I believe that if Apple were to either put the OS on Intel hardware, or
support ARDI with all the technical specs that they / you needed, they
could become more profitable. Where had Microsoft made the bulk of its
money? They did it by licensing the OS. Apple really can't produce the
volum,e of custom ASICs needed by clone manufacturers. Thats why the
deal with gateway fell through. If they out the os on NON Apple
hardware, they can work out licensing agreements, to distribute the OS.
You guys (speaking to ARDI) really ought to work with QUIX, using their
technology to drop in system 7.5, and allow them to use your emulator.
Crate a mutual technology exchange.
Did anyone read in a recent MacWeek, about Apple wanting to put Windows
or Windows 95 on the Mac. They ran into some problems. They lost there
OEM licensing agreement with Microsoft, and in order to get a new one,
they must swear that they will not sue MS for patent infringement. They
then said, well why not put the non-upgrade version of WIndows95 on the
Mac. Problem, it comes on 1.7 (or so) meg floppies that the mac (Super)
Drive can't read. The full product does not come on CD.
Why does Apple want Windows on Apple hardware, but they don't want MacOS
on Intel (or compatible (Cyrix, AMD, NexGen)) hardware?
Bill Miller
From owner-paper Tue Feb 6 20:24:02 1996
Return-Path: <owner-paper>
Received: by ftp.ardi.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
id m0tk0UC-0007qTa; Tue, 6 Feb 96 20:24 MST
Sender: owner-paper
Received: from r02n06.cac.psu.edu by ftp.ardi.com with smtp
(Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0tk0Td-0007qQC; Tue, 6 Feb 96 20:23 MST
Received: from [128.118.59.228] (cbel13.cac.psu.edu [128.118.59.228]) by r02n06.cac.psu.edu (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA43158; Wed, 7 Feb 1996 03:20:18 GMT