Z*Magazine: 4-Apr-88 #100

From: Atari SIG (xx004@cleveland.Freenet.Edu)
Date: 07/28/93-10:56:24 AM Z

From: xx004@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Atari SIG)
Subject: Z*Magazine:  4-Apr-88 #100
Date: Wed Jul 28 10:56:24 1993

|//SYNDICATE ZMAGAZINE   Issue #100//|
|//Publisher/Editor| April 4, 1988 //|
|//   Ron Kovacs   | Vol 3, No. 1  //|
|//Asst Publisher  |Managing Editor//|
|// Ken Kirchner   | Mr. Goodprobe //|
|SPC                                 |
|Post Office Box 74                  |
|Middlesex, New Jersey 08846-0074    |
|BBS #1: Syndicate (201) 968-8148    |
|BBS #2: Stairway  (216) 784-0574    |
|Contents                            |
|*|Editors Desk                      |
|*|Communicating With Turbo Basic    |
|*|XEP80 Review (Yes Another One)    |
|*|Carina Update                     |
|*|Commentary on Atari               |
|*|SPC Newswire                      |
Editors Desk
by Ron Kovacs

We are into the 4th month of 1988 and
time seems to be flying past faster
then ever.  There never seems to be
enough time to do anything!!

Spring is here, Baseball season begins
today and I am hoping the Mets go for
it all in 1988!

We have reached our first milestone
with this weeks issue. Close to our
second year and 100 issues later. I
hope we have improved our style since
our debut in May 1986. After doing
this weekly for two years, one would
think this would have to stop, well
to comfort the many thinking we are
going to quit, Forget it!  We are
going to cover the 8 bit till there
are 3 users left!  (Lets just hope I
dont have to eat my words next month)

In other news this week, CompuServe's
SIG*Atari and given Zmag it's own
Data Library.  In this new area, you
will find reprints of past articles,
past issues, utilities, and other
items of interest. We encourage the
User Group Editors out there to
download the articles and use in your
local newsletters!  Many thanks to
Ron Luks and Mike Schoenbach for their

We are currently discussing plans for
a Zmag contest, good prizes are being
located and details will be released
in about 2 weeks. Stay Tuned!!!!
Communicating with Turbo-Basic XL
by Art Horan

When I heard that people were having
trouble getting an R: handler to work
with Turbo-Basic XL, I figured,
"What's the problem? R: handlers are
relocatable so it should be easy
getting one to work with Turbo." Well,
I eventually did manage to get the
handler installed and working, and the
solution did turn out to be simple,
but not so easy.

First, I thought, why not just tack
the handler onto the end of the Turbo-
Basic XL binary load file using the
DOS copy-with-append function? But I
rejected that notion, figuring that
Turbo-Basic would not return control
to the DOS binary load routine. (Later
I tried this and found that not only
doesn't the handler load, but Turbo-
Basic wouldn't run either and I wound
up back at the DOS menu.)

Okay, the R: handler doesn't need to
load _chronologically_ after Turbo,
only after it in memory. The handler
always tries to load in at the lowest
unused memory location, and Turbo-
Basic XL also loads into low memory,
so we have to find a way to keep them
from using the same memory area. The
OS has a variable called MEMLO which
keeps track of the lowest free byte in
memory. MEMLO is at memory location
743. If we PRINT DPEEK(743) from
Turbo-Basic, we get a value of 13865,
which translates to $3629 hex. So, I
thought, let's create a binary header
to load 2 bytes into MEMLO, and the 2
bytes will be $29 and $36 - the low-
byte, high-byte way of expressing the
value $3629. Next append RS232.SYS to
this, and we'll have a new handler
which will install itself above Turbo-
Basic's memory area. Now, I thought,
we can load Turbo from DOS, or append
it to the altered RS232.SYS and rename
the whole thing to AUTORUN. Well, it
seemed like a good idea, so I tried
it. And the system crashed. Although I
did hear the whine of the handler
downloading just before the system

Turbo-Basic XL has a statement called
"BRUN", which will load and run any
binary file. So why not BRUN
"D:RS232.SYS". I tried it. The system

Ah-hah! I thought. I bet I'm trying to
load the handler into Turbo-Basic's
program area. So I did a DPEEK(128),
which is where we find BASIC's LOMEM
variable (in both the Atari and Turbo-
XL versions). This points to the
beginning of the program area. It read
$3629. So, I thought let's see what
happens to LOMEM if I change MEMLO. I
DPOKEd 743,$5000. LOMEM still read
$3629. So then I typed NEW. Voila!
LOMEM now read $5000. The Basic
program area was now safely out of the
way. Now, let's put MEMLO back to
$3629 and BRUN the handler. The system
didn't crash. I even heard the whine
of the handler downloading from my P:
R: Connection, but when I tried to
open the R: device, the system
crashed! I was mystified.

I disassembled RS232.SYS and modified
it so the first thing it would do is
change MEMLO to read $3629. Then I
tried to boot Turbo with the handler.
The system crashed! So I tried to boot
this handler with Atari Basic. You
guessed it - the system crashed! Hmmm,
why did it crash with Atari Basic? I
took another look at the disassembled
RS232.SYS and figured it out. With
Memlo at $3629 the RS232.SYS code was
trying to download the handler on top
of itself - a definite no-no. So I
changed RS232.SYS to bump MEMLO up to
$4000, safely above both T-Basic and
itself. This worked fine with Atari
Basic, so at least I knew I had solved
that part. After BASIC loaded with the
handler, MEMLO was up to $4715. (This
is with my P:R: Connection, with the
850, it might be something else.)

Next came what I thought would be the
hard part - changing Turbo Basic to
set the new higher MEMLO. But it was
very easy. The first 8 bytes of the
Turbo BASIC file are the 6-byte header
to load into MEMLO and then a value of
(surprise) $3629. All you have to do
is use a disk editor to change the 7th
and 8th bytes of the file to point to
the desired new MEMLO ($4715 for my
P:R:C -- but do it lo-byte, hi-byte of
course). It worked. So simple, yet so

We could just quit here with a working
R: handler, but let's try some other
things. First let's see if we can BRUN
the revised handler. Yup, if we reset
the program area as above, all we have
to do is "BRUN D:RS232TB.SYS" (which
is what I named the revised handler).
It works fine, but for some reason
doesn't survive Reset. As a matter of
fact, our earlier procedure with the
stock RS232.SYS also works if we reset
the program area and then reset MEMLO
to $4000 instead of $3629.

But do we really have to set MEMLO
that high to get the handler to
download? Let's try $3900, the next
memory page after the RS232 download
code. That works too, and our eventual
MEMLO with Turbo-Basic is $4015,
saving almost 2K. Not only that but we
can create a binary header which loads
$3900 into MEMLO as I tried to before
and append the regular RS232.SYS file
to it. And one last change: let's not
alter the value that Turbo-Basic loads
into MEMLO, let's leave that alone and
instead change the address into which
the value loads (bytes 3-7 of the
Turbo-Basic XL file). If we load $3629
into location 711, all we are changing
is 2 color registers. We don't need to
change MEMLO because the handler
already changed it to $4015 when it
downloaded. This way we will know by
the orange border color that we are
loading the R: version of Turbo-Basic

Here is a short program in Turbo-Basic
XL which you can use to produce an R:
version of Turbo which will use the
filename RTBASIC.COM:

100 DATA 255,255,231,2,232,2,0,57
110 DATA 199,2,200,2
120 DIM RTB$(24000),PATCH$(4)
130 ? CHR$(125);" RTBASIC.COM CREATOR  by Art Horan  ":?
180 TRAP 200:CLOSE #1:OPEN #1,4,0,"D:RS232.SYS"
190 BGET #1,ADR(RTB$)+8,1024
200 CLOSE #1:BYTES=DPEEK(856):IF ERR<>136 THEN ? CHR$(253);"ERROR ";ERR:END 
210 ? :? BYTES;" BYTES IN RS232.SYS READ."
220 RTB$(LEN(RTB$)+BYTES+1)=""
250 BGET #1,ADR(RTB$)+START,21000
270 IF ERR<>136 THEN ? CHR$(253);"ERROR ";ERR:END 
290 RTB$(LEN(RTB$)+BYTES+1)=""
320 TRAP 340:OPEN #1,8,0,"D1:RTBASIC.COM"
340 CLOSE #1:IF ERR<>136:? CHR$(253);"ERROR ";ERR:ELSE :? :? "FINISHED!":ENDIF 
350 END 
XEP80 Review
by John Castravet

I have waited a long time for the
release of the XEP80 card for the
Atari computers. For all of this time
I kept on feeding on various
speculative articles that appeared in
ANALOG Computing and Antic, The Atari
Resource. All that talk about a built-
in 16K or 32K of memory, increased
horizontal resolution that would have
made the 8 bit GEM a possibility.

