Actually its not so much creating quality content that takes money as selling it. What's expensive is getting people to buy a $15 album the actual cost of recording one is not so high. Which means there might be room for alternative models.
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 1
IBM is still like that. The divisions might as well be separate companies. I recently had a taste of it when they were bidding on a contract I was running.
But anyway you see my point about what I mean by IBM not standing behind OS/2. Look arguably they aren't standing behind DB2, either so it isn't that atypical.
How does the comment regarding openness prove anything regarding number of users? I'm not sure how you are responding to the issue.
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 1
Give me an example of:
IBM making a serious push for the home market. Even something as small as the "Dude you are getting a Dell" campaign Dell used to change their image.
I don't disagree had Microsoft honored their commitments things would have been easier. But Microsoft was honoring their commitments from OS/2 1.0-1.3 and the product flubbed. It wasn't until Microsoft walked that IBM brought out 1.3.1 and started to actually try and sell OS/2.
Agree with what you wrote. Can't find good figures on a 5 mintue search but I'm not sure about Fujitsu. They have sold a lot of medical tablets, industrial tablets... They may very well still be ahead of Apple.
I think more use Windows. I doubt more use Linux. The/. numbers for Linux have always been terrible. Most embarrassingly during the period of time when Linux advocacy was a big part of/. culture like 2001.
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 1
Heck yes. It wasn't until IE 4.5 that Windows got the ability to organize the desktop the way you always could with WPS. And by IE 6 they removed those features.
I don't have nearly the shell functionality today I had in 1993.
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 1
IBM PSP (Person Software Products) was completely on board, at least as far as I could see from the outside, but IBM PCCO (the PC Company) was not. Different divisions, and somewhat different goals.
I'd agree with that somewhat. PSP saw it as a product. They didn't comprehend they were attacking the largest software company in the world on their home turf and the kinds of resources that would require.
It would be like if the US declared war on Russia and showed up with 1000 troops to the first battle. Where we really committed?
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
BTW since your comment was knowledgeable I looked you up. Your skillset looks like a fit to be on our contact list. If you are interested take a look at Blue Lotus and click on the contact button. I don't have anything in the Minneapolis area currently but...
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 1
Actually the push started with 1.3.1. IBM slashed the price from $250ish to $99 and freewared a whole bunch of internal software on their BBSes.... They were going after the tech crowd at that point and breaking free of OS/2 as a niche product. Certainly 2.0 was the first release in most software stores. But what I said applied then too.
As for OS/2 on boxes. They did that on their Microchannel line, which always sold with OS/2 or Windows. Why not on their high end generic line (Ambra) or low end generic (don't remember name)? IMHO the Microchannel people were worried about the lower end hardware cannibalizing sales. Ambra which dollar for dollar which was a better machine was a threat in the hardware department.
And no IBM could have just paid the penalty and gotten a worse price on Windows. Then IBM machines would be OS/2 with an optional cost upgrade to Windows. That would have shown commitment on IBM's part. And if they were going to give into extortion go public with the extortion. Show video on the 6 pm news.
Certainly what Microsoft did was unethical and illegal. But when IBM didn't ship OS/2 on its own boxes that was throwing in the towel. Could you imagine Scott McNealy or Larry Ellison caving like that?
Yep. XTree was GUI but with power user featues. But Norton Commander wizes were way faster than people who used GUI file managers. Lots of us all through the early 90s still did file management from the command line some of the time. In fact I'd say maybe 5-10% of the time I still do.
But hard drives are so much larger now, and files more complex. Hierarchies go 10 levels deep. In the old days maybe 2 levels. Its hard to separate the tool productivity drop from the increased complexity of file systems.
I don't think this is flamebait. And you may have a point, though you are obviously exaggerating. One of the big features that was supposed to come out with 10.6 and still might be with 10.7 was trusted applications. Either all desktop apps come from a trusted source (a key at apple) or you have to use a command line override to get them to install. The idea being that viruses, etc... become virtually impossible to spread.
Techy people would go for that compromise and it would have the same effect.
First off Apple is still the choice of tech geeks. I assume (given you slashdot number) you remember "Macintosh, the computer people really use". Mac from day 1 catered to the "I hate PCs" crowd.
Steve Jobs has a long history of telling consumers, partners and boards of directors "my way or the highway". When he was just an inventor/exec and not yet a business god he stood up to the Apple board twice in huge ways. The first time they sent him off to work on a niche product called the Macintosh and the second time they fired him and he founded NeXT. Now, getting into a public fight with Steve Jobs, much less firing him would send the stock crashing.
