LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 03-10-2002, 08:22 PM   #1
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Rep: Reputation: 199Reputation: 199
Looking back in history...


I was browsing thru some Unix sites when I came across a timeline about Unix history. In that timeline I saw that Microsoft created a little OS called Xenix... back in 1980. I wonder whatever happened with that OS as I have read up on it before a long way back but forgot Microsoft even made a Unix type OS... hmmm.... Guess if they stuck to it, they might have made a decent OS today..

-trickykid
 
Old 03-11-2002, 06:47 AM   #2
Thymox
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cornwall, England.
Distribution: Debian + Ubuntu
Posts: 4,345

Rep: Reputation: 57
How about everyone clicking this link, and giving 'em hell for generally being a crappy company with a crappy OS:

http://www2.survey-poll.com/mt/1809/mtVXRtqH.htm

(Hey, it's sort of relevant - just click the link )
 
Old 03-11-2002, 11:04 AM   #3
CragStar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2000
Location: UK - Frome
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 1,081

Rep: Reputation: 45
I never heard of that before - mind you my early microsoft knowledge comes from the film Pirates of Silicon Valley, which says something.

Could you post up the link to the timeline? I am interested in the early computer period. Cheers
 
Old 03-11-2002, 11:14 AM   #4
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 199Reputation: 199
I was reading up on Unix at www.unix-systems.org and they have a timeline there...

direct link http://www.unix-systems.org/what_is_..._timeline.html

-trickykid
 
Old 03-11-2002, 11:50 AM   #5
Stephanie
LQ Addict
 
Registered: May 2001
Location: Arizona
Distribution: 9.2 Mandy 1.4 Gentoo 5.1 FreeBSD WinXP
Posts: 1,166

Rep: Reputation: 45
I never knew that at all.

I was always the impression that they were always making DOS. I wonder why they switched from a UNIX base to their own?

Anyone think that despite what they said back then, they knew the comptuer would become huge, so they wanted to be proprietary and manipulative?
 
Old 03-12-2002, 07:22 AM   #6
CragStar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2000
Location: UK - Frome
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 1,081

Rep: Reputation: 45
It depends which source you read.

IMO gates was a manipulative person who just wanted to be top in any field he wanted. It think that he definately worked hard with computers - but for the wrong reasons.

One thing is for sure, he couldn't have timed his entry onto the computer scene any better. I think it is luck more than anything.
 
Old 03-12-2002, 12:22 PM   #7
Thymox
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cornwall, England.
Distribution: Debian + Ubuntu
Posts: 4,345

Rep: Reputation: 57
I agree. People may slate MS for all-sorts, but you have to ask yourself: If I were in the position when it all took off, would I have been any different? Being the head of a reasonable sized corporation means that you are on the look out for any viable method to make money - and that's just what they did. But, back on topic...Has anyone actually ever tried Xenix?
 
Old 03-12-2002, 12:55 PM   #8
Stephanie
LQ Addict
 
Registered: May 2001
Location: Arizona
Distribution: 9.2 Mandy 1.4 Gentoo 5.1 FreeBSD WinXP
Posts: 1,166

Rep: Reputation: 45
Xenix?

Sorry, I have never heard of it.

And I can also say taht I may have been business minded if I were in Gates shoes, but I would have not taken it as far as he did.
 
Old 03-12-2002, 03:22 PM   #9
CragStar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2000
Location: UK - Frome
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 1,081

Rep: Reputation: 45
I dunno though - its one of those things.

One day your having a little fun developing software and then boom - your the head of one of the most powerful companies in the world.

Microsoft still suck, and there is no excuse for their attitude these days. There company direction and business model is not suited to the computer industry, and for that reason I Linux instead.
 
Old 03-21-2002, 08:24 AM   #10
CragStar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2000
Location: UK - Frome
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 1,081

Rep: Reputation: 45
More M$ info:

Saw this on the register - haven't read it fully yet, but it looks related to this thread.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/24504.html
 
Old 03-21-2002, 08:44 AM   #11
Thymox
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Cornwall, England.
Distribution: Debian + Ubuntu
Posts: 4,345

Rep: Reputation: 57
Re: More M$ info:

Quote:
Originally from http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/24504.html

"I think the original DOS might have been developed on one of their old VAX mini's but by the time I got there everything including DOS 2.x, all their languages and applications, Mac Word and Mac Excel, Windows Excel and Windows Word were written in vi and compiled on those goddamn Xenix boxes, and all their documentation was written in vi and compiled in troff and nroff. I don't think [they] really moved to the PC platform for development until around the time Windows 3.1 came out."

"And through Windows NT, you can see it throughout the design. In a weak sense, it is a form of Unix."
Does this mean that Win3.0 was written and compiled on a Xenix box?

Oh no! So all this time we've been slating XP (NT5.1) we've really been talking about another Unix-like OS?
 
Old 03-21-2002, 09:20 PM   #12
Sixpax
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2002
Distribution: Mandrake 8.1
Posts: 386

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
One day your having a little fun developing software and then boom...
It was my understanding that Gates didn't even develop the software himself... he paid some computer geek(s) to write DOS and he assumed full rights to it. After IBM started pumping money into his pockets, he hired people to continue it's development. I doubt the guy even knows how to spell "C"

Anyone hear any different?
 
Old 03-21-2002, 09:55 PM   #13
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 199Reputation: 199
Quote:
Originally posted by Sixpax


It was my understanding that Gates didn't even develop the software himself... he paid some computer geek(s) to write DOS and he assumed full rights to it. After IBM started pumping money into his pockets, he hired people to continue it's development. I doubt the guy even knows how to spell "C"

Anyone hear any different?
Gates is a programmer, he just didn't have a OS at the time he presented IBM with his offer, so he bought DOS. I am sure though he doesn't do much programming now, not when he can afford to just pay others to do it.

-trickykid
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
history junaid18183 Linux - General 14 11-07-2009 08:01 AM
history saipraveen Linux - Newbie 5 06-10-2005 08:04 PM
about history jackandking Programming 1 12-18-2004 03:10 PM
How to find back "history" database after "history -c" ? san_lss Linux - Newbie 1 01-07-2004 12:53 PM
History neohybrid1 Linux - General 1 12-03-2002 05:53 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:41 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration