Re: Microsoft Flame[tm] [NOISE]
Forget about the monopoly aspects for a second and look
at MS as an American success story. It has all the classic elements: started small, with a crew of social misfits and eventually grew up.
RobL ------------------|----------------------------------------------------------- Rob Lowry | PO Box 288 | Rockford Wa 99030 | ral@otc.mhs.compuserve.com robl@on-ramp.ior.com
Well, I disagree. Microsoft succeeded primarily because it was "chosen" by IBM in about 1981 or so, needing an OS for their PC. MS didn't even write it; Seattle Computer did, and that was a port of CP/M. Not much creativity. MSDOS revisions 1.0 and 1.1 were pure crap.
On Thu, 21 Dec 1995, jim bell wrote:
Well, I disagree. Microsoft succeeded primarily because it was "chosen" by IBM in about 1981 or so, needing an OS for their PC. MS didn't even write it; Seattle Computer did, and that was a port of CP/M. Not much creativity. MSDOS revisions 1.0 and 1.1 were pure crap.
I'm sure that's true to a large extent. However, although I may be wrong, I beleive that MS's primary reason for initial success was in MS BASIC. They needed a new OS to go with BASIC, so they used DOS. They needed a new filesystem to store BASIC files, and thus FAT was born. Tobin Fricke
participants (2)
-
jim bell -
Light Ray