Jobs is going to do things his way. They might be successful they might not but no he's running Apple until he leaves. Then public sentiment will matter.
I agree with you. For Linux to succeed it either needs to find new markets (like embedded) or Microsoft needs to trip badly. Both are possible. There was a real opening with the Netbooks.
typesetting: Document Sciences products haven't advanced. I'd say TeX likely has it here. scripting languages: Perl, Python and Ruby are the big ones. Where is REXX? Where is AutoLisp? Except for Microsoft Batch File Language (which no one claims is any good), are there any commercial ones even in the top 10?
Massive learning curve? Compared to switching to Linux? No I don't think there was an opportunity there.
Where there was a clear opportunity was netbooks. Linux had a clean year on a platform that played to all their strengths. You want an example that one stinks.
As for "almost ready". Its been ready for 10 years. It just hasn't been better than the 2 main competitors. The GNU project was successful in creating a free OS usable for anything. It was no successful in creating the best OS on the market. OTOH the original goal was a free Unix and then the best Unix on the market. I'd say in terms of traditional Unix desktops they were successful. People in 1998 would be shocked that a dozen years later Solaris, AIX, Digital Unix, IRIX have all been essentially passed by Linux.
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 1
Heck OS/2 1.3 was excellent. OS/2 2.0 was amazing. There was no mess. IBM just didn't stand behind it, they weren't onboard.
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I assume you were IBM back then. Then come on. OS/2 wasn't even available preloaded on your own computers. I bought an Ambra and I couldn't get OS/2 preloaded nor OS/2 support for the sound card on the Ambra motherboard. Your IBM resellers didn't carry or push OS/2. I had a bear of a time getting OS/2 1.3 until you had the direct order program. Also you wouldn't distribute in normal channels.
IBM was talking out of both sides of their mouth the whole time they were pushing OS/2. Sun and Microsoft both stood behind their OSes 100%.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually its not so much creating quality content that takes money as selling it. What's expensive is getting people to buy a $15 album the actual cost of recording one is not so high. Which means there might be room for alternative models.
IBM is still like that. The divisions might as well be separate companies. I recently had a taste of it when they were bidding on a contract I was running.
But anyway you see my point about what I mean by IBM not standing behind OS/2. Look arguably they aren't standing behind DB2, either so it isn't that atypical.
How does the comment regarding openness prove anything regarding number of users? I'm not sure how you are responding to the issue.
Give me an example of:
IBM making a serious push for the home market. Even something as small as the "Dude you are getting a Dell" campaign Dell used to change their image.
I don't disagree had Microsoft honored their commitments things would have been easier. But Microsoft was honoring their commitments from OS/2 1.0-1.3 and the product flubbed. It wasn't until Microsoft walked that IBM brought out 1.3.1 and started to actually try and sell OS/2.
He's older than you.
OSX has a package manager (apt for fink same as debian and port for MacPorts, same as freebsd)
OSX has a very good X shipped with the OS XQuartz.
I think you are reading the reverse of what was intended based on your response. Take a 2nd look at the context.
Agree with what you wrote. Can't find good figures on a 5 mintue search but I'm not sure about Fujitsu. They have sold a lot of medical tablets, industrial tablets... They may very well still be ahead of Apple.
Oh did realize this was in yet. Thanks.
I think more use Windows. I doubt more use Linux. The /. numbers for Linux have always been terrible. Most embarrassingly during the period of time when Linux advocacy was a big part of /. culture like 2001.
Heck yes. It wasn't until IE 4.5 that Windows got the ability to organize the desktop the way you always could with WPS. And by IE 6 they removed those features.
I don't have nearly the shell functionality today I had in 1993.
I'd agree with that somewhat. PSP saw it as a product. They didn't comprehend they were attacking the largest software company in the world on their home turf and the kinds of resources that would require.
It would be like if the US declared war on Russia and showed up with 1000 troops to the first battle. Where we really committed?
You are correct. Thanks for the reminder.
BTW since your comment was knowledgeable I looked you up. Your skillset looks like a fit to be on our contact list. If you are interested take a look at Blue Lotus and click on the contact button. I don't have anything in the Minneapolis area currently but...
