"Martin P. Hellwig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jeroen Wenting wrote: > <cut> >> >> Without Microsoft 90% of us would never have seen a computer more >> powerful than a ZX-81 and 90% of the rest of us would never have used >> only dumb mainframe terminals. > <cut> > At the time you "PC" guys where hacking around monochrome green and a > bit lighter green screens I was doing multi-media editing on my Amiga > 600. So perhaps we should state that we would have been a lot further > if not an incredible amount of cool technologies where bought by MS > and then simply put in the freezer to protect their future market > share.
You mean like the lamp that keeps burning forever, like Philips has? > Although Commodore where never serious competitors, Because there programming skills were as worse as MS? I mean, their BASIC had only 2 instuctions: PEEK and POKE? > they had > some "intern" difficulties, too bad but life goes on. Yup, same for Acorn. Their RISC work station was the fastest computer available for home users at that moment. > To go on, stable version of truly free unix likes where released > around 1994 that was in the same time MS was working on their super > stable released windows 95 and a slightly better NT 3.5 and let me not > forget OS/2 warp 3.0 . > > I'm not a MS basher, Yet you call NT slightly better compared to Windows 95. So you have no clue what you're talking about. > hey I make money of them administrating them, > however to state that if we didn't had MS we would been in the IT > stone ages is blatantly wrong, Now there is truth. > I think we would have been a lot > further No, since companies are just companies, not little gods like some want them to be. > then where we are now. Perhaps we even had a other mainstream > architecture like sparcs and powerpc's. But "crippled" like Intel. -- John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/ Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/ I ploink googlegroups.com :-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list