virutal bottomless pit of
financing to carry on the fight so long as the people say "Get rid of them".
recall, also, that competitors are screaming foul alot, the gov't can't ignore
that, its politically stupid. What, law being influenced by politics? OF
COURSE!, who makes the laws afterall? Americans, esp, hate someone that shoves
their face in something and is a mean "winner." Anyone paid attention to
Motorola, they are a collasal company, liokely the largest American based
company. Why don't the gov't chase them down?, diversity and playing nice.
Learn this bill, if you take on the gov't, you lose, period.
> Brian
> ( bcw...@bnr.ca )
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not.
Dave Rosky
>>>Name the last product from Microsoft that could be described as
>>>'innovative'. Or even 'fun to use'.
>
>>Fortran-80 for CP/M
>
>The M80 assembler for CP/M wasn't bad either.
>
> Graeme Gill.
EDLIN !
--DR
/* Any opinions are my own. */
e...@shore.net
with Fortran-80, Basic-80, M80, and the like. It been years since it's been booted.
To somewhat get back on topic I noticed that DDJ (a magazine that use to cover
CP/M and like systems) had a article on creating a "smiley face" OpenDoc part
using SOM under OS/2. It was in the March 1995 issue. The authors mentioned
about an article in MSJ on doing the same under OLE.
I have read Doctor Dobbs Journal for years and like them because they cover a
broad area of programing. I like to read about systems and areas I am not
currently involved in.
73 Eric e...@shore.net
Valentin Richter
(Alexander the great) wrote:
> I thought Novell or someone bought Quattro pro? Altho, I know I read in a rag
> that they were planning on a Pmac version cause of the RISC factor.
Unfortunately when Novell bought Wordperfect Corp. MacLeak reported that
Macintosh developers of Wordperfect were fleeing in droves -- and were
hired by headhunters from Microsoft. So much for the Macintosh support of
Novell.
Can anyone explain to me why almost all the major software developers are
trying to beat Microsoft on its own turf i. e. the DOS/Windows platform?
If Lotus, Novell would really support the Power Macintosh -- something
Micrsoft would only reluctantly do, because it would loose its edge
regarding the intimate knowledge (and control) of the underlying operating
system and would have to play by the same rules as its competitors --
_then_ we had something badly needed: competition. But unfortunately
knowbody at Lotus etc. seems wiilling to grasp this opportunity.
Valentin
-----
Valentin Richter
ric...@informatik.uni-muenchen.de
A statistician is someone who drowns in a creek whose average
depth is three feet. anon (at least to me)
muza...@smixedsignal.com
In article <Richter-0803...@ug201aq.ppp.lrz-muenchen.de>,
> Can anyone explain to me why almost all the major software developers are
> trying to beat Microsoft on its own turf i. e. the DOS/Windows platform?
because, as someone said, that is where the money is.
> If Lotus, Novell would really support the Power Macintosh -- something
> Micrsoft would only reluctantly do, because it would loose its edge
> regarding the intimate knowledge (and control) of the underlying operating
> system and would have to play by the same rules as its competitors --
Don't forget that MS is one of the best selling producers of Mac software.
They don't control Mac OS but they have some of the most popular Mac
applications. To me, this shows that intimate knowledge or the control
of the OS is not necessary. If you say that MS has intimate knowledge of
Mac OS, I would like to ask why others don't.
> _then_ we had something badly needed: competition. But unfortunately
> knowbody at Lotus etc. seems wiilling to grasp this opportunity.
Does Lotus produce sw for Macs ? I don't think they have all their apps
on Mac. But this is not surprising. They were very late to Windows too
and frankly that is the reason why they got beat up so badly by Excel.
I think Lotus doesn't know how to write GUI software. I hate those
1" sq buttons in Notes.
>
> Valentin
Muzaffer
standard disclaimer
David Gillies
>: Looks like Bill Gates is more than a little worried about OpenDoc,
>: eh?
>
>Maybe now we can start chipping away at the giant and break its
>stranglehold! Personally, I couldn't care less if MS decided not to fling
>any of it's shit software to the Mac. Good work Apple! Don't back away
>from OpenDoc, it's the future, don't let the past slow you down.
