Linked by umad on Thu 25th Aug 2011 22:51 UTC
Apple I thought OSNews would be a good forum to talk about a matter that has been weighing on my mind lately primarily because the site has been so focused on Apple's patents and litigation as of late. The news that HP, the largest PC manufacturer in the world is spinning off or getting out of this business is what really prompted me to write this article.
Permalink for comment 486889
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Wait a minute...
by Dr.Mabuse on Thu 25th Aug 2011 23:37 UTC
Member since:

Microsoft was given access to the Macintosh early on and made its own copy of Apple's operating system. In addition to user interface concepts, Microsoft incorporated actual code from Apple into their software. When Microsoft sold their product, they in turn created a business model for countless PC manufacturers to build upon which would in turn create greater purchasing strength by the sheer number of company's buying the PC's standardized components.

Citation? Keeping in mind architecture differences (16-bit x86 vs 32-bit 68k), I find this highly improbable.

How much of the industry is littered with make-believe stories and innuendo?


At the end of the day, the GUI that made the Mac unique was a Xerox invention. How many operating systems owe their very existance to them? I know Apple people claim they were compensated, but is this really so?

It's also worth mentioning, that at the same time the Mac and PC were originally battling it out, the Amiga's operating system and user interface was light-years ahead of either of them. Never mind hardware specs.

So what exactly is the argument presented in this article? If they had begun suing much earlier then Apple (and therefore all of us) would be much better off? Or is just a tale of bitterness and/or morality?

More like wishful thinking to be honest...

Edited 2011-08-25 23:40 UTC

Reply Score: 13