Re: Apple + Sun ?
- From: Mitch <mitch@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 09:26:07 GMT
In article <200608301730388930-jcrnospam@nospammaccom>, John C.
Randolph <jcr.nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Both of which can be had without assuming Sun's obligations. It's very
much like when people say that Apple should buy SGI: why bother, when
you can just cherry-pick the people you want as they give up hope and
leave the dying company?
I can answer that -- because of the patents and products.
A company doesn't just run on the people -- in tech, you also want
control/access to the patents and products.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Apple + Sun ?
- From: John C . Randolph
- Re: Apple + Sun ?
- References:
- Apple + Sun ?
- From: Jim Polaski
- Re: Apple + Sun ?
- From: Sandman
- Re: Apple + Sun ?
- From: George Graves
- Re: Apple + Sun ?
- From: GreyCloud
- Re: Apple + Sun ?
- From: John C . Randolph
- Apple + Sun ?
- Prev by Date: Re: Tell The Truth About Apple And Get Sued
- Next by Date: Re: Dave Letterman's iStinguisher!
- Previous by thread: Re: Apple + Sun ?
- Next by thread: Re: Apple + Sun ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|