In-Reply-To: <199505010846.DAA20618@everest.pinn.net>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status: 



On Mon, 1 May 1995, Don Taylor wrote:

> At 04:03 PM 4/30/95 -0500, Jeremy Allaire wrote:
> >
> >I don't think this is the case.  Spyglass more or less liscensed the name,
> not the code, though they do/did have access to the code.  Spyglass re-wrote

Spyglass negotiated for two rights.  They can make enhancements that do 
not get distributed to the general population.  They don't have to 
provide source code to their binaries.

> Don't you think this will create some brand identity confusion and market
> image problems for NCSA? Many users won't be smart enough to tell the
> difference between NCSA Mosaic and Spry Mosaic. They'll just make either a
> positive or negative statement along the lines of 

Actually, the biggest problem will be that people will quickly notice the 
difference and suddenly 2 million Spyglass users will be frantic to get 
the new and improved flavor.

>     "I use Mosaic and its a piece of {cake/crap depending on your viewpoint)."
What gets really fun is when someone gets a copy of the inferior product 
and compares it to a Commercial product (Like NetScape).  Unix users have 
been going through this for years.  Most of the books I've seen comparing 
Unix and WindowsNT compare NT with all its GUIs and Windows features to 
Unix running under a VT-100 interface.  When they start comparing it to a 
full-bodied implimentation like SlackWare Linux on CD, there is this "OH 
WOW" reaction.  It's fun to watch.

> Actually, I guess the benefits and detriments can go either way.

> Tally Ho

>     Don
	Rex Ballard


From rballard@cnj.digex.net Tue May  2 20:45:40 1995