#A2200
19 messages in this thread
Legal problems? First of all, we have created a MAC clone… and Apple *has*
lawyers.
Secondly, would the public object to a better machine at a lower price?
>>Legal problems? First of all, we have created a MAC clone… and Apple *has*
>>lawyers.
Apple has the good sense not to sue over something that they don't perceive as
a threat to their business interests. How else would you explain them suing
Microsoft over Windows look and feel when they licensed most of that technology
to MS, while not suing Commodore over a Workbench which bears much more in
common with the Mac desktop? Suing Commodore would have legitimized the Amiga.
They just let Commodore self destruct. If they perceive you as a threat Jim,
you'll hear from their lawyers.
Apple does not perceive us as a threat. In fact, when I met with them a few
months ago, they were very surprised at what we have done to improve the MAC.
Their only real concern was that the emulation was making the MAC family look
bad… after seeing the benchmarks, they realized that we make the MAC look
better than it really is. 🙂
BTW, when the Amiga was introduced, its GUI was radically different from the
Amiga's. Since the first 64K MAC was released, it is interesting to see how
much it has changed to resemble the Amiga's GUI.
woops… it was late when I typed that one…
When the 'MAC' was introduced, its GUI was radically different from the
Amiga's…. sheesh… sleep Jim, damn it! 😉
PFFJI – But I believe Amiga licensed the WorkBench from Xerox when the
original software developement began. It has the same right has Apple to
use that GUI.
Hank/Videology – Where you get all the P.O.M.P. under all
Circumstances
>>But I believe Amiga licensed the WorkBench from Xerox when the >>original
software developement began.
That's news to me, Henry. Can anyone else confirm this? In fact, I don't
believe Apple had a Xerox license.
Regardless, one of the things that Apple sued it's *licensee*, Microsoft, over
was overlapping windows. Apple sucessfully sued DR over the GEM interface on
this very point. They just as easily could have sued Commodore had they
regarded the Amiga as a threat to their market. Whether someone has a
legitmate right to a technology is often irrelevant in corporate legal wars.
Xerox set up an whole lab to work on GUI. They worked on it for 10 years
before deciding it wasn't a goer. The story is that the dynamic duo had a
tour through the Xerox labs about a year before they were closed down and
took the idea off to their garage.
The funny part was that after Apple had been suing MS for 1 – 2 years,
Xerox turned around and started suing Apple for the same thing. I never
did hear what was the outcome of it all…
regards, Lu on AutoPilot downunder
>>Xerox set up an whole lab to work on GUI. They worked on it for 10 years
>>before deciding it wasn't a goer.
Right, and Apple hired the guys who had developed the stuff for Xerox. Alan
Kay was one.
>>The funny part was that after Apple had been suing MS for 1 – 2 years,
>>Xerox turned around and started suing Apple for the same thing.
The suit against Apple was dismissed on some technicality, I don't recall what,
but Xerox had failed to do something to protect their work.
Lu,
> what was the outcome of it all
The judge told Xerox that they'd waited too long to bring suit!
Malcolm
Xeros's lawsuit was tossed out of court, because they waited too long to
sue Apple for taking the idea without permission. (Then Macfanatics have
the gall to continue to whine about how MS ripped of "their" idea.)
John
> In fact, I don't believe Apple had a Xerox license.
I'm pretty sure of it because I remember Xerox suing or threatening to sue
Apple at the time Mac was released. I wondered at the time why CBM was not
threatened and thought that perhaps this was because Amiga never had a
business relationship with Xerox labs the way Apple had during LISA's
development.
Tom
alternate: jonest@hfsi.com
I never met a man I didn't like…Will Rogers
>>I wondered at the time why CBM was not >>threatened and thought that perhaps
this was because Amiga never had a >>business relationship with Xerox labs the
way Apple had during LISA's >>development.
I don't think that Apple ever had a business relationship with Xerox on the GUI
stuff. Xerox did sue Apple about the same time Apple sued Microsoft over
Windows, many years after the Mac had been released.
I've been saying that CBM was never sued was because Amiga sales were never
enough to sue over. In fact, I think a lawsuit against CBM by Apple would have
been a winning situation for CBM, and Apple knew this. It would have provided a
great deal of publicity and lent credibility to the Amiga. "The Amiga? Oh
yeah, that's the machine Apple's all shook up about." Much better to ignore it,
and let Commodore dig its grave.
Tom,
I figured Apple never sued over Workbench cause it was too different. I
think a Mac user mightn't "get" Workbench.
Malcolm
Malcolm,
I seem to recall that the reason they couldn't sue C= was that we had a
color interface when they did not.
The colour interface sounds reasonable to me too. But I still think that a
Mac person in court might sit down at an Amiga and fail to operate it. 🙂
Malcolm
Malcolm, please don't say that an Amiga interface is too hard for a Mac person
to understand!
–Jim
Jim,
You're product depends on a legally obtained Apple Macintosh ROM chip. The
rest of your product is essentially off-the-shelf hardware. Please let me know
if the afore mentioned statement is not true.
We are speculating, that the Computer Answers product is based on the CD32
motherboard, which, at the time, was a Commodore owned and manufactured
hardware part with custom ICs and ROMs. This is, obviously, not exactly a
"clone" product. And therefore, has more tangibility than your product.
I would welcome an Amiga clone product. However, I really don't think that's
feasible at the moment. I would suggest, however, that the new owners
seriously think about licensing the OS and Amiga chipset to those manufacturers
interested in making general purpose computers, workstations or embedded
systems.
BTW, Jim. You have an excellent product. If you can get Macintosh AND
MS-DOS/Windows emulation working as a stable, no fuss, finished product, you
have the potential of advancing the Amiga technology to the next level. Apple
is interested in licensing its software technology , therefore they may even
help you get ROMs, OS and manuals, maybe even technical support. Hey, you may
even be able to make the Amiga more attractive to the mainstream consumers! ;-}
The situation reminds me of the recent political campaigns. After the voting
is done, the opposing sides will have reconcile their differences and work
together. Such a consortium of Samsung (manufacturing), CEI
(distribution/owner), UK Group (distribution/owner), ESCOM (distribution and
retail), Philips (technology development) etc. have all the right facets to
allow the Amiga technology to succeed in one field or another. Lets see it
happen. As usual, Amiga users everywhere will have to roll up the sleeves and
help. What else is new! ;-}
Happy Thanksgiving!
Regards,
John Chang
John,
An Amiga clone is VERY feasible. I chatted with Dave Haynie before he left to
Scala, and we both had basically the same idea for an Amiga clone. A single
low-end RISC processor can emulate the entire custom chipset (including control
for Cirrus Logic or similar graphics chip). All you would need is the RISC, the
CPU, slots and some glue logic. Realistically, you could fit the entire
assembly (minus the Zorro slots) in the palm of your hand.
The price? Way cheaper to produce than Commodore's spendy custom chips.
Flexibility? Yes! Want full screen sprites? No problem… how about 2.88 disk
drive support? No problem. Why Commodore did not go this route is beyond
me…. I know Dave wanted to do something similar, and they said 'No'.
Sounds like a heck of an idea to bring up to whoever ends up with the Amiga
Technology.