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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (173540)	3/13/2003 9:00:26 PM
From: tcmay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

"Here's a list in no particular order to illustrate my thoughts- "Lisa, Mac- I consider apple in its current form to have "come from Xerox Parc"." I don't. Jobs, Atkinson, etc. saw the Alto in late '79, but work had already progressed very far. There were many articles "in the air" about man-machine interaction. The SRI work by Doug Englebart in the late 60s, Ivan Sutherland's "Sketch Pad" at U. of Utah, MIT's work on the LISP Machine. Many expected GUIs, not just PARC. More importantly, the Mac developers DID NOT come from Xerox PARC, and I thought your explicit point was about companies paying people to develop ideas and then losing some of those _people_ who go off and start up companies. I have no dispute that ideas from various places swirl around. " Oracle- IBM Santa Theresa Lab." Again, Ellison did not work at IBM. He used the published research on the algorithms (this was long before the Patent Office was accepting patent apps on mathematical ideas and algorithms. " Siebel- Oracle." Granted. But many of us have a problem figuring out what it is that Siebel does that is innovative. It's just a spin-off, like a chip spin-off of Intel would be (e.g., Seeq, Xicor). Spin-offs can be very innovative, but I don't see the rest of your examples as being innovative (PeopleSoft, BEA, etc.). --Tim May