Waaay OT - Macintosh software

Page 2 of 3  
p_j wrote:

I'm not sure what point you think you're making here. You seem to be trying to imply that they did not have the right to sell MS-DOS to IBM. The guy who wrote it seems to disagree with you, and quite honestly I think he knows a Hell of a lot more about that topic than you do.

I see. So every time someone brings a suit that's proof positive that whoever they sued did something wrong. Then I guess that James Randi was wrong about Uri Geller.
Regardless, you're clearly not rational on this topic.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You mean the guy who sued him?

Ah, another "so" insertion of words in my mouth. You didn't bother to explain or defend your earlier irrational insertion of words in my mouth, and this one no doubt not be defended. Clearly there is no way to jump from my words to your silly statement. In fact my words contradict it.

You just worship Bill all you want.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
    Greetings and Salutations. On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:22:12 -0500, p snipped-for-privacy@postzzzmark.net (p_j) wrote:

    Well, for what it is worth, my take on it is that Apple was a company of hardware and software geeks who were focused on making the coolest systems and software. They were pretty clueless when it came to the business world.     M$ has always been a marketing giant. I have to say that I DO admire Gate's ability to build up a frenzy of excitement over his product, and get folks to buy it. He might not be that great a geek, but, he can sell snow to an Eskimo.     So...you put an apple system and a PC next to each other... The apple had a lot of strengths (great graphics support from day one, ease of use, shallow learning curve) but cost $3000 or so.     The PC was really cheap, and, did most things "well enough". Americans will, more often than not, go with cheap over quality, which gives the PC an advantage.     Also, of course, there was the flood of PCS on the market. It was, and still is, kind of a challenge to find a place that sells Apple hardware and Software. However, it is hard to walk more than a block without passing a clone shop or some other source of PC stuff.     Market penetration, adequate value, aggressive marketing all work together to take over 85% of the market.

    Look at the roll-out of Windows 98. That was so hyped and pushed that it had folks who did not even OWN a computer asking me if they should buy a copy. Now THAT is marketing.     Of course, as the judge said...M$ may have gained its monopoly legally, through aggressive marketing, but, they used that power to illegally maintain that monopoly...and by definition, a monopoly makes it very hard for competition to grow.     It is a tough world out there.     Regards     Dave Mundt     
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
J. Clarke wrote:

Uh....Radio Shack.....(remember the TRS-80?)
PHilski
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
philski wrote:

OK, one, and I guess if we count Zenith that makes two. But both were successful businesses before personal computers, neither abandoned their other markets to pursue computers, and both have gotten out of computer manufacturing--Radio Shack is a DECPaquard outlet but doesn't make or sell their own anymore, while Zenith went back to televisions. Are any of the myriad companies that sprang up to manufacture CP/M machines still around?
And if there's anybody to blame it's Digital Research--if CP/M-86 had been delivered on time then Seattle DOS would never have been written and Microsoft wouldn't have had a product to sell to IBM.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

After IBM's first few models, they were hurt _bad_ by all the cheap clones that came out. They went from being "the company" to just the most well-known one, and a rather expensive one at that.
Apple chose the company over wider platform distrubution. When Apple did get into allowing clones in the mid '90s, they almost got IBM'ed. The clones were cheaper and sometimes faster, though not usually the best quality. Apple nearly went under, and when they brought Mr. Steve back he whacked the clones. Apple still got to keep their niche markets, sales went up, so the company survives. Recently they've really big ignoring the education market, and that has me worried. Used to be nearly 100% Apple user base.
GTO(John)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yawn. Apple has been "failed" for well over 20 years now.

This is why the cover of the Apple2 was user-removable and aftermarket cards and software were widespread? I think your history is skewed.

No, I'm _sure_ your history is skewed.

Well sure, if you can make up your facts as you go along, no problem.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yeah. They can't even figure out how to spend the $4 billion cash they have.
Idiots...
djb
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Clif wrote:

All a matter of market. Hobbyists knew about Apple. _Everybody_ had heard of IBM. So when IBM brought out a PC that's the one that people bought, until the clones got established. And the software went where the market was.

Personally I never much cared for Macs, but the current generation is quite tempting.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Unfortunately, too many people believe that. If you go to http://guide.apple.com/index.lasso and click on the link I've written below, you will find more programs than you'd ever need in *ANY* field of work.
Software Browse the software section for over 18,000 Macintosh applications and software titles.
There is *NOTHING* you can do on a PC that you cannot do on a Mac.
Gerry < used and taught both platforms for years and became more and more of a Machead as the years progressed >
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:18:21 -0400, "G.E.R.R.Y."
run autocad?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:26:09 -0600, Dave Balderstone

but only if you forst run windows in some emulation mode. no thanks. one operating system at a time....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
No buts... The straight answer is "yes, you can run AutoCad on a Mac"
;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:20:15 -0600, Dave Balderstone

way back when- in a version before I ever used autocad- there was acad for the mac. if that's what you mean, it's not going to work for me. but I don't think that's what you mean. I think you mean emulating windows on the mac and running acad on that. life's too short for such exercises in redundancy...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope. I mean running Windows on the Mac, not emulating Windows. The software (Virtual PC, now owned by Microsoft) actually emulates the Intel hardware...
But I'm sure we both have better nits to pick, eh?
:-)
djb (of the Department of Redundancy Department)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There's no reason to. Superior products are available for MacOS, like Vectorworks. Autocad tags are largely supported, as I understand it; it's been a couple of years since I did the comparisons.
The success of Autocad is one of those mysteries parallel to the success of Microsoft, Novell, and others: "Wow, I have to hire THREE more geeks to run this, so it must be better!"
Autodesk isn't in the software business; they're in the upgrade and support business. They charge an arm and a leg for the product, then four arms and six legs for the support (which really isn't optional). Not to mention several testicles for specialized libraries. It's one helluva business model!
But unless Autocad requires a hardware dongle, there's no reason you can't run it on a Mac. VirtualPC handles Windoze programs nicely, albeit much slower than on native hardware, or Mac equivalents on Apple hardware.
Kevin
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

the virtual video card apple uses for it's virtual machine to run windows on really sucks. why would I want to buy an overpriced mac to poorly emulate windows on when I can build my own PC that will stomp the pants off of it for a fraction of the price?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You wouldn't. But I was responding to the notion that it couldn't be done.
If you're devoting a machine to Autocad, then it would be silly to start with a Mac. But if you're using a Mac for other reasons, and you come across a particular PC-only program that you *must* use, then emulation is cheaper than buying another machine.
Kevin
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You can still put a floppy in s a new PC. :~)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.