Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!acornrc!bob From: bob@acornrc.UUCP (Bob Weissman) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Apple/Microsoft dispute (was Re: SEA & I'm not happy!) Summary: Apple did not buy anything from Xerox Message-ID: <1017@acornrc.UUCP> Date: 19 Sep 88 21:47:49 GMT References: <4574232@<16800358@clio> <925@psu-cs.UUCP> <24945@bu-cs.BU.EDU> Organization: Acorn Research Center, Palo Alto, CA Lines: 22 In article <24945@bu-cs.BU.EDU>, madd@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Jim Frost) writes: > In article <1894@udccvax1.acs.udel.EDU> anand@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (Anand Iyengar) writes: > |In article <1988Sep13.185106.14193@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> sarathy@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Rajiv Sarathy) writes: > | Au contraire: it's good for Apple, who stole it from Xerox, who's > |to weak to sue them... > > Apple bought the technology from Xerox, they didn't steal it. I worked at Xerox at the time the Apple Lisa was developed, and I can assure you that Apple did not buy anything from Xerox at that time. It has long puzzled me why Xerox let Apple get away with this. "Stole" is probably too harsh a word, but "derived" certainly applies. > Then they improved it a lot. This is a matter of opinion. It is also false. (:-) -- Bob Weissman Internet: bob@acornrc.uucp UUCP: ...!{ ames | decwrl | oliveb | pyramid }!acornrc!bob Arpanet: bob%acornrc.uucp@ames.arc.nasa.gov