Finally, a few days ago I have
received mine via UPS. And was I

Well, no 32K memory built-in, not even

The horizontal resolution is still
kept at 320 in graphics mode, while in
text mode a matrix of 5X9 including
descenders makes itself barely
noticeable. That means that text looks
almost the same as any good public
domain 80 column simulator software in
the public domain and on most bulletin
boards. Well, maybe a little better.
All this on a monochrome monitor. On a
color monitor the quality is somewhat
less, but the difference is not
dramatic. If the signal is fed into
the luminance input of a monitor with
separate luminance and chroma inputs,
versus the composite NTSC input of a
color monitor, the quality is a little
better with the former monitor. But
still the picture is white on black.
Oh, yes, or black on white.

There was a hand written note in the
package attesting to the fact that
only software that uses the legal CIO
vector to the E: and S: devices will
work with the XEP80. This sounds like
passing the blame to software authors.
Of the little software that's left and
supposed to be working with the XEP80
(software that does legal screen or
editor access), most of it will still
not work, at least properly. Why? Gone
are all the features that made the
Atari computer a superior 8 bit
machine. Features as Display List
Interrupts, Vertical Blank Interrupts
and Player/Missile Graphics are all
gone. They probably went to join the
SETCOLOR and DRAWTO commands. All
these are still accessible in the 40
column mode, but... Also gone is the
<BELL>, CHR$(253) sound.

The above mention note also said
something about having to readjust the
horizontal hold of the monitor. I had
to readjust the vertical hold, while
the horizontal hold just moved the
picture to the right of the screen to
bring in the 2 characters that were
otherwise missing. The display is
supposed to be 80 columns by 25 lines.
A simple count revealed that it
displayed about 74 columns by 23
lines. Now, this cannot be a problem
with the monitor itself, since it
displays the standard Atari video
output in 40 column by 24 lines with
ample amount of border around. Even
when the 25 line from ICD's RTime 8 is
displayed there is still border left
on the top and bottom of the picture.
So the XEP80 is over-scanning.
Incidentally, forget about the
familiar time and date display if you
are using SpartaDos and RTime 8.

Then there is the built in printer
interface. I wonder how many Atari
users out there who own a standard
printer (parallel Centronics) do not
have some kind of Atari 850, ICS's P:R
Connection or some other type of
printer interface. This feature alone
will not probably make somebody look
into the XEP80 more deeply. They might
as well stuck on the front of the box
an LCD watch, the type that one is
used these days on seeing on almost

In conclusion I view the XEP80 more
like a gimmick.  Atari should have
used the parallel port instead of the
joystick port, and design it in such a
way that it keeps up with the
reputation the Atari computers have
gained based on their graphics
capability. It should have also a
separate chroma/luma output as well as
the composite NTSC one. Before I build
some kind of a switching box, I would
have to do quite a lot of plugging and
unplugging of video cables.

It is true, Atari makes great
computers, but when it comes to
peripherals you should better look at
somebody else's product line. Just
look at the Percom, Indus and Rana
disk drives, drives that support true
double density and were available
before Atari introduced their own
"double density" 1050 drives. Now they
came out with the XF-551. Isn't it a
little too late?

Luckily for third party developers
like ICD, OSS and Batteries Included,
or just simple, regular computer
hackers, who made possible 256K, 576K
and even 2Meg available, we have one
of the most powerful 8 bit machine
there is. We, Atari users brag about
our systems everywhere, trying to
attract new people, while Atari comes
out with something like the XEP80 or
even the XE GS (a full fledged 65XE
computer without the keyboard that
sells for more). Come on Atari, give
us a break.

Let's just hope that the XF-551 drive
and the SX212 modem are worth their
Carina Update
by Ron Kovacs

In a near future edition, We are
going to take another look at the
Carina BBS software.  Beta test site,
The Lions Den BBS will be visited and
we will capture and include commentary
and update information.

The reason we have choosen to do
another review is because each Carina
System can be different and highly

The Lions Den BBS, well known in modem
land, has been helpful in the
development of the Carina Software,
and another view looks exciting.

Stay tuned for more information in the
weeks ahead.
Reprinted from the April issue of the
CLAUG Newsletter.

Behind the 8-Bit
by Dirk VandenHeuvel

This month I will finally tackle the
subject I have been putting off for so
long and tear into Atari for their
lack of marketing and support. So
without further ado..

Atari has stabbed all of us Atari
8-bit owners in the back. From the
looks of things, Atari's motto should
be changed from "Power without the
Price" to "Power without the Support."
Atari makes the most powerful home
computers on the market, both 8-bit
and 16-bit alike. When it comes to the
hardware, we are in a class by
ourselves. This is what makes their
lack of support all the more
frustrating. Unlike the Coleco Adam,
or Timex Sinclair, or a host of other
orphaned and unsupported computers, we
cannot upgrade to a better made and
better supported machine. There is no
machine that is better made, only ones
better supported. So we are forced to
compromise, either stay with your
superior Atari computer with lousy
support or switch to an inferior
computer with better support.

It is unfortunate that Atari has put
us in this akward position.
Unfortunate because with the proper
support and marketing Atari could be
at the top of the heap. There is
simply no real reason for us to have
to switch machines. We already have
the best made machine, we only need
support and marketing for it to simply
be the best. Atari needs to sport a
higher profile and advertise more.
Advertising is needed so that people
who don't know about Atari or Atari
computers will consider them when
making a purchase.

In regards to marketing Atari needs to
remember that when it comes to game
machines Atari needs to compete not
only with Sega and Nintendo, but also
with Commodore. And there is much to
be learned, if Atari is listening,
from all three of those companies.

For one, look at how Sega and Nintendo
are operating. They are marketing
themselves as being on the cutting
edge, both with their hardware and
their software. They are selling games
that are new and exciting, many fresh
from the arcades, others quickly
licensed from the big software
companies. What does Atari do? It goes
back and re-releases old programs,
some over five years old. The art of
game design has progressed
considerably in just the last two
years, to go back to games written
earlier than that seems a foolish way
to showcase and sell your machine.
Furthermore where Sega and Nintendo
have been quick to develop, release,
and support hardware for their
machines Atari has not. Witness the
multitude of controllers, including
the light gun and 3-D glasses
available for those other systems
contrasted with the meager offerings
from Atari. The Atari Light Gun should
have been available seperately, along
with the Bug Hunt cart, from day one.
By not doing so Atari turned its back
on all the loyal Atari owners who
would have liked to buy one.

But, in the area where Atari has an
edge it has failed to exploit it. This
is a lesson that Atari would be well
to learn from Commodore. That lesson
is that just like the C64, the Atari
XEGS is not just a game machine, but
also an advanced computer. This is a
strength not a weakness, and it should
be played up, not pushed under the
rug. Commodore has seen this and their
ads emphasize not only the games you
can play on the C64 (more numerous
than on ANY other system), but also
all the OTHER things you can do with
it. I have yet to see a similar Atari
commercial or ad (if Atari's
interested I have an idea for just
such a commercial). But, Atari much
more than Commodore needs to do
something. The Commodore is still the
first machine to get new games
released for it, and its software base
is still growing and going strong,
unlike Atari's which is getting
smaller. Sega and Nintendo have seen
this and are playing a good game of
catch up. Atari should realize that it
must do the same. By adopting the
strategy of getting the licenses for
the best new games and developing
their own, rather than releasing old
and often dated ones. Atari should
then go on to sell their machines like
Commodore does, as both a game machine
and computer all wrapped up in one.

Atari could take another cue from
Commodore when it comes to support.
Commodore has released a large amount
of hardware for its 8-bit line, from
their 3 1/2" disk drive for the C64,
and plug-in RAM expanders, to their
most recent release, a new 8-bit
computer, the C128D. The C128D besides
sporting a built-in disk drive has
also a built-in 80 column board.
However, unlike Atari they decided to
give it 64k of dedicated RAM, whereas
our vaunted XEP80 has only 8k. And the
XEP80 costs about a 1/5 of what a
C128D does. Furthermore unlike the 80
column display on the Commodore, which
actually has programs to use it, the
Atari as of now has no commercial
programs designed for the XEP80.

But, maybe I should have expected this
from a company that two years ago when
asked about GEOS, called it an
interesting novelty. Well, that
novelty has gone on to found a major
software company (now planning to
expand into Apple products, NOT Atari)
and has breathed new life into the
Commodore 64. When I asked John Skruch
two years ago why Atari was not
developing something like GEOS he
replied that Atari was waiting for the
neccesary hardware. They had the
mouse, but they needed the 80 column
board and a higher capacity disk
drive. No matter that GEOS waited for
neither on the Commodore. But, wait,
here we are two years later, with the
80 column board and the new drive and
we still have no program like GEOS. In
fact we don't even have an Atari DOS
that supports the new DD/DS drive to
its full potential because ADOS is not
ready yet. Never mind the delay with
the release of the official version of
SX-Express for the SX212 modem. Atari
is obviously doing something wrong.

The question is, where is Atari going
astray. Are we the users not making
our preferences and our concerns
known? I don't think so. All one has
to do is read the messages on GEnie or
Compuserve or the articles in the User
Group Newsletters across the country
and you can see that the 8-bit Atari
owners feel like they have been left
out in the cold. Atari for too long
has depended on us, the users, and the
nebulous "third party" companies, to
do their job for them. To do their
advertising, their selling, and even
their job of support. Forget the loss
of the toll-free customer service
line, that was no big deal, but when
the Atari authorized service center
became a thing of ancient mythology
we've got problems- right here in
River City.

What does Atari need to do? First,
Atari needs to be advertising their
products more vigorously. Then they
need to make sure that those products
are available- all around the country.
The average consumer should not have
to be Ellery Queen to find the nearest
Atari dealer. Next Atari needs to
ready and release all the hardware and
software that has been promised up to
now. It should then start work on
releasing the kinds of products we
Atari owners need and want, both
hardware and software. Next Atari
should be getting the licenses to the
newest and hottest games out now,
instead of looking through the bargain
bins for last year's has beens. This
would also save them money in
advertising, as these are the games
that are advertised by their
publishers anyway. All Atari would
need to do is let people know that the
program is available on the Atari as

Atari also needs to be getting on the
phone with the big software companies
and letting them know Atari is still
around. When I talked to Origins about
Ultima V they told me they wanted to
release an Atari version, but had no
inside programmers to spare for the
project and they were looking for an
outside programmer to do the port.
Where is Atari? When I talked to
Interstel about an Atari version of
Star Fleet II they said sales had been
very disappointing on Star Fleet One
and they were going to pass. But, why
doesn't Atari offer to port it?
Finally, when I talked to Microprose
last year about an Atari version of
Gunship they complained that most
Atari owners only had 48k and they
couldn't do the game in that little
space. They were going by figures they
had from some survey over a year old.
Why didn't Atari set them straight
with some CURRENT figures? Atari needs
to be needling, pleading, and cajoling
these software companies into
supporting the Atari. They need to do

It's not my job to do for Atari what
other computer companies do for
themselves. Atari has the best
computers around, and in my opinion
they also have some of the best users.
Atari has some of the best businessmen
around running the show, but if they
want to be the best computer company
around they need to work harder on
marketing and supporting their
products. Only then can the Atari
computer truly be called the best-
without qualification.

Next month, my last column and a wrap
up of some of the new PD and
commercial software out and my long
awaited review of Quickcode. Have a
nice month!
SPC Newswire
By Don Clark  Chronicle staff writer

(reprinted from the San Francisco

Oakland,Ca--  Top software publishers
are vowing an agressive new round of 
joint piracy lawsuits against U.S.
corporations and others that make
unauthorized copies of programs.

A joint anti-piracy campaign,
announced Sunday, is being pushed and
largely funded by industry giants
Microsoft, Lotus Development, Ashton-
Tate and Word Perfect.  It includes a
litigation fund of undisclosed size
that will be coordinated by the 320
member Software Publishers
Association, which is having an annual
conference at the Claremont Hotel here
this week.

The SPA says it has already identified
several offenders.  They range from
rder firms that have made a
business of pirating software to
companies and universities that buy
one copy of a program and illegally
make multiple copies for internal use.

"I think we've found some good
targets," said Ken Wasch, the SPA's
executive director.  "You'll see some
suits very soon."

The joint effort parallels similar
actions taken in recent months to
crack down on foreigh sellers of
pirate software. The focus on
copyright issues also coincides with a
raging controversy triggered by Apple
Computer Inc., which filed a lawsuit
on March 17 that accuses Hewlett-
Packard Co. and Microsoft Corp. of
illegally copying the visual displays
of Apple's Macintosh computer.

Though unauthorized duplication is
believed to be widespread at large
U.S. companies, software publishers
have been reluctant to go after them
in court.  For one thing, those
companies may be large software
customers.  They also have ample
resources to fight a lawsuit.

That reluctance has ended, Wasch said.

One key reason is the phasing out of
copy protection built into program
diskettes, due to the widespread
opposition of software customers.
Lotus, for example, has announced
plans to remove the electronic
protection from a new version of its
top selling 1-2-3 program being
released next fall.

"Since copy protection has been
removed, the entire industry is at the
mercy of an honor system of users,"
Wasch said.

The SPA named Joe Bainton, a New York
attorney with a reputation for
agressive litigation, to carry out the
suits against the pirates.  R. Duff
Thompson, general counsel of the Utah
based Word Perfect, will serve as
chairman of the association's
litigation fund.

Major software companies banded
together once before on domestic
piracy under the auspices of ADAPSO,
the computer software and services
industries association.  It also set
up a litigation fund, but brought only
one suit in 1985 before focusing
mainly on educating corporations about
software piracy laws.

In other matters, software industry
executives said Apple's suit casts a
cloud over future development of
software based on Microsoft's Windows
program for IBM-compatible computers. 
Phillipe Kahn, chief executive of
Scotts Valley based Borland
International, was roundly applauded
for proposing that the SPA set up an
arbitration system so that copyright
disputes between companies are not
settled by judges and juries.

"Apple's telling us Microsoft Windows
has AIDS,' Borland said. "We're
anxiously waiting to hear that the
tests come back negative."

Online Today reported this week that
Apple Computer's recent "look-and-
feel" lawsuit should be settled, not
in the courts, but by the Software
Publishers Association, Borland
International founder/President
Phillipe Kahn said in his keynote
address at the SPA's spring symposium

Thursday, Apple Computer filed suit
against Hewlett-Packard and Microsoft
Corp. for alleged copyright

As to Microsoft, the complaint alleges
that the visual displays of Microsoft
Windows 2.03 violate Apple copyrights.

After careful review of the complaint
and a 1985 license agreement between
Apple and Microsoft, Microsoft is
convinced that the case has no merit.

Microsoft has not exceeded the license
agreement, nor has it infringed any
Apple copyrights or patents.
Specifically, no visual displays in
Microsoft Windows 2.03 exceed the 1985

William H. Neukom, vice president of
law and corporate affairs, said ''We
are puzzled that Apple has brought
this suit in light of the 1985 license
agreement between us. 

''That agreement covers visual
displays, and we are in full
compliance with that agreement. We
have not infringed any copyright or
patent held by Apple.''

Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT)
develops, markets and supports a wide
range of software for business and
professional use, including operating
systems language, and application
programs, as well as books and
hardware for the microcomputer

Steve Jobs, the mercurial entrepreneur
who co-founded Apple Computer Inc.,
dodged questions Tuesday about a new
computer he has promised to deliver to
the market in early 1988.

''I wish I could tell you about our
product today,'' Jobs told an annual
meeting of the Software Publishers
Association in Berkeley. ''I cannot,''
Jobs said, telling an audience of
approximately 200 that he will
introduce what is expected to be a
computer workstation for use in
colleges ''when it's ready''. 

Jobs, who has founded a new company
called NeXT Inc. to produce a machine
to fit his vision of the needs of
academia, explained his silence by
saying, ''a young company needs the
advantage of surprise.'' But he
described the machine under production
as ''the best product that I've ever
seen in my life. The product that
we're working on will speak louder
than anything I can say.'' 

Jobs also expressed puzzlement over a
copyright infringement lawsuit
recently filed by Apple Computer
against two other computer companies,
Microsoft Corp., of Redmond, Wash.,
and Hewlett-Packard Co., of Palo Alto,

The suit alleges that Microsoft and
Hewlett-Packard illegally copied the
audio-visual display of Apple's
Macintosh computer in designing their
own software. 

Jobs urged software developers in the
audience to ''express themselves'' on
the subject, saying the issue of
copyrights and computer software is
vital to innovation in the industry. 
ZMagazine Issue #100     April 4, 1988
(c)1988 SPC/Ron Kovacs

Return to message index