Early Years
ARTICLE DATE: 10.12.05
By Michael J. Miller
Microsoft today is a huge company, with thousands of employees in hundreds of buildings all around Redmond, Washington. That was hardly the case in 1983, when I first saw the product that was destined to evolve into Windows. Microsoft's headquarters were merely a small building next to the Burgermaster in Bellevue, another Seattle suburb. Then eight years old, the company had grown to about 400 people. It was primarily known as the maker of BASIC programs for many systems, and of MS-DOS, an operating system it had sold to IBM a few years earlier.
Many different companies during that period made computers that ran MS-DOS, but the problem was that these computers weren't all compatible with one another. IBM's version, called PC-DOS, was one standard, but companies like Digital Equipment Corp., Texas Instruments, and HP all made systems with different graphics devices.
Over the next few years, the industry would move to a world of "IBM compatibility," but many of these systems couldn't run applications designed specifically for the IBM PC.
Windows' 20th Anniversary
Early Years
Living in a Windows World
Windows Into the Future
back
"We Bet the Entire Company On It"
That was one of the key goals behind the project that was to become Windows. Back then, it was called "Interface Manager," and when I first saw it, I was working for a magazine called Popular Computing. Interface Manager was being developed by a small team that included Rao Remala, who was Interface Manager's first programmer and worked for Microsoft for more than 20 years in various areas of the business.
Microsoft chairman and chief software architect Bill Gates clearly remembers how much was riding on that project.
"We weren't kidding that we bet the entire company on it," Gates recalls. "The strange thing was we were a much smaller company at the time. We were competing to establish this platform with companies larger than ourselves."
When Interface Manager was first announced, Microsoft described it as an option that would work on top of all the company's operating systems, including DOS and Xenix, Microsoft's version of Unix.
The idea was that it would provide a single interface to control the bitmapped screen, graphics hardware, and various other I/O devices. The basic foundations of the future Windows were all there--on-screen windows, easy data transfer between programs, graphic icons, and mouse support. One of the key features was a series of menu commands at the bottom of each window, giving a common way of entering commands for all the programs.
Part of the reason this was included was that by the fall of 1983, "integrated software" was the big buzzword in the industry, spurred by the success of Lotus 1-2-3. At this point, a number of new "integrated operating environments" were being developed, including Apple's Lisa, which had shipped earlier that year, and a number of systems that were designed for x86 computers--notably VisiCorp's VisiOn, Quarterdeck's DESQ (which eventually morphed into DESQview), and Digital Research's Concurrent CP/M (notable for enabling multitasking).
Eyeing the Competition
Of course, graphics were a large part of the discussion as well. Apple was working on its Macintosh project at this point, and Digital Research was soon to announce its Graphical Environment Manager (GEM). But everyone was taking cues from work that had been done earlier at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) in California.
From Our Readers:
"The point-and-click world opened all sorts of new doors for me--and my career. It made me actually want to learn more about how the computer worked."
--John Brown
"Certainly the work done at Palo Alto Research Center, among others, influenced the bet we made to say the company would put all of its energy behind the graphical interface," Gates remembers.
Gates adds that Windows wasn't merely a graphical user interface. "It was actually two things," he says. "It was multiple applic
Even with all the love in the world for a particular job, you can still experience burn out.
I found this exceptionally chilling from the article:
Everyone is expendable, thanks to many employers' short-term, economic goals. And there's no incentive to work long hours. It won't likely pay off for the worker in the long run.
The truth is that (IT especially) is an expense. Business can't get along with out IT, but loves to bust it's balls when it's running up the bills.
Network TV wouldn't have it this way. Here's why. I envision a "reality" show where contestants get to travel into space and repair the shuttle.
It seems educational venues have lost focus entirely. The system is designed to factory pump students through and end result turns into a bunch of American Idol watching apathetical idiots. It amazes me when I have to explain something twice to someone (younger) that was drilled into my head when I went to school.
Yes - it is the standard two steps forward, one step back theory.
Of course, we might have less sunlight, but hey, who needs it when we have enough lights on at night to be seen from space. I better go invest in some more sun lamps.
