As far as I can recall MS was required to remove the Trash Can as it was an Apple idea. That is all Apple got from a multimillion dollar legal battle. I think it almost put them out of business. Understand that I have no love for the evil empire of gates, but as I recall the court basically said Apple had no leg to stand on as they had not developed the technology and Xerox had pretty much tossed it in the trash can (pun intended).
Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto ----- Original Message ----- From: "Raimo Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 4:18 AM Subject: Vs: Mac Blat > What�s this? There was a law suit which Apple won and Microsoft lost. > The interface was indeed originally developed by Xerox Palo Alto Research Center but there�s nothing to indicate that Apple got it free. > All the best! > Raimo > Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho > > -----Alkuper�inen viesti----- > L�hett�j�: T Rittenhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > P�iv�: 12. tammikuuta 2003 2:31 > Aihe: Re: Mac Blat > > > >Why Mike, you didn't ask my opinion, so how can it be best? > > > >BTW, the reason Apple could not keep Gates from using the interface is > >because they didn't invent it, Xerox did. > > > >Ciao, > >Graywolf > >http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 2:29 PM > >Subject: OT: Mac Blat > > > > > >> >> how hard it is to use a Mac > >> > > >> > This is a classic oxymoron! > >> > >> > >> Cotty, > >> Considering that "Windows" is a blatant rip-off of the Mac interface that > >> Gate's lawyers somehow weaseled him out of paying for, the ease of use of > >> _all_ computers is directly related to the ease of use of Macs. Even > >though > >> Windows is still inferior in every way. > >> > >> In virtually every creative field, there are true innovators, then there > >are > >> the often rapacious, often more energetic and less principled imitators > >that > >> follow on their heels and opportunistically appropriate the market. > >Windows > >> PCs are second-rate consumer products. The Microsoft OS is third-rate. The > >> real personal computers are Macs. > >> > >> Macs are superior products. They work better, they are more elegant, they > >> are more pleasant to work with, they're designed better. The OS is much > >more > >> stable and elegant and the interface is far better. Even as objects they > >are > >> much more aesthetically pleasing to have in the home. Now that so many > >> outside companies are writing software for them and Apple is no longer > >> controlling the compatibility standards, I'm finally experiencing crashes > >on > >> my Mac. But I worked with a Mac Quadra for _six years_ at the magazine, > >nine > >> hours a day, five days a week, and guess how many crashes or freezes I > >ever > >> experienced? None. Zero. It never happened. No downtime, ever, period, > >> except one time when the starter battery on the motherboard ran dry. Try > >> that with a PC. As soon as I go 100% OSX native, I hope to reclaim that. > >> > >> I understand that many people have to use PCs because their work demands > >it, > >> their computers are provided by their employers or their workplaces are > >> standardized on PCs, they need certain software that is only available for > >> PCs, or simply because they've always used PCs and it's difficult to > >switch > >> platforms. There are lots of good reasons for being stuck with PCs. But > >> "stuck" is the word. To me, PCs are just appliances. They betray poor > >taste > >> and a lack of aesthetic sense in their makers, if not their owners. > >They're > >> crass. I thank my lucky stars I started with Macs and I will never switch > >> unless I am absolutely forced to do so, and then I'll wait until the > >> absolute last possible moment. > >> > >> --Mike > >> > >> P.S. My "Sunday Morning Photographer" column two weeks from now is called > >> "The Best of 2002," in which I name a bunch of products as the best of the > >> year and discuss them--best photography book, best digital camera, best > >> enlarger, that sort of thing. Can you guess what won "Best Digital > >> Photography Computer Workstation"? I'll give you a hint--it's not a dang > >PC. > >> <g> > >> > >> > > >
