COMPUTER QUESTION

[W4CBJ]

The answer may be so simple that I do not understand.

References are made to PC's (Personal Computers) and Macs ((McIntosh by Apple). Why the difference in terminology ? Isn't a Mac a personal computer ? Or is this just a play on words ? 73 Joe W4CBJ

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (W4CBJ @ Jan. 12 2008,20:52)]The answer may be so simple that I do not understand.

References are made to PC's (Personal Computers) and Macs ((McIntosh by Apple). Why the difference in terminology ? Isn't a Mac a personal computer ? Or is this just a play on words ? 73 Joe W4CBJ
"PC" was originally a trademark of IBM when they introduced their original Personal Computer. "PC" has come to be recognized as the standard Wintel machine, while a Mac, is a Mac, is... An Apple. "It's Awesome!"

[W4CBJ]

That makes sense. Why didn't I think of that ? Anyway, thank you for the explanation... 73 Joe W4CBJ

[KL1ZB]

Apple does not make "McIntosh", they do make a brand of computers called "Macintosh".

McIntosh is the company that makes high end audio equipment that looks old. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (KL1ZB @ Jan. 13 2008,02:09)]Apple does not make "McIntosh", they do make a brand of computers called "Macintosh".

McIntosh is the company that makes high end audio equipment that looks old. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
And Apple pays McIntosh (the audio equipment company) a royalty so thay Mc wouldn't file copyright infringerment law suits. With things like the iPod now, Mc could claim marketplace overlap and confusion.

[K8ERV]

Anyone remember the LISA? Pre Mac.

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (K8ERV @ Jan. 13 2008,12:30)]Anyone remember the LISA? Pre Mac.

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo
How'z 'bout the funky 3.5" disks the LISA used?

I still think APPLE made a huge mistake listening to the "Marketing Steve" (Jobs) vs. the "Technowhiz Steve" (The Woz) by NOT making the file systems and disk system of the Mac compatible with the Apple ][. It wouldn't have been hard, and would have prevented the alienation of many (formally) hard-core Apple loyalists. Too many people felt if they had to abandon their Apple][ based data, it was cheaper to migrate to the IBM PC.
(BTW, I still use an Apple ][+ for some packet operations. Hard to kill the old beasts.)

[KL1ZB]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Jan. 12 2008,07:46)]And Apple pays McIntosh (the audio equipment company) a royalty so thay Mc wouldn't file copyright infringerment law suits. #With things like the iPod now, Mc could claim marketplace overlap and confusion.
Really, Do you have any documentation or web links about this?

The only suit I know suit I know about is the McIntosh rain coat company sued apple over the use of Macintosh.

I do not know of any ipod related "McIntosh" royalty, but I could be wrong.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (KL1ZB @ Jan. 13 2008,16:12)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Jan. 12 2008,07:46)]And Apple pays McIntosh (the audio equipment company) a royalty so thay Mc wouldn't file copyright infringerment law suits. With things like the iPod now, Mc could claim marketplace overlap and confusion.
Really, Do you have any documentation or web links about this?

The only suit I know suit I know about is the McIntosh rain coat company sued apple over the use of Macintosh.

I do not know of any ipod related "McIntosh" royalty, but I could be wrong.
I'll try to find the link. Apple wanted to prevent any possible hassle with the audio company, even though there wasn't too much likelihood of confusion between a computer and high(est) end audio equipment. (But in today's litigious atmosphere, a law suit could happen with out such an agreement over "audio equipment" such as the iPod. Stranger law suits have occurred.)
There was no success in the other case, as there was no likely market confusion between a computer and a raincoat, and I don't believe the raincoat manufacturer(s) had a legitimate trademark, any more than an apple (the fruit) farmer had on the name. I'm not sure there ever was a "trademark" for McIntosh as a raincoat, and the spelling used by the computer company was different, anyway.


---------------------------
Added:

(QUOTE:) "...Apple also had to pay McIntosh Labs to use the name. McIntosh Labs is the maker of very high-end audio equipment and even though the name is spelled differently, the courts ruled that the names sounded identical.

At the time prior to launch, the Macintosh name was loved by all, that Apple paid McIntosh Labs a never disclosed amount of money for use of the name."

Posted by: Terry Gregory | Jan 19, 2007 10:57:21 AM

http://blog.wired.com/cultofmac/2007/01/steve_jobs_trad.html
------------------------------

and another reference:

http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/20783.html

=================
I'm sure there are other sources for the agreement between Apple and McIntosh, the audio manufacturer..