On 11/3/12 8:50 AM, Chris Albertson wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Sarah White <kuze...@gmail.com> wrote:
So, at or around 1981 (the year I was born) there was a cool concept.
IBM was selling "personal computers" (IBM-PC compatible later became a
thing) and by the time I was old enough to operate a modem, I had one
myself. Life was good.
Wonder if there is any sensible way to petition microsoft to fix this
stupid mistake dating back to the DOS era. Windows 8 / metro is out now,
and I can't bloody stand the changes.
I always wonder why people continue to use MS Windows. Perhaps thheir
employers force them to. But other than that why?
I don't know that it's "force"... At JPL we have an enormous variety of
desktop OSes, and for the most part, nobody much cares which one you use
as long as you can get your job done.
Perhaps because you have a (expensive to replace) tool that requires IE
for access?
Perhaps because the large installed base means that design tools are
written for Windows first and others later?
Perhaps because of the large installed base it's easier to find folks to
write software for Windows than for other products.
Perhaps because for all its ills, Windows isn't that bad a desktop
environment. The kind of timekeeping thing we're discussing here is,
when it gets right down to it, not going to affect the vast majority
(99.99%?) of users.
That is the root cause of all Window's problems. The company was run be a
"chief software architect" who technically very ignorant and lacked any
formal education in the subject. Windows still suffers because it tries to
maintain backwards compatabilty
Hardly the "root" of all problems.. Yes, the conflation of kernel and
UI (most of Windows is really all about UI capabilities: heck it's the
very name of the product). The kernel of NT was based on the
architecture of VAX/VMS, which was fairly nice. Real multitasking, real
pre-emption, real process isolation, real dynamic run time binding.
(none of which DOS had)
You can say it suffers from needing backward compatibility.. overall,
they've done a half way decent implementation of this these days (there
were some real clunkers along the way). But it's also important to
allow people to use their significant investment in old software. You
may have the best idea in the world and a very cool OS that implements
it, but who's going to pay for recoding all those billions of lines of
software for your new OS?
And assuming that money falls from the sky to pay for it, where are you
going to find all those software people to do the work, at any price?
Sure, I've seen lots of people just dying for the opportunity to
decipher some 20 year old enterprise application and convert it to a new OS.
You have to remember that in 1980 we have computers that would allow 100
people to simultainiously log in and do work from 100 different termmiansl.
Well before that actually. More like late 60s. TymShare corp, for
instance. Dartmouth BASIC for another.
ANd note that those timesharing systems provided an environment that
essentially hid the OS (kernel wise) from the user. You fired up your
ASR33 and were in the BASIC environment from the get go.
This also is the environment that BillG started doing computing work in.
He didn't start sitting at a keypunch cranking out JCL cards to
compile his COBOL or FORTRAN jobs and allocating DASD for the temporary
files.
We have the Internet (called arpanet back then. We had email and UNIX was
alive and well. We even had mice and track balls This was not the "dark
ages" the only real difference was the price of hardware. And in this age
gates did NOT know the difference between an OS and a command shell and he
was running Microsoft.
Don't make the mistake of confusing public statements with background
and knowledge. For all you know, Gates wanted to deliberately confuse
the two for marketing reasons.
Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
