4 ms·
This has always struck me as Apple-Fanboy revisionism (and this coming from a guy with an iPhone and a Macbook). For this to be true it would have meant Apple
by TomOfTTB 17y ago
This has always struck me as Apple-Fanboy revisionism (and this coming from a guy with an iPhone and a Macbook). For this to be true it would have meant Apple had the upper hand in the negotiation and I just don't see that. Apple gave up too much (and had to look submissive doing it which had to sting Jobs) and Microsoft gave up virtually nothing (a relatively small amount of money and a promise to continue developing a product that was hugely profitable for them)
Also, the Microsoft exec who supposedly gave testimony proving this theory didn't do that at all and in fact continues to deny the suit had merit (even though he no longer works there). That's all chronicled in this book: http://www.amazon.com/Renegades-Empire-Software-Revolution-Microsoft/dp/product-description/0609807455 http://www.amazon.com/Renegades-Empire-Software-Revolution-M...
- berntb 17y agoWell, I would be surprised if that embarrassing circumstance wasn't denied, disregarding if it was true or not! If the code didn't ship in Windows, it would have been easy to verify. I didn't see anything in the media about it then, which would have been the time to deny it. But you know how it is, big advertisers never get a fair treatment in the media. :-) Edit: re "giving up too much"... Apple had its back against the wall at the time.
- zmonkeyz 17y agoI didn't see them as giving up too much at the time. In the end they were able to buy some time to release some great products and still have a great Mac Business Unit producing Office.