http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/EFDF04D6-8FE9-49E2-878C-B15FA27F1CCA.html
Interesting read, and so true....
Interesting read, and so true....
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Which is the most hair-raising South African mountain pass you've driven?
Why 2007 will not be another 1995 for Microsoft
- Thread starter PeterCH
- Start date
1. By mathematic alone 1995 can never be 2007 I would think that obvious but lets move on...
2. It would help if the author didn't have a chip on his shoulder and actually presented facts and not his ignorance if he didn't know OS/2 warped itself out of the running. Its not only in the software market IBM lost out but also in hardware which had nothing to do with Microsoft, they just became useless and that's all. There was a time when you said computer you meant IBM and they had the market with an iron grip, now all of a sudden their arcane methods of doing business are not what led to their demise...pfft funny!
3. Microsoft left the relationship because of IBM's iron laws, had it been left to IBM the computer would have remained for the elite for years on end. MS had far more to lose than IBM, but still left that relationship. On their own who ended up winning? How many copies of IBM DOS sold compared to MS DOS, keep in mind that MS wasn't even a 16th of the size it is today and IBM was far bigger?
Far too easy to blame MS for their own crappy business management...
4. If you don't know about Vista rather keep it to yourself as the FUD is really starting to look ridiculous. How the hell is XP so great when the very same people were lambasting it years back when it came out in favor of 98se saying they could do the same thing? Very same idiots are harping the same song again with Vista please. It's tired.
5. The release of the 1st Lamborghini cannot be re captured with any other releaase of a Lamborghini after. May things work like this, Win'95 was a departure from the old and isn't that different from Vista as its an evolution of the GUI not the revolution of it that was win'95. Any primary school kid can get that.
6. If people would spend just half the time they spend on hating MS into making a better OS or a company with a better business model* maybe they'd get somewhere. Why is it that people can sing the Xbox360s praise but not realizer that MS the same company which is forever evil made that possible not by anything else but borrowing what they had mastered on the PC.
7. For all the bad things that MS is, they made gaming viable on the PC (eventually resulting in Xbox as well) and when nobody else was willing to do anything about it. I remember having to fight with IRQ conflicts, DMA channels and all that. I do remember messin' with VESA drivers and the like. Nobody cared, but MS did and its been getting better year on year.
Now that we are here its as if they did all that by some voodoo unknown to all. When we were going to get strong armed by 3Dfx into mini drivers and all that, who leveled the playing field painfully with each revision of an API? Microsoft that's who. MS has many dodge policies and outright illegal business practices we all know that, but which company of that size doesn't? Out of all of them which has if anything made computers easier to use and more accessible?
2. It would help if the author didn't have a chip on his shoulder and actually presented facts and not his ignorance if he didn't know OS/2 warped itself out of the running. Its not only in the software market IBM lost out but also in hardware which had nothing to do with Microsoft, they just became useless and that's all. There was a time when you said computer you meant IBM and they had the market with an iron grip, now all of a sudden their arcane methods of doing business are not what led to their demise...pfft funny!
3. Microsoft left the relationship because of IBM's iron laws, had it been left to IBM the computer would have remained for the elite for years on end. MS had far more to lose than IBM, but still left that relationship. On their own who ended up winning? How many copies of IBM DOS sold compared to MS DOS, keep in mind that MS wasn't even a 16th of the size it is today and IBM was far bigger?
Far too easy to blame MS for their own crappy business management...
4. If you don't know about Vista rather keep it to yourself as the FUD is really starting to look ridiculous. How the hell is XP so great when the very same people were lambasting it years back when it came out in favor of 98se saying they could do the same thing? Very same idiots are harping the same song again with Vista please. It's tired.
5. The release of the 1st Lamborghini cannot be re captured with any other releaase of a Lamborghini after. May things work like this, Win'95 was a departure from the old and isn't that different from Vista as its an evolution of the GUI not the revolution of it that was win'95. Any primary school kid can get that.
6. If people would spend just half the time they spend on hating MS into making a better OS or a company with a better business model* maybe they'd get somewhere. Why is it that people can sing the Xbox360s praise but not realizer that MS the same company which is forever evil made that possible not by anything else but borrowing what they had mastered on the PC.
7. For all the bad things that MS is, they made gaming viable on the PC (eventually resulting in Xbox as well) and when nobody else was willing to do anything about it. I remember having to fight with IRQ conflicts, DMA channels and all that. I do remember messin' with VESA drivers and the like. Nobody cared, but MS did and its been getting better year on year.
Now that we are here its as if they did all that by some voodoo unknown to all. When we were going to get strong armed by 3Dfx into mini drivers and all that, who leveled the playing field painfully with each revision of an API? Microsoft that's who. MS has many dodge policies and outright illegal business practices we all know that, but which company of that size doesn't? Out of all of them which has if anything made computers easier to use and more accessible?
bekdik
Honorary Master
@Shockg - well said.
Microsoft was handed the desktop by IBM and Novel when they walked away from it.
Apple existed before Microsoft. Why did they not attain the same status?
Unix existed before Microsoft. Why did they not attain the same status?
Maybe Microsoft is delivering what it takes to make the desktop, and now to a large extent, the server, a commodity item easily usable by many many millions.
Microsoft was handed the desktop by IBM and Novel when they walked away from it.
Apple existed before Microsoft. Why did they not attain the same status?
Unix existed before Microsoft. Why did they not attain the same status?
Maybe Microsoft is delivering what it takes to make the desktop, and now to a large extent, the server, a commodity item easily usable by many many millions.
Roo!
Expert Member
Yes, the MS OS has been getting better, easier and prettier to use. One can not say however that because more people use it it is the better product.
There are far more stable, secure and better written OSs out there, even though the general public will never us them as they're a little tricky to set up and use and they don't run games and other apps so well (probably cos there's no games for them, lazy production houses!!!).
The simple fact of the matter is that at the moment, even with Linux etc getting easier to install, set up and use, the consumer simply doesn't have a choice when it comes to most of the available software and that forces all of us to use windows whether we want to or not.
There are far more stable, secure and better written OSs out there, even though the general public will never us them as they're a little tricky to set up and use and they don't run games and other apps so well (probably cos there's no games for them, lazy production houses!!!).
The simple fact of the matter is that at the moment, even with Linux etc getting easier to install, set up and use, the consumer simply doesn't have a choice when it comes to most of the available software and that forces all of us to use windows whether we want to or not.
F
Fudzy
Guest
Don't forget the labour of manually allocating enough memory to play games/run applications.
This guy who wrote it delivers an interesting one sided view of the Microsoft/IBM/APPLE story but clearly also has a HUGE chip on his shoulder!
I don't really care who wins the OS race - wherever the wind blows!.
I don't really care who wins the OS race - wherever the wind blows!.
marine1
Honorary Master
Well said Sock
I don't know about you guys but I used DOS 5.0, DOS 6.xx, DRDOS5, Windoze 3.0, Windoze 3.1, Windoze 95, 98SE, NT3.5, ME, 2000 and then XP. Sure, XP was the best but the prior releases were utter garbage. Windoze 95 ran on top of DOS, crashed just like Windoze 3.1. The only advantage of Win95 were its 32bit extensions on top of 16 bit DOS and a prettier menu system which Mac already had. Now I use XP and MacOSX. I
was always a Windoze user but MacOSX REALLY is better. Not one single system crash since I bought the system 6 months ago. Sure I had one or two app crashes (opensource VLC player) but the system never became unstable - a far cry from Windoze XP SP2 Pro. Productivity APPS run, really run. Stuff is so easy to configure too. Just one or two clicks.
Spotlight finds your files in seconds. Windoze XP search takes entire minutes - Spotlight takes seconds - actually it takes 2-3 seconds to find a file, as long as it takes you to type in the partial name. Interface is simple. Easy. No stupid notifications to tell me something WORKS, my USB stick is connected or my Creative Zen Vision is plugged in. I expect it to work. What happens if I'm typing? Well that crud, comes up. It steals the focus. Stupid messages from Microsoft take my time. Mac never does that. It only tells you when stuff doesn't work - in a very unobtrusive manner. I recommend you guys try it out,
forget the bloatware junk of MS - a company which made it's fortune by destroying competition and producing hype, instead try Mac OSX.
Do check out the other articles, eg the one how MS and Intel used
stolen Apple code to make Video for Windows run as fast on Windoze
as QuickTime ran on Windoze. I actually remember that, WFW was unusable
but QuickTime worked quite fast - way back then.
I don't know about you but I used both systems and Mac OSX is so much better than Windoze. It actually allows me to do what I want to do.
