"Surely Apple won't react the same way if I'm angry enough over it in the future" is my guess. But we're talking about logic so thin that you could floss your teeth with it.
This is one of those reasons why you really really need to get other people on board with your workflows. If you're the only one who works like that and someone does something insane, but it technically works, but it blows your workflow up... that's your problem. "You should just develop how I'm developing. Putting in a print statement for every line then waiting 5 minutes for the application to compile."
So long as no one sees your workflow as valuable, they will happily destroy it if it means getting the ticket done.
Just wanted to highlight your last point so that it's clear. Microsoft reimplementing the authors project was exactly what they wanted! To see a different implementation. A different "take".
Wow this is as cool as hell!!!! I think I'm going to make the switch to this. I'm a logseq devotee but this is really addressing pain points I have with that application.
Adversarial compatability is not a reason to mock a competitor to an entrenched monopoly.
I have no love for Microsoft, but the idea that a locked in monopoly, responsible for tainting or outright destroying huge swaths of the internet, is a "success"...
Not gonna lie though. Making a fake page that looks like a competitor to show people after they ask you to give them their competitors site is very mockable.
I see the similarities between these situations, but the difference is deception, Not that it's "copying".
IANAL as well. but I have to say, if typing into typing Google into the Bing search and getting a page that looks almost exactly like Google can't be proven as intent to deceive, then the law is broken.
I can't imagine anything clearer to prove intent than a user requesting that they want to go to Google to Bing, Bing responds to that request by showing them a page that looks like Google's. That is so clear. Is that really not able to be proven in court?
Any normal human would be sued into complete oblivion over this. But everyone knows that these laws arn't meant to be used against companies like this. Only us. Only ever us.
