Re: The IBM PC's slavish devotion to the Apple II

[Greg Buchner <apple22@mn.rr.com>]

In article <1fwgrgl.5go6pvy22uraN%email@luddite.ca>,
 email@luddite.ca (Simon Williams) wrote:

> Bill Garber <willy46pa@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> > > And, being that you're so high on having a source, could you give one
> > > for the statement where you said that IBM bailed out Apple?  I don't
> > > seem to remember that.
> > 
> > Maybe the original poster of that statement will repost,
> > it was something I read on one of the usergroups also.
> > I guess I should've kept quiet. I have a bad habit of speaking
> > out of turn. Sorry.
> 
> Hey Bill, are you thinking of Microsoft rather than IBM? I'm not clear
> on the details, but I believe MS was instrumental in keeping Apple on
> the go during the late 90's. Some cynical folks would suggest that they
> did this because the continued existence of Apple Computer Inc was
> evidence against the Microsoft monopoly.
> [No source available -- just a vague recollection ;-) ]

The info on this is that when Apple & Microsoft made a deal to keep MS 
Office on the Mac (a no brainer for a company that's trying to rake in 
all the cash in the world) and make IE the default browser on the Macs, 
MS bought $150 million worth of Apple Preferreed Stock (no voting 
rights, just extra consideration in dividends AFAIK).  This happened 
while Apple had a couple of billion in the bank.  They didn't need to be 
bailed out.

I believe this was beneficial for both companies, MS in the fact that 
they were involved with their monopoly stuff with the government at that 
point and MS wanted to make certain people knew there was another OS out 
there that they supported and for Apple in that it made certain that 
Office would be available for the Mac for 5 years.  Although now that 
the 5 years has come and gone, MS is still keeping Office going for the 
Mac.

Greg B.

-- 
There's just one 2 in my e-mail address, so delete one to e-mail me.