Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!lll-winken!arisia!sgi!shinobu!odin!odin.corp.sgi.com!portuesi From: portuesi@tweezers.esd.sgi.com (Michael Portuesi) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: uSoft/Apple and user interfaces Message-ID:Date: 10 Aug 89 12:24:10 GMT References: <9025@cs.Buffalo.EDU> <341@xrtll.UUCP> Sender: news@odin.SGI.COM Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mtn. View, CA Lines: 44 In-reply-to: mark@xrtll.UUCP's message of 9 Aug 89 14:46:43 GMT In article <341@xrtll.UUCP> mark@xrtll.UUCP (Mark Vange) writes: > So my basic question is: why leave these guys alone and only go after > uSoft and HP??? > --- Probably because both C-A and Tandy sales together do not add up to uSoft sales. Why is HP in the fray? Because HP's New Wave package includes software technology (hot links between applications) that Apple doesn't have and is trying to put into System 7.0. It's quite obvious that if they should win, everyone else (inclusing IBM with their PS/2) will be knocking on their door to hammer out the details of a "liscensing" agreement. At this point, Apple doesn't look like they have overwhelming odds for victory, and much of the suit has been thrown out of court. So I don't think too many people are worrying about making "licensing" agreements with Apple. As an aside, my personal feeling about the issue is that Apple should have a right to copyright the audio-visual aspects of their system, such as the look of their scrollbars, the look and format of their windows, the Trashcan icon, and pull-down menus. I do not believe they have the right to copyright such broad concepts as overlapping windows, icons (even traffic signs use them), and menus. The tricky part is making the distinction between the cosmetic features which are part of the Apple interface (which they certainly have a right to protect) and the general concepts implemented in their interface, which should be public domain. One thing which does disturb me is that overlapping windows are still one of the issues up for debate, as it was one of the differences between Microsoft Windows 1.0 and 2.0. I've seen lots and lots of different windowing systems, and I can only recall two that offered support for tiled windows only (Windows 1.0 and the Andrew Window Manager). --M -- Michael Portuesi Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Inc. portuesi@SGI.COM