Indeed, its what MS has excelled at. But its not innovation by MS is it?


Which thread is that? This one where you are losing the argument that Microsoft is not a corrupt monopoly that ships sub standard products because it knows most people don't understand that they have any choice?


Seems to me that you're lacking data in a whole lot of areas. Sometimes you just have to accept that your preconceptions are wrong, especially when those preconceptions are mostly propaganda...sorry ...marketing, force fed to you by a corrupt monopoly.

There were no such argument to begin with. This thread's title is "I had to post this". It isn't about "who invented what". Besides, it doesn't matter. An invention is useless until it becomes adopted.

If you wish to discuss whether Microsoft has innovated something or not, you're free to start new thread. I wouldn't join the discussion, though, because such subject is not interesting.

First I would need evidence indicating that my ideas are preconceptions and that my preconceptions are "wrong". Currently no such evidence has been given. To provide such evidence, you need to know what my ideas/preconceptions are (and currently you clearly have a wrong idea).
It is really unfortunate that some people cannot provide cold-blooded argument, and prefer to portray Microsoft/Windows as enemy of Linux or some kind of "evil incarnate". In my opinion, such position is pathetic.
Have a nice day.

@ sig if you really think anyone is believing your rhetoric give your head a shake. If you had even the slightest clue the truth about your precious windoze would shock you after all M$ was started NOT by innovation BUT by the THEFT of other people's work! This fact is widely known and by all counts ignored by the courts, and politicians in M$ very deep pockets. IMHO M$ is responsible not of helping the industry but rather hindering new innovations, where we would be without M$? Probably miles ahead of where we are presently.

Wrong. Microsoft started its business with a basic interpreter for the Altair 8800. Its start with operating systems was with their own version of Unix, called Xenix. Their first great success with operating systems was with MS-DOS, which they legally purchased and not have stolen. They also have written Windows themselves and not have stolen it from anywhere. One may argue that they have stolen the concept of a GUI and windows from Apple, but then you have to say the same about Apple and Xerox.

A simplifiaction, but true IMO.

I was using x86 early on, from about 84 onward (no, I'm not as old as that makes me seem LOL). In 84, there was a lot more apple software and games around, by 87-88 the field had totally changed, apple was a much smaller share of software and games, the good ol 'IBM compatible' had taken over a huge amount of market share.

Quite likely. However, without microsoft domination of the desktop marketplace its likely that there would be more of a diverse OS marketplace, and that would (probably) make 'bit players' like linux and BSD far more mainstream.

If that is true, its only because of windows (possibly) creating more uptake for personal compuiter sooner, or computer use in general. IMO that was bound to happen sooner or later, personal computing had been growing since the late 70s.

You've probably got to thank the whole ecosystem in general, the big players in systems (intel, cyrix, amd, power PC, and even the 'server' systems that were, and remain, a lot more expensive than 'desktop' systems) for that. Without some compition in systems, the amount of power we currently have would not be there.

BTW, over the last 12 years or so you've probably to thank AMD for a lot of it. Without AMD, intel wouldnt have been pushed so hard to stay competitive, and IMO we would be stuck with 32bit (intel wanted itanium to be the 64bit system) and single core CPUs. I'm guessing, based on what I know, but think that without the competitors the current intel CPUs would be around 'core solo' levels. Just enough to stay competitive with power PC.

I wouldnt go so far as to think that we would have a 'technological wonderland' but I in general agree.

Theres a huge list of the people that microsoft has screwed pretty badly...most of whom were (technically) 'microsoft partners'.

I really dont like the militaristic or religious imagery ('enemy', 'evil') but I can see where people are coming from. Those sorts of terms are actually common in the higher level corporate mindset though.

As I've said before on this thread, using those sorts of terms creates an 'us and them' mindset, and it just pushes people further into corners. Thats counterproductive IMO.

I would say that linux is a competitor to windows, and that microsoft will what feels it can get away with to defend what it sees as its market. How far they will go to defend that 'turf' is all thats in question.

Not really, the individuals that developed the GUI and mouse interface worked at Xerox went on to Apple and developed the Desktop metaphor for the Mac.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface

I'm not saying, btw, that using others work as inspiration is bad thing, its the hypocrisy of MS of taking all these idea from University's and other technological development centres that freely spread the idea's they developed (e.g. Xerox Parc, AT&T etc) using them to develop their own products and then have the audacity to attempt to squash competition with bogus lawsuits claiming theft of their idea's. Its the sheer effrontery of it.

Its a classic example of "do as I say, not as I do." Never could stand a hypocrite.

Indeed, was making a point not writing a book!




Absolutely agree, and as far as I'm concerned where hardware is concerned you can make all the same arguments in this thread but for Microsoft, read "Intel".

Historically they have been just as bad as Microsoft and if it wasn't for AMD we would be way behind the curve from where we are now. That's what competition does for you you see.

I have never called Microsoft "Evil" or the "Enemy" they are a business, doing what business, particularly big business, does. Carefully balancing on the knife edge of legality, occasionally straying far enough that the criminal system drags its ponderous ass into action.

But what I can and will do is always judge the people with whom I do business and vote with my feet. I have never paid for a Microsoft product since Linux became fully functional and have often bent the license terms of what I did pay for to the breaking point and sometimes beyond, hey, what goes around comes around. And I have always purchased AMD, rather than Intel.

What I can also do is speak up and challenge those who are still mesmerised by the slick and shiny giant that is corporate marketing and unthinkingly bleat out the polished arguments and catch phrases that have been hammered into their brains by skilful advertising.

As it moved to completely "Linux vs Windows" style, it's time to close it. If you want to continue the discussion, please move to the "Linux vs Windows" thread.