Windoze well - that's another story. Patches, patches and patches,
patches to patch patches and patches to patch errors created by other
patches. Or how DivX destroyed Adobe Premiere's ability on my Windoze
to software render AVI and MPEG2 file. Oh and don't let me try to Render
something in software on Premiere like an M2V file, haha, stuff just dies,
on a system which is made of premium componets all approved by
Adobe. On Mac, DivX, xVid, Matroska container support plus QuickTime,
all perfect. I wanna render in vxid, stuff works, I want to render a
QuickTime file, stuff works, I wanna create an M2V for burning to DVD,
I can do so in 3 different ways, and all work, VERY fast. No crashes,
ever, so far for 6 months. Now that I added 2GB of RAM on top of 1GB
- stuff is even smoother.
So yeah, I've seen both worlds, and the one world is filled with bug fixes, and
tinkering, the other world, just works.
was always a Windoze user but MacOSX REALLY is better. Not one single system crash since I bought the system 6 months ago. Sure I had one or two app crashes (opensource VLC player) but the system never became unstable - a far cry from Windoze XP SP2 Pro. Productivity APPS run, really run. Stuff is so easy to configure too. Just one or two clicks.
Spotlight finds your files in seconds. Windoze XP search takes entire minutes - Spotlight takes seconds - actually it takes 2-3 seconds to find a file, as long as it takes you to type in the partial name. Interface is simple. Easy. No stupid notifications to tell me something WORKS, my USB stick is connected or my Creative Zen Vision is plugged in. I expect it to work. What happens if I'm typing? Well that crud, comes up. It steals the focus. Stupid messages from Microsoft take my time. Mac never does that. It only tells you when stuff doesn't work - in a very unobtrusive manner. I recommend you guys try it out,
forget the bloatware junk of MS - a company which made it's fortune by destroying competition and producing hype, instead try Mac OSX.
Do check out the other articles, eg the one how MS and Intel used
stolen Apple code to make Video for Windows run as fast on Windoze
as QuickTime ran on Windoze. I actually remember that, WFW was unusable
but QuickTime worked quite fast - way back then.
I don't know about you but I used both systems and Mac OSX is so much better than Windoze. It actually allows me to do what I want to do.
Windoze well - that's another story. Patches, patches and patches,
patches to patch patches and patches to patch errors created by other
patches. Or how DivX destroyed Adobe Premiere's ability on my Windoze
to software render AVI and MPEG2 file. Oh and don't let me try to Render
something in software on Premiere like an M2V file, haha, stuff just dies,
on a system which is made of premium componets all approved by
Adobe. On Mac, DivX, xVid, Matroska container support plus QuickTime,
all perfect. I wanna render in vxid, stuff works, I want to render a
QuickTime file, stuff works, I wanna create an M2V for burning to DVD,
I can do so in 3 different ways, and all work, VERY fast. No crashes,
ever, so far for 6 months. Now that I added 2GB of RAM on top of 1GB
- stuff is even smoother.
So yeah, I've seen both worlds, and the one world is filled with bug fixes, and
tinkering, the other world, just works.
Last edited:
Highflyer_GP
Honorary Master
LOL @ i-Fluff.
Don't blame MS for Apple's lack of success, blame Apple for Apple's lack of success. They deliberately targeted (and still target) the more wealthy section of the population, MS went after the masses and still managed to provide a competitive OS. Now you tell me who is more likely to come out tops? Using a Mac/Linux/OS2 etc. did/does not make you smarter, it makes you think you're smarter just because your OS accomplishes the same result in a different way.
Don't blame MS for Apple's lack of success, blame Apple for Apple's lack of success. They deliberately targeted (and still target) the more wealthy section of the population, MS went after the masses and still managed to provide a competitive OS. Now you tell me who is more likely to come out tops? Using a Mac/Linux/OS2 etc. did/does not make you smarter, it makes you think you're smarter just because your OS accomplishes the same result in a different way.
curiouswanderer
Expert Member
Yeah I think use what you and I'll use what I want. As long as it achieves what I set out to do, I'm happy. I don't understand this OS bashing. Both have its purpose.
Ask Apple to open up their OS more to provide more flexiblity for programmers and see what happens. That's what you get as a trade-off. MS prefers ease of development for their OS and they suffer in terms of security. Apple effectively locks the OS down and prefers to provide apps themselves than from third party ones. I would be more scared of an Apple monopoly than a MS one honestly.
Ask Apple to open up their OS more to provide more flexiblity for programmers and see what happens. That's what you get as a trade-off. MS prefers ease of development for their OS and they suffer in terms of security. Apple effectively locks the OS down and prefers to provide apps themselves than from third party ones. I would be more scared of an Apple monopoly than a MS one honestly.