Funny to hear Ballmer say something like this. Heck - Office for "Students and Teachers" is $129.99 [Blatent link to bestbuy;)]... Guess we can't have that either.
Just buy a bare bones box and a hard drive, put Knoppix on it and call it a day.
I've found myself in the midst of this pickle as well. Most of our projects are centered around the fact that this is "free" (caveats apply) software. I now have to look at what my upgrade path is and how to let my user community now know that they have to suffer through at least an upgrade a year.
I also am worried that if the release pattern for "Professional" continues every six to eight months, how will ISVs keep up with that as well as the ES/WS/AS lines? I need to be able to run things like Tivoli Storage Manager and the like that always lag behind in release certifications anyway. I don't want to be forced into the ES/WS/AS lines because of this.
Re:in the long term.....
on
Chicken Run
·
· Score: 1
They will create a large flying apparatus and fly directly out of the chicken coop. Of course this is after many failed attempts of digging under the fences. Oh wait, I'm having deja vu
This is quite true. The strategy that RH is planning is a constant release pool of "home/hobby" versions with no point releases. {Far be it from me to now condemn the.0 releases as I have in the past...} RH is pouring most of their resources into their broken apart Advanced Server line -- there will be an Enterprise Server line seen here, a WorkStation Server line seen here and the Advanced Server line seen here. These will have point releases along the way, but will lag behind that of the hobby/home use version because of ISV certifications. They believe that they will get stronger ISV certification if they stop mucking with the code base in such a short time (recall that 7.0 - 7.3 has all been released in roughly a year span) It often takes some ISV's six months to certify a piece of software.
It's a good thing Homer Simpson doesn't live in NYC... he had a tough time when Springfield was split into two area codes... Imagine if he had a cell phone in NYC!
I'm waiting for the EA World and EA Land. I want to rid the Sim Roller Coaster! Envision it now - Celeb's doing commercial spots with
"You've just won the SuperBowl - now what are you going to do?"
[big football dude] "I'm gonna go to EA World!"
I can hardly wait!
Slashdot Mirror
the link doesn't work - it goes to the non printer friendly version.
less of an eye burning version is below.
Early Years
ARTICLE DATE: 10.12.05
By Michael J. Miller
Microsoft today is a huge company, with thousands of employees in hundreds of buildings all around Redmond, Washington. That was hardly the case in 1983, when I first saw the product that was destined to evolve into Windows. Microsoft's headquarters were merely a small building next to the Burgermaster in Bellevue, another Seattle suburb. Then eight years old, the company had grown to about 400 people. It was primarily known as the maker of BASIC programs for many systems, and of MS-DOS, an operating system it had sold to IBM a few years earlier. Many different companies during that period made computers that ran MS-DOS, but the problem was that these computers weren't all compatible with one another. IBM's version, called PC-DOS, was one standard, but companies like Digital Equipment Corp., Texas Instruments, and HP all made systems with different graphics devices. Over the next few years, the industry would move to a world of "IBM compatibility," but many of these systems couldn't run applications designed specifically for the IBM PC. Windows' 20th Anniversary Early Years Living in a Windows World Windows Into the Future back "We Bet the Entire Company On It" That was one of the key goals behind the project that was to become Windows. Back then, it was called "Interface Manager," and when I first saw it, I was working for a magazine called Popular Computing. Interface Manager was being developed by a small team that included Rao Remala, who was Interface Manager's first programmer and worked for Microsoft for more than 20 years in various areas of the business. Microsoft chairman and chief software architect Bill Gates clearly remembers how much was riding on that project. "We weren't kidding that we bet the entire company on it," Gates recalls. "The strange thing was we were a much smaller company at the time. We were competing to establish this platform with companies larger than ourselves." When Interface Manager was first announced, Microsoft described it as an option that would work on top of all the company's operating systems, including DOS and Xenix, Microsoft's version of Unix. The idea was that it would provide a single interface to control the bitmapped screen, graphics hardware, and various other I/O devices. The basic foundations of the future Windows were all there--on-screen windows, easy data transfer between programs, graphic icons, and mouse support. One of the key features was a series of menu commands at the bottom of each window, giving a common way of entering commands for all the programs. Part of the reason this was included was that by the fall of 1983, "integrated software" was the big buzzword in the industry, spurred by the success of Lotus 1-2-3. At this point, a number of new "integrated operating environments" were being developed, including Apple's Lisa, which had shipped earlier that year, and a number of systems that were designed for x86 computers--notably VisiCorp's VisiOn, Quarterdeck's DESQ (which eventually morphed into DESQview), and Digital Research's Concurrent CP/M (notable for enabling multitasking). Eyeing the Competition Of course, graphics were a large part of the discussion as well. Apple was working on its Macintosh project at this point, and Digital Research was soon to announce its Graphical Environment Manager (GEM). But everyone was taking cues from work that had been done earlier at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) in California. From Our Readers: "The point-and-click world opened all sorts of new doors for me--and my career. It made me actually want to learn more about how the computer worked." --John Brown "Certainly the work done at Palo Alto Research Center, among others, influenced the bet we made to say the company would put all of its energy behind the graphical interface," Gates remembers. Gates adds that Windows wasn't merely a graphical user interface. "It was actually two things," he says. "It was multiple applic
I found this exceptionally chilling from the article: The truth is that (IT especially) is an expense. Business can't get along with out IT, but loves to bust it's balls when it's running up the bills.