Actually the push started with 1.3.1. IBM slashed the price from $250ish to $99 and freewared a whole bunch of internal software on their BBSes.... They were going after the tech crowd at that point and breaking free of OS/2 as a niche product. Certainly 2.0 was the first release in most software stores. But what I said applied then too.
As for OS/2 on boxes. They did that on their Microchannel line, which always sold with OS/2 or Windows. Why not on their high end generic line (Ambra) or low end generic (don't remember name)? IMHO the Microchannel people were worried about the lower end hardware cannibalizing sales. Ambra which dollar for dollar which was a better machine was a threat in the hardware department.
And no IBM could have just paid the penalty and gotten a worse price on Windows. Then IBM machines would be OS/2 with an optional cost upgrade to Windows. That would have shown commitment on IBM's part. And if they were going to give into extortion go public with the extortion. Show video on the 6 pm news.
Certainly what Microsoft did was unethical and illegal. But when IBM didn't ship OS/2 on its own boxes that was throwing in the towel. Could you imagine Scott McNealy or Larry Ellison caving like that?
Yep. XTree was GUI but with power user featues. But Norton Commander wizes were way faster than people who used GUI file managers. Lots of us all through the early 90s still did file management from the command line some of the time. In fact I'd say maybe 5-10% of the time I still do.
But hard drives are so much larger now, and files more complex. Hierarchies go 10 levels deep. In the old days maybe 2 levels. Its hard to separate the tool productivity drop from the increased complexity of file systems.
I don't think this is flamebait. And you may have a point, though you are obviously exaggerating. One of the big features that was supposed to come out with 10.6 and still might be with 10.7 was trusted applications. Either all desktop apps come from a trusted source (a key at apple) or you have to use a command line override to get them to install. The idea being that viruses, etc... become virtually impossible to spread.
Techy people would go for that compromise and it would have the same effect.
First off Apple is still the choice of tech geeks. I assume (given you slashdot number) you remember "Macintosh, the computer people really use". Mac from day 1 catered to the "I hate PCs" crowd.
Steve Jobs has a long history of telling consumers, partners and boards of directors "my way or the highway". When he was just an inventor/exec and not yet a business god he stood up to the Apple board twice in huge ways. The first time they sent him off to work on a niche product called the Macintosh and the second time they fired him and he founded NeXT. Now, getting into a public fight with Steve Jobs, much less firing him would send the stock crashing.
Jobs is going to do things his way. They might be successful they might not but no he's running Apple until he leaves. Then public sentiment will matter.
Leaders are generally given credit for accomplishments. Napoleon didn't personally conquer northern Italy.
I agree with you. For Linux to succeed it either needs to find new markets (like embedded) or Microsoft needs to trip badly. Both are possible. There was a real opening with the Netbooks.
Anyway you sound like someone who would like OSX.
OSS poster children:
typesetting: Document Sciences products haven't advanced. I'd say TeX likely has it here.
scripting languages: Perl, Python and Ruby are the big ones. Where is REXX? Where is AutoLisp? Except for Microsoft Batch File Language (which no one claims is any good), are there any commercial ones even in the top 10?
Massive learning curve? Compared to switching to Linux? No I don't think there was an opportunity there.
Where there was a clear opportunity was netbooks. Linux had a clean year on a platform that played to all their strengths. You want an example that one stinks.
As for "almost ready". Its been ready for 10 years. It just hasn't been better than the 2 main competitors. The GNU project was successful in creating a free OS usable for anything. It was no successful in creating the best OS on the market. OTOH the original goal was a free Unix and then the best Unix on the market. I'd say in terms of traditional Unix desktops they were successful. People in 1998 would be shocked that a dozen years later Solaris, AIX, Digital Unix, IRIX have all been essentially passed by Linux.
The XTree style view was based on a DOS product called the Norton Commander. The Linux Midnight Commander is based on it you can see the similarity.
Heck OS/2 1.3 was excellent. OS/2 2.0 was amazing. There was no mess. IBM just didn't stand behind it, they weren't onboard.
I assume you were IBM back then. Then come on. OS/2 wasn't even available preloaded on your own computers. I bought an Ambra and I couldn't get OS/2 preloaded nor OS/2 support for the sound card on the Ambra motherboard. Your IBM resellers didn't carry or push OS/2. I had a bear of a time getting OS/2 1.3 until you had the direct order program. Also you wouldn't distribute in normal channels.
IBM was talking out of both sides of their mouth the whole time they were pushing OS/2. Sun and Microsoft both stood behind their OSes 100%.