Re: Apple //f...

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

Charles Stephens <devnull@dobbs.eng.sun.com> wrote:

>>>>>> "ST" == Supertimer  <supertimer@aol.com> writes:
>
> ST> Since the "Mac" GUI is embedded in the IIGS, it is doubtful
> ST> that Apple would sell the rights to the IIGS even to this day.
> ST> It would be too easy for someone to take that GUI out of the
> ST> IIGS and wrap it in modern hardware (maybe even in a PC)
> ST> and challenge the Mac.
>
> ST> Think about it.  Some company buys the IIGS.  It takes only
> ST> the GUI out of it.  It then builds an OS around that GUI and
> ST> sells the OS for PCs.  That's something Apple is too smart
> ST> to allow happen.
>
>Frankly, I think starting from scratch is faster than hacking 65C816
>machine code.  Apple probably didn't want to hassle with the costs to
>gather the documentation and code.
>
>I mean, if I wanted to create a IIgs clone today, I could easily do it

Not talking about a IIGS clone.  Rather, anyone who buys the IIGS
also in effect owns the "look and feel" of the Toolbox in the IIGS'
ROM which means they are in effect free to use that GUI.

They don't even NEED the code.  They could just implement the
placement of the menu bar on top, buttons, icons, etc., in normal
x86 code and build it into any OS.  Even Windows.  And then
what is going to happen?

Tha Mac would have lost one of its advantages, a distinct GUI
("look and feel").  People would look at the PC and the Mac and
think "what's the difference?"  They both LOOK the same.  Both
are USED the same.  The PC has more software and is cheaper
per unit of processing power.  ;-)

That's why Apple will never sell the IIGS even though they have
no great love for it.