thursday 1 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I think the hate for MS grew as the company grew to dominate the planet. I never tried Mac but the first windows was something so new. We could have mutiple applications run at the same time. Well, that was the theory anyway. Windows didn't stabilize 'til 3.11 or something. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 DOS was, as stated, all we had at the time. The fact that some of the commands are still quite useful means that the skills I learned years ago are also useful. As for the hate, I think most of the angst (against MS, not just Windoze) is based on the fact that Bill and Co decide what is wanted, develop bloatware, and then charge well over cost recovery prices. It is not a coincidence that Microsoft has a large number of millionaires (in $US) on the "payroll". Link to post Share on other sites
journey_man 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Originally Posted By: muikabochi Was the first Windows popular at the beginning? I mean has the hate been there from the beginning or did it grow somewhere along the line? Prior to version 3 Windows didn't do much. Version 3.0 was when it all started happening. And generally it was a good thing, personally it solved a number of problems in our organisation. We all got email and having a TCP stack on every machine allowed me to port our main application from a slow Novell system to a much faster Unix machine, which in turn made it a snap for our overseas branches to log on to our central machine. TCP/IP was so much more flexible than the IPX we had been using. However it certainly introduced a heap of problems. It was soooo unstable. Basically it was a multiprocess operating system sitting on top of the single process operating system called DOS 3! The problems caused by memory above the 1M (or was it 2M, I forget) barrier had to be seen to be believed. And suddenly we needed all that memory. QEMM anyone? Link to post Share on other sites
thursday 1 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 wysiwyg. those were the bad old days. Token Ring? how slow was that? 512? Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Originally Posted By: thursday. wysiwyg. More frequently known as What You See Is What You Hope You Get Link to post Share on other sites
journey_man 0 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Originally Posted By: thursday. wysiwyg. those were the bad old days. Token Ring? how slow was that? 512? I hated Token Ring, the horrible cables, the horrible price. But typically IBM, it was reliable. Thin ethernet was wonderful, it worked well, it was cheap and it was easy to use and extend. That is until you got a cable fault. Then you were in real trouble, the whole network went down and you needed specialist gear to find the fault quickly. I remember spending hours with a couple of cable terminators looking for a cable that a pet dog had chewed. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Originally Posted By: Journey Man Thin ethernet was wonderful, it worked well, it was cheap and it was easy to use and extend. That is until you got a cable fault. Or a faulty NIC. Link to post Share on other sites
DOSser 0 Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Oh yes. Stories of old. Get 4GB rather than 3GB. Not much difference in price anyway. Link to post Share on other sites
klingon 10 Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 Quote: I think the hate for MS grew as the company grew to dominate the planet. Basically, envy. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 Nah, I don't think I would want to be in Bill Gates' position. OK, he has plenty of money, but so much that he could not possibly spend it all in one lifetime, and that's all he'll get! It's not so much envy as a dislike of a company that has ignored the world's standards for so long that they are now seen as being the standard. And to get there, has swallowed up many really innovative small companies, transforming their groundbreaking technology to fit the "company mold". Plus the fact that they cannot spell colour or realise. Link to post Share on other sites
2pints-mate 0 Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 I'm a little confused, perhaps it is the pre-coffee early Monday morning thing. If they totally ignored the world's standards, then how did they (or were allowed to be) seen to become the standard? Link to post Share on other sites
journey_man 0 Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 It's called being a subversive bully. In many internet standards (and others) Microsoft took the existing standard and added their own features. Sometimes they told people, sometimes not. The idea being that only Microsoft Products would "play" the Microsoft enhancements. If you are big enough you get away with it because all the smaller organisations have to adopt the new Micrsoftised standard, sometimes involving buying technology off Microsoft to do it. Some of these enhancements genuinely made a difference, in other cases they were simply a callous attempt to subvert the market. Link to post Share on other sites
2pints-mate 0 Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 Given the same circumstances, you in the place of Microsoft back then, would you have more charitable to your competitors? Link to post Share on other sites
journey_man 0 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 I don't like cheats, so I'd like to think I would have acted fairly. I've always preferred Win-Win solutions. But who knows. I'll let you know when I get there! Link to post Share on other sites
2pints-mate 0 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Why is it "cheating"? Isn't (wasn't) it just "business"? Link to post Share on other sites
thursday 1 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 not really business, that's why there were anti-trust rulings against them. MS took the world into heavy computing when the world could've gone the other way. Look at what Sun could do. Open systems, thin clients etc. Opportunity gone perhaps. It was like the butterfly in time travel. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Originally Posted By: 2pints,mate I'm a little confused, perhaps it is the pre-coffee early Monday morning thing. If they totally ignored the world's standards, then how did they (or were allowed to be) seen to become the standard? We'll forgive you, mate! (If only because your avatar is amusing! ) JM has it right. The "FrontPage extensions" are what I was referring to, specifically. But there are many other examples for those inclined to look (or those with a long memory!) Link to post Share on other sites
bobby12 0 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Or try saving a Word doc as a webpage and see how heavy it gets with hundreds of unnecessary tags. There is no way in the world they were put there for any functional reason. For me the most annoying is how IE doesnt follow web standards. In reality, IE is the web standard. All developers have to code their html/css for it. Really how hard can it be for them to follow the standards. I also recently took out an MS Sharepoint site. Management wanted a 'backup' of the site, ie. a version of it on CD with all the attachments and comments. MS have made it impossible to do this. The only way to backup the site is by running another sharepoint server and importing the backup to it! The result: sharepoint is still running as read-only. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Yep, as a teacher of IT in a previous life, I used to get the students to type their name (just their name) into a text ed (we used wordpad) and save it. Then type EXACTLY the same into MSWord and save. Then looked at the DOS directory showing the actual file size (not the windoze indicative "about this big, we think" file estimation) and they were amazed at the overhead. try it, it's fun! Link to post Share on other sites
ii-tamago 0 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Should I care? Sorry, just things like that go well over my head. I'm doing well to type so much here and be logged into the interwebs! Link to post Share on other sites
journey_man 0 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Originally Posted By: ii-tamago Should I care? Definitely not! Life is too short. Go do something fun! Leave it to those who give a sh*t cos it's their job or hobby. For most peeps computers will become like cars. You get them fixed when they don't work. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Yeah, and to do that, you need people who give a sh*t, and care enough to keep that sort of stuff in their head so they can fix your broken beastie. As it happens, that is what I do, as a "spare-time" paid job. Link to post Share on other sites
joshnii 2 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 So you must actually like Microsoft then, for giving you all that work demand? Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Doesn't stop me bagging them, though! Vista has changed the standard install from 1 hour including optimisation and some tutorial to 1.5 hours for the same service. That means a 50% increase in my cut from the job, Gotta love that! Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts