Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J R KARY who wrote (25686)	7/25/1999 2:17:00 AM
From: Adam Nash	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 213186

Watson thanks for your info on IBM . AAPL by late '96 may have lost IBM's confidence with the Taligent and Copland OS disasters , further the MacOS was not yet PowerPC native (AIM formed in '91). After IBM's performance on Taligent and OpenDoc disasters, Apple similarly had reason to not feel dependent on IBM. The MacOS non-native issue is a non-issue. The significance of the Mac OS architecture not being completely native as a performance issue was eliminated with the birth of the dynamic 68k emulator. It is just not significant compared to other architectural issues. Compare that to the speed of IBM's PowerPC-native OS/2 - oh yeah, you can't because it never shipped. Apple has done more to ship a high-volume PowerPC operating system than anyone. Period. BTW It is well known at this point that Apple was grooming itself for sale to IBM several times in its history. At least, that's what the executives believed. I personally believe any Apple acquisition would have truly been a high-tech horror story. - Adam