Cringely says Apple has rights to the WinXP APIs.

[link|http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060420.html|I, Cringely at PBS]:

Remember Steve Jobs' first days back at Apple in 1997 as Interim-CEO-for-Life? Trying to save the company, Steve got Bill Gates to invest $150 million in Apple and promise to keep Mac Office going for a few more years in exchange for a five-year patent cross-licensing agreement? The idea in everyone's mind, of course, was that Microsoft would grab lots of Apple technology, which they probably did, and it quite specifically ended an Apple patent infringement suit against Microsoft. But I'm told that the exchange wasn't totally one-way, that Apple, in turn, got some legal right to the Windows API.

That agreement ran for five years, from August, 1997 to August 2002. Even though it has since expired, the rights it conferred at the time still lie with the respective companies. Whatever Microsoft grabbed from Apple they can still use, they just aren't able to grab anything developed since August 2002. Same for Apple using Microsoft technology like that in Office X. But Windows XP shipped October 25, 2001: 10 months before the agreement expired.

I'm told Apple has long had this running in the Cupertino lab -- Intel Macs running OS X while mixing Apple and XP applications. This is not a guess or a rumor, this something that has been demonstrated and observed by people who have since reported to me.

Think of the implications. A souped-up OS X kernel with native Windows API support and the prospect of mixing and matching Windows and Mac applications would be, for many users, the best of both worlds. There would be no copy of Windows XP to buy, no large overhead of emulation or compatibility middleware, no chance for Microsoft to accidentally screw things up, substantially better security, and no need to even take a chance on Windows Vista.

If so, why haven't they released it yet? Presumably because they still need MS to provide Office/Mac. If so, won't they still need Office/Mac when/if this OS X version were released?

It sounds great, but it sounds too much like the [link|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workplace_OS|Workplace OS] and [link|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC|PowerPC 615] rumors out of IBM. In other words, it's not the technology that's the problem.

:-(

Cheers,
Scott.

Darrell Spice, Jr. Trendy yet complex\nPeople seek me out - though they're not sure why\n[link|http://spiceware.org/gallery/ArtisticOverpass|Artistic Overpass] [link|http://www.spiceware.org/|SpiceWare]

Post #252,906 by Another Scott 4/21/06 2:24:40 PM Reply	Cringely says Apple has rights to the WinXP APIs. [link\|http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060420.html\|I, Cringely at PBS]: Remember Steve Jobs' first days back at Apple in 1997 as Interim-CEO-for-Life? Trying to save the company, Steve got Bill Gates to invest $150 million in Apple and promise to keep Mac Office going for a few more years in exchange for a five-year patent cross-licensing agreement? The idea in everyone's mind, of course, was that Microsoft would grab lots of Apple technology, which they probably did, and it quite specifically ended an Apple patent infringement suit against Microsoft. But I'm told that the exchange wasn't totally one-way, that Apple, in turn, got some legal right to the Windows API. That agreement ran for five years, from August, 1997 to August 2002. Even though it has since expired, the rights it conferred at the time still lie with the respective companies. Whatever Microsoft grabbed from Apple they can still use, they just aren't able to grab anything developed since August 2002. Same for Apple using Microsoft technology like that in Office X. But Windows XP shipped October 25, 2001: 10 months before the agreement expired. I'm told Apple has long had this running in the Cupertino lab -- Intel Macs running OS X while mixing Apple and XP applications. This is not a guess or a rumor, this something that has been demonstrated and observed by people who have since reported to me. Think of the implications. A souped-up OS X kernel with native Windows API support and the prospect of mixing and matching Windows and Mac applications would be, for many users, the best of both worlds. There would be no copy of Windows XP to buy, no large overhead of emulation or compatibility middleware, no chance for Microsoft to accidentally screw things up, substantially better security, and no need to even take a chance on Windows Vista. If so, why haven't they released it yet? Presumably because they still need MS to provide Office/Mac. If so, won't they still need Office/Mac when/if this OS X version were released? It sounds great, but it sounds too much like the [link\|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workplace_OS\|Workplace OS] and [link\|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC\|PowerPC 615] rumors out of IBM. In other words, it's not the technology that's the problem. :-( Cheers, Scott.
Post #252,920 by SpiceWare 4/21/06 4:20:52 PM Reply	if it supports WinAPIs then Windows Office would run Of course, after experiencing Microsoft tweeking Win32s.dll to break Win-OS/2 compatibility, I wouldn't trust Windows Office to run for long using WinAPIs on the Mac. Darrell Spice, Jr. Trendy yet complex\nPeople seek me out - though they're not sure why\n[link\|http://spiceware.org/gallery/ArtisticOverpass\|Artistic Overpass] [link\|http://www.spiceware.org/\|SpiceWare]
Post #252,923 by drewk 4/21/06 4:30:31 PM Reply	"Not for long" is right All it takes is one service pack with associated Office updates to change a ubiquitous API in a trivial but annoying way. Like say a change to the File Open dialog used by Office apps. Release a version that depends on a new API and Office for OSX is instantly sunsetted/legacy. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #252,932 by inthane-chan 4/21/06 5:44:03 PM Reply	And that API change already exists - require .NET.
Post #252,929 by Another Scott 4/21/06 5:35:08 PM Reply	Yup. "It's a Critical Security Update. We can't help it that it breaks applications that aren't running on our OS. We only test fixes on our OS." Or some such rot. Cheers, Scott.
Post #252,934 by pwhysall 4/21/06 5:52:50 PM Reply	Why would you want it? Office 2004 is much nicer than the Windows version. Peter [link\|http://www.no2id.net/\|Don't Let The Terrorists Win] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!

Welcome to IWETHEY!