>
>Ashley Perrien
I'd say that, judging from the smoke coming out of Apple's chimney in the
form of technical notes, develop articles and alpha releases of OpenDoc, the
probability of Apple pulling out of the OpenDoc consortium ranges from zero
to slightly less than zero. Quite apart from the fact that they've spent a
lot of money on development, abandoning OpenDoc now would put a huge dent in
their operating system strategy. Document-centric computing is the way of the
future, and anyone who thinks that OLE in any way compares to OpenDoc should
go away and examine the two systems side by side. OLE is a classic bloated
Microsloth kludge which is almost diametrically opposed to the lean and
streamlined operation of OpenDoc. The alpha version of OpenDoc I've been
checking out recently occupies 18K of disk space. A fairly complex part, say
a word processor, would only be in the 200K range du to the ability to rely
so heavily on the Shared Library Manager.
If Gates pulls out of Mac development then more fool him. He's a twat anyway.
______________________________________________________
David A. G. Gillies (D.A.G....@bradford.ac.uk)
(c) 1995 Wittgenstein's Amazing Underwater Supermarket
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
muza...@smixedsignal.com
In article <3jktpa$k...@selway.umt.edu>, <may...@selway.umt.edu> writes:
> >Muzaffer
>
> Still working for Microsoft, Muzaffer ?
no
> "muza...@microsoft.com" rings a bell.
than your bells have a problem with ringing at wrong times.
Muzaffer
standard disclaimer
Illya Vaes
>In article <Richter-0803...@ug201aq.ppp.lrz-muenchen.de>,
>> Can anyone explain to me why almost all the major software developers are
>> trying to beat Microsoft on its own turf i. e. the DOS/Windows platform?
>because, as someone said, that is where the money is.
No, that's where the installed base is.
It's also where the cut-throat competition and razor-thin margins are.
>> If Lotus, Novell would really support the Power Macintosh -- something
>> Micrsoft would only reluctantly do, because it would loose its edge
>> regarding the intimate knowledge (and control) of the underlying operating
>> system and would have to play by the same rules as its competitors --
>Don't forget that MS is one of the best selling producers of Mac software.
>They don't control Mac OS but they have some of the most popular Mac
>applications. To me, this shows that intimate knowledge or the control
>of the OS is not necessary. If you say that MS has intimate knowledge of
>Mac OS, I would like to ask why others don't.
*Was*, *had*. If people have any option whatsoever, they dump Word 6 for
(bringing even your Power)Mac (to your knees) for WordPerfect. Imagine that!
They lost sight of the first rule: deliver quality.
--
Illya Vaes (iv...@ib.ns.nl) "Do...or do not, there is no trying" - Yoda
Dutch Rail Engineering, Signalling CAD "He meddled with things man was meant
Postbus 2855, 3500 GW Utrecht to leave alone" - Obi Wan Kenobi
Tel +31.30.358586, Fax 357212 MS-Windows, the Dark Side of the GUI
Jens Alfke
(Robert Cassidy) wrote:
> The others would. OpenDoc needs system level support - only Apple can do
> that well. OpenDoc wouldn't work on a Mac if Apple wasn't involved.
Speaking as one of the development engineers on the Mac implementation of
OpenDoc, I don't think that's true. OpenDoc doesn't use any secret Mac OS
stuff (well, there are two minor places but 3rd parties could have
implemented that stuff slightly differently.) Heck, it doesn't even patch
any traps, it's a well behaved normal Mac application. Given a procedural
shared library system like CFM or ASLM, 3rd parties could have ported SOM
and written OpenDoc on top of it without any insurmountable obstacles.
Of course, the fact that we're inside Apple and can e.g. call the Process
Manager engineers when we have a problem does help get things done a bit
quicker :)
david raoul derbes
And the same argument goes for OS/2, of course.
Why do the ISV's wanna take on MS on their home turf (Windows) when there
are very fertile fields in Mac, OS/2, and probably others?
My guess is that it is two factors: greed and stupidity.
Greed: "Boy, if we could capture the Windows market, we'd make 60 Gazillion
bucks!!"
Stupidity: "We know more about Windows than MS does!!"
Well, it is far, far better to own 80% of a small market than 0% of a huge
market. And, if you think you know more about Windows than MS, you're not
thinking clearly.
Just because a person is a genius at programming does not make that person
a genius at business.
My father, may his memory be honored, was a fabulously talented doctor, but
his skills at business were not the greatest. Many of his colleagues lost
hundreds of thousands of dollars in one harebrained business scheme after
another.
And so, I think, it goes in software...
Unwise CEO's and their companies are soon parted: Jobs, Kahn, etc.
David Derbes [lo...@midway.uchicago.edu]