Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Let's look at this a little closer... | |
| Posted By: PCDestroyer | Date: 4/19/02 10:24 a.m. |
In Response To: Re: Let's look at this a little closer... (Lophan) Those are very good analogies/points to be made in that line of thought... However, I would venture to say that having Chevy make a "car" of their own that performs the same functions is kind of like having Microshite copy the Mac OS... but not completely like it. I think having more than one car/truck company in the world is a very very good idea... as it advances technology so we aren't all driving econo-boxes and hotrods that all look the same... however, that is for the greater good and is somewhat "friendly" competition...
I think that the Mac would advance on it's own course just fine and with just as many improvements... without the PC/Windows in the picture. (Apple did give us Firewire without any PC prodding)
Microsoft was using text based interfaces as their primary "vehicle" and then saw that flashy mustang fly by and said "whoa, cool... let's copy that" even though it wasn't their current line of thinking. Chevy, I venture, came into the game looking to make cars and knew exactly what they wanted to do... I don't think they were making go-carts and said "whoa, cool... let's copy that"... heh I dunno... I guess the argument could really be made either way... and in the end Microsoft just got around it the same way Chevy does with Ford... make it different enough... That isn't a "mustang" it's a "corvette"... "see, it looks different and has a different name... but it does the same things mostly" Mac OS: Trash, Macintosh HD, Documents
"Windows is a 32 bit interface running on a 16 bit shell over top of an 8 bit system running on a 4 bit processor made by a 2 bit company with not 1 bit of sense..." - unknown I added that cuz it's funny... I'll concede your point... but both of us are really right. It's only the court that decided that it wasn't copyright infringement that makes any damn bit of difference... lol PCD | |
|
| Replies: |
| Big News!! - DirectX for Macintosh! | Miguel Chavez | 4/17/02 11:19 a.m. |
| Yeah... Kinda | Mr. Zarquon | 4/17/02 11:56 a.m. |
| Geez... why the negative spin? | ferrex | 4/17/02 1:03 p.m. |
| Because, I am. | Mr. Zarquon | 4/17/02 1:10 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | Kanen Faud'r | 4/17/02 1:26 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | PCDestroyer | 4/17/02 2:32 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | Mark Levin | 4/17/02 3:07 p.m. |
| Carmack... | Miguel Chavez | 4/17/02 3:22 p.m. |
| Re: Carmack... | ferrex | 4/17/02 7:08 p.m. |
| Re: Carmack... | Mr. Zarquon | 4/17/02 9:31 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | PCDestroyer | 4/17/02 3:45 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | ferrex | 4/17/02 7:02 p.m. |
| Re: Geez... why the negative spin? | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 9:57 a.m. |
| Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG | protexts | 4/18/02 4:46 a.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 10:11 a.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is off | protexts | 4/18/02 2:11 p.m. |
| Make a 1AC! | 123456789 | 4/19/02 11:47 a.m. |
| Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | kiro69 | 4/18/02 11:19 a.m. |
| Re: Speak for yourself there, parnter... | Lophan | 4/18/02 12:09 p.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | protexts | 4/18/02 2:30 p.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 4:37 p.m. |
| The place where your whole argument falls down... | Louis Wu | 4/18/02 4:54 p.m. |
| Re: The place where your whole argument falls down | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 5:04 p.m. |
| Ack. | Louis Wu | 4/18/02 5:16 p.m. |
| Re: Ack. | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 5:45 p.m. |
| Re: Ack. | protexts | 4/18/02 9:34 p.m. |
| Re: Ack. | kiro69 | 4/19/02 10:36 a.m. |
| Re: Ack. | Louis Wu | 4/19/02 10:54 a.m. |
| Re: Ack. | protexts | 4/19/02 10:01 p.m. |
| As I said before, I agree. | 123456789 | 4/19/02 5:36 p.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | protexts | 4/19/02 5:38 a.m. |
| Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 4:26 p.m. |
| awesome reply, pcd *NM* | kiro69 | 4/18/02 10:43 a.m. |
| Re: Quick note... | Lophan | 4/18/02 12:38 p.m. |
| Re: Quick note... | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 4:40 p.m. |
| Re: Quick note... | Warbow | 4/18/02 4:42 p.m. |
| Re: Quick note... | PCDestroyer | 4/18/02 4:57 p.m. |
| Re: Let's look at this a little closer... | Lophan | 4/19/02 12:24 a.m. |
| Re: Let's look at this a little closer... | PCDestroyer | 4/19/02 10:24 a.m. |
| Re: Let's look at this a little closer... | vector40 | 4/19/02 9:03 p.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | Lophan | 4/20/02 12:13 a.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | vector40 | 4/20/02 1:12 a.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | PCDestroyer | 4/21/02 6:27 p.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | protexts | 4/20/02 5:15 a.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | vector40 | 4/20/02 4:09 p.m. |
| Re: Then again, theoretically... | PCDestroyer | 4/21/02 6:24 p.m. |
| Implementation and Stealing | protexts | 4/22/02 3:24 a.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | Aida-kun | 4/22/02 5:15 a.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | PCDestroyer | 4/22/02 9:56 a.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | protexts | 4/22/02 2:45 p.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | PCDestroyer | 4/22/02 9:49 a.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | protexts | 4/22/02 3:05 p.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | PCDestroyer | 4/22/02 8:34 p.m. |
| Re: Implementation and Stealing | kiro69 | 4/23/02 10:35 a.m. |
| I agree | 123456789 | 4/17/02 3:19 p.m. |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |