From: Mark Kovarski <kovarski@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Q&A to the Alliance
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 06:30:58 GMT

 IBM-Apple-Motorola Contingency Q&As

  1Q. Why is IBM doing this?

  1A. -It would broaden the reach of the RS/6000 RISC platform;
      -It would accelerate development of an object-based software
       environment in which IBM and Apple help define a
       fundamentally more productive technology;
      -It would match the skills and know-how of industry leaders
       to create powerful and easy-to-use computers.


  2Q. Why not do this alone?

  2A. Apple's skills dovetail very neatly with ours.  Working
      together should allow us to develop new technologies more
      quickly and effectively than if we worked alone.

  3Q. Why work with Apple?

  3A. Apple brings excellent skills to the table that complement
      IBM's very well.  Their end-user software is superb, and IBM
      brings strengths in technology, enterprise computing and
      systems architecture.  We are also very impressed with
      Apple's work in object-oriented software and look forward
      to joining our efforts with theirs in this area.


  4Q. Why is this good for IBM and its customers?

  4A. Customers should realize the benefits of new computing
      platforms that draw on the strengths of each firm.  IBM not
      only is extending the reach and appeal of the RS/6000
      architecture, but we are also taking a lead in the
      development of a fundamentally better operating
      environment.


  5Q. What is so great about object-oriented programming?

  5A. It is a fundamentally more efficient approach to the
      construction of software.  As such, it should unleash
      significant productivity gains for users and developers.


  6Q. Your press release talks about combining IBM and Apple
      efforts in object-oriented software, but makes no mention of
      the relationship IBM has with Metaphor (Patriot Partners).
      Have you lost confidence in Metaphor?

  6A. Absolutely not.  IBM and Metaphor have had a marketing and
      technical relationship since 1988, and we announced the
      formation of a partnership last September.  This partnership
      has been focusing on using the concepts of multimedia and
      object-oriented programming to construct an environment that
      will allow software developers to write applications that
      will run on multiple platforms without additional
      programming effort.  This partnership work is moving ahead
      aggressively and will continue.


  7Q. Wouldn't it make sense to merge the technologies of Patriot
      Partners and Apple in the area of object-oriented operating
      environments?

  7A. Both Apple and IBM have invested considerable time and
      resource in object-oriented software.  And both companies
      bring a lot to the table.  We have thought long and hard
      about our collaboration, including a plan to combine our
      respective efforts in this area.  Some of these details
      remain in discussion.


  8Q. Is it your plan, then, to have two offerings for the
      marketplace--one from Patriot Partners and one from your
      collaboration with Apple?

  8A. No, it is our intent to create a single object-oriented
      environment.


  9Q. Doesn't this new operating system (object) mean that IBM is
      hedging its bets on OS/2?  Why should customers and ISVs
      continue to invest in OS/2?

  9A. Let's not mince words:  Our OS/2 strategy is unchanged.
      Customers should invest in OS/2 today for the same reasons
      they did yesterday.  We have carefully defined a robust,
      32-bit operating system that fully exploits advanced
      hardware capabilities.  Our customers and software
      developers should understand two things about our intended
      software relationship with Apple:  their investments in
      current operating systems will be completely protected; and,
      we will provide a smooth migration path into the new
      environment.

      In addition, we have said many times we are looking into
      ways of putting OS/2 on a RISC (AIX) platform.

      (IF NEED: object still several years away from commercial
      introduction.)


 10Q. Will you rule out adoption on MS/NT as a result of this new
      relationship with Apple?

 10A. We will evaluate NT as we do any new offering and would
      consider adding it to other offerings if customer demand
      warrants.


 11Q. What does this do to your relationship with GO, with whom
      IBM has an agreement for a pen-based, full object operating
      environment?

 11A. GO has innovative technology and we continue to work with
      them.  IBM's intended work with Apple does not affect our
      relationship with GO.  We have made no changes to our
      development and marketing plans with GO.


 12Q. Why did you delay announcement of the deal?

 12A. We think you would agree that discussions of this magnitude
      should not be concluded or announced too hastily.  All the
      parties decided it would be better to postpone the
      announcement in the interests of having extra time to
      prepare a more thoughtful and complete letter of
      understanding.  The result is a clear statement of
      direction, an outline for what could become one of the most
      far-reaching developments in our industry.

      We also concluded that some announcement now is desirable so
      we could put an end to speculation and tell people exactly
      what are the areas of discussion among the companies.  We
      will spend a fair amount of time on contract work, but we
      have the agreed blueprint for moving forward in all areas.


 13Q. Why aren't you disclosing additional details about the Apple
      and IBM initiatives?  Is the deal so shaky that you are
      afraid to be specific?

 13A. The understanding is on solid footing and we have a very
      good plan for what we want to do.  All that remains is to
      put it into contract form.  When that occurs, we will be
      happy to provide additional detail.


 14Q. Why are you bothering to announce anything at all, then, at
      this time?

 14A. We are releasing this information because it helps to
      clarify precisely what it is that the companies have been
      discussing.


 15Q. What needed clarification?

 15A. Recent reports indicated that the talks had stalled, among
      other things.


 16Q. Didn't you cancel your reservations at the Sheraton in San
      Francisco, where you planned to hold a press conference on
      June 28?

 16A. We don't consider such details to be relevant to the
      announcement today.


 17Q. Can I at least see a copy of the agreement?

 17A. As we have stated before, we are not releasing any
      additional information until we go to contract.


 18Q. Some reports have speculated that IBM's motivation for an
      Apple alliance is to avoid liability under Microsoft's
      alleged infringement of Apple's user interface.  Do you deny
      that this is a factor?

 18A. Our participation is based on the benefits to our customers,
      our companies and, we hope, the industry at large.


 19Q. Where did the discussions take place?

 19A. At a number of locations.  The letter of understanding was
      reached in San Jose, CA.


 20Q. Where will the continuing talks be held?

 20A. They will be held at many different locations.


 21Q. Who was responsible for reaching this understanding in each
      company?  Was it Sculley and Kuehler?

 21A. These executives clearly played a lead role, but they were
      supported by a large number of people throughout the
      companies.


 22Q. Why are you granting no executive interviews?

 22A. All parties have decided to defer that until further notice.


 23Q. Did you have trouble working together because of the
      differences in your corporate cultures?

 23A. Not at all. Our mutual respect has grown over the course of
      our discussions.  We found that we work very well together.


                               # # #