| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1733.1 | legal tanglements | CSOA1::ROOT | North Central States Regional Support | Tue Jan 21 1992 14:23 | 9 |
| You would be opening up DEC for I presume at the least licensing and
legal problems concerning XVT Software. It may be nice that DEC might
benifit maybe as to future sales etc. but that still does not give DEC
the right to circumvent licensing agreements as I assume the software
is not public domain.
Regards
Al Root
|
| 1733.2 | | BHAJEE::JAERVINEN | This space intentionally nonblank | Tue Jan 21 1992 16:19 | 7 |
| It's certainly not PD but I don't think it's very expensive either.
Of course, if it is of benefit to us, nothing would prevent you from
buying a licence for them...
(No, we don't have it either, we just had an evaluation copy).
|
| 1733.3 | | BUNYIP::QUODLING | Mup - mup - mup - mup - mup - mup - mup | Tue Jan 21 1992 17:37 | 16 |
| A cursory look in VTX softbase, shows that vxt is a set of libraries
that allows one to build portable applications, across GUI's. It sells
for between $3,500 and $22,000.
As use of this software, would involve inherently including output from
it in their own product, Any attempt to use it in an unlicensed fashion
should not happen. Period.
Just because DEC has a license to use software, doesn't give it the
right to give, loan or sell, said software to anyone else.
XVT software can be contacted at 1800 30th Street (Suite 204), Box
17665, Boulder CO, 80308 Ph (303) 443 4223
q
|
| 1733.4 | Conference pointer | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Panic? Only in emergencies | Tue Jan 21 1992 19:21 | 2 |
| The conference where graphical user interface tools are discussed is
SICVAX::GUI_TOOLS, especially third-party tools, UNIX and PC.
|
| 1733.5 | | MR4DEC::GREEN | | Sat Jan 25 1992 22:34 | 10 |
|
Personally I think we go way overboard paying and helping other
companies to port sw to our platforms. Wordperfect flat out stated in the
press that they saw no market for Wordperfect on Ultrix, but
they were going to do the port anyways because DEC was funding it.
Isn't paying people to port to our platform just an admission
that it isn't an attractive platform? Do you think Microsoft
pays anyone to develop DOS applications?
|
| 1733.6 | Do the right thing | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Teach all nations | Sun Jan 26 1992 17:38 | 19 |
| We're a rather late entrant into the workstation market. If one
believed your arguments, then where would competition come from? The
first entrant into any market with software would run on the most
"attractive" platform and that's all folks.
Paying people to do the port is an admission that Digital lacks
sufficient market share in order to let a natural pull happen from
customers to the software vendors to us. (And nothing more.)
Why should Digital just accept that? I wouldn't have been surprised to
learn that in 1981, Microsoft paid to have a BASIC compiler for 8-bit
CP/M re-written for MS-DOS, or in 1984, the Microsoft paid to have work
done on applications for Xenix, when Xenix was a stratgic product for
Microsoft.
What took Digital such an incredibly long time to learn was that personal
computer software was mass-marketed and not subject to the weeks and
months of evaluation that was normal for mini-computer software at the
time.
|
| 1733.7 | | VCSESU::BRANAM | Steve, VAXcluster Sys Supp Eng MRO1-3/SL1, DTN 297-2625 | Mon Jan 27 1992 13:02 | 5 |
| RE .5 and .6 - I believe Microsoft paid someone to develop MS-DOS (or actually
bought it outright)? I think it was known as 86-DOS or DOS-86 or something like
that. The only competition was CPM-86 (and if you ever used it, you would know
why MS-DOS is the leading PC OS!). That looks like an example of strategically
buying into a market. Of course, the lack of competition was a big help.
|
| 1733.8 | It was mostly in place before IBM arrived. | ELMAGO::TTOMBAUGH | Naked in a cave in the Jemez | Mon Jan 27 1992 13:24 | 7 |
| Bill Gates had a Basic compiler running on the Intel 8080 as early
as 1976, PROM based, and a disk version by 1977. I've always
heard that these provided the basis for MS-DOS, although by the time
IBM entered the PC market he was certainly well enough off to hire
someone to write an OS rather than do it himself.
Terry
|
| 1733.9 | From a '77 onwards PC hack ;-) | IW::WARING | Simplicity sells | Mon Jan 27 1992 15:50 | 8 |
| Bill Gates bought rights to a product called "QDOS" from Seattle Computer
Products (SCP) during the negotiations with IBM. It's only when it got to
V3.x that SCP lost the right to give the code away free on their own machines.
SCP wrote QDOS because they were fed up with Digital Research taking so long
to move CP/M from the 8080 to the 8086. Hence their "Quick and Dirty Operating
System" which Bill Gates purchased in the nick of time.
- Ian W.
|