Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site teklds.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!tektronix!teklds!davidl
From: davidl@teklds.UUCP (David Levine)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.micro.atari,net.micro.mac,net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <1175@teklds.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 24-Oct-85 12:36:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: teklds.1175
Posted: Thu Oct 24 12:36:08 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 26-Oct-85 04:42:44 EDT
References: <3208@nsc.UUCP> <1196@vax1.fluke.UUCP>
Reply-To: davidl@teklds.UUCP (David Levine)
Followup-To: net.micro.pc
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 40
Xref: watmath net.micro.pc:5713 net.micro.atari:1492 net.micro.mac:3145 net.micro.amiga:486
Summary: 

In article <799@hou2d.UUCP> xxajtxx@hou2d.UUCP (A.THANGARAJ) writes:
>	A more visionary Apple might have forseen that GEM, by introducing 
>IBM PC and compatible users to a MAC-like interface, was helping to propagate 
>a standard user interface in the PC industry...
>                  ... If only all drawing, painting and desktop programs would 
>confirm to a standard screen display, ...  the personal computer industry 
>as a whole would benefit...
>This would, in the long run, benefit Apple itself! 
>                          ... Whereas the "MAC-like User Interface" may have
>soon become the industry standard, displacing anything put out by IBM or 
>Microsoft, Apple has now forfeited that position. 

I just have to put my two bits in on this one.  Apple has nothing to gain and
everything to lose by letting the "Mac-LIKE user interface" (emphasis mine)
become a standard.  The hordes of business computer users who think that IBM is
the only name in computers have no reason to buy Apple products unless they are
in some way clearly superior to IBM.  This superiority can be in price, 
features, performance or what have you, as long as it's enough of a DIFFERENCE 
to make up for lack of IBM compatibility.  If the "Mac-like user interface" is
available on the IBM PC, short-sighted grey suits will see no reason at all to
buy a Mac.  Thus, Apple (as a profit-making business) has no choice but to
protect its differences.

This article reminds me of those who said in 1980 that IBM's entry into the
personal computer field would "legitimize" the industry.  (Remember when "PC" 
meant "a personal computer", not "an IBM-compatible 16-bit MS-DOS computer"?
Remember Osborne and Victor?  Remember when micros were an adventure?) 

I've directed followups to net.micro.pc only.  This branch of the discussion 
is taking off in an IBM-compatible direction.

By the way, what DOES that .signature with the two tombstones mean?

David D. Levine       (...decvax!tektronix!teklds!davidl)    [UUCP]
                      (teklds!davidl.tektronix@csnet-relay)  [ARPA/CSNET]

P.S.  Forgive me for spouting off, but it looks like I'm going to be forced 
to use a PC at work (can you imagine the pain of using MS-DOS every day when 
you're used to the power of UNIX?) and the very thought of IBM just makes me 
sick.