Micro$oft may be smiling all the way to the bank, but when they realize the bank systems are running on the mainframe, they'll cry all the way home.
Reminds me of fucking Ned Flanders. He'd purposely obfuscate a word just to avoid swearing.
Wow, someone knows what my spam filter looks like ;) ah shit!
A coworker of mine thought the title 'March of the Penguins' would be an excellent title for a biography on Linus Torvalds :>
Looks like some people might have to update /etc/resume after this.
They could do blown in or fiberglass too (mixing some old technology with new?) More types of insulation could be used too.
Network TV wouldn't have it this way. Here's why. I envision a "reality" show where contestants get to travel into space and repair the shuttle.
It seems educational venues have lost focus entirely. The system is designed to factory pump students through and end result turns into a bunch of American Idol watching apathetical idiots. It amazes me when I have to explain something twice to someone (younger) that was drilled into my head when I went to school.
I expect that Oprah will have a show and voila - there will be TiVo's under everyone's chair ala how she gives other crap away during her shows.
:>
Oh yeah - don't argue with the significant other. They usually get their way...
Hey, as long as Natalie Portman is involved -- I'm game.
And that the British Pornographic Industry reported an 87% increase in downloads as well...
Yes - it is the standard two steps forward, one step back theory. Of course, we might have less sunlight, but hey, who needs it when we have enough lights on at night to be seen from space. I better go invest in some more sun lamps.
I'm waiting for the horribly selling game "(take a) whizz on the whiz" which will rank right up there with the encarta product itself imho.
Funny to hear Ballmer say something like this. Heck - Office for "Students and Teachers" is $129.99 [Blatent link to bestbuy ;)]... Guess we can't have that either.
Just buy a bare bones box and a hard drive, put Knoppix on it and call it a day.
I've found myself in the midst of this pickle as well. Most of our projects are centered around the fact that this is "free" (caveats apply) software. I now have to look at what my upgrade path is and how to let my user community now know that they have to suffer through at least an upgrade a year. I also am worried that if the release pattern for "Professional" continues every six to eight months, how will ISVs keep up with that as well as the ES/WS/AS lines? I need to be able to run things like Tivoli Storage Manager and the like that always lag behind in release certifications anyway. I don't want to be forced into the ES/WS/AS lines because of this.
They will create a large flying apparatus and fly directly out of the chicken coop. Of course this is after many failed attempts of digging under the fences. Oh wait, I'm having deja vu
This is quite true. The strategy that RH is planning is a constant release pool of "home/hobby" versions with no point releases. {Far be it from me to now condemn the .0 releases as I have in the past...} RH is pouring most of their resources into their broken apart Advanced Server line -- there will be an Enterprise Server line seen here, a WorkStation Server line seen here and the Advanced Server line seen here. These will have point releases along the way, but will lag behind that of the hobby/home use version because of ISV certifications. They believe that they will get stronger ISV certification if they stop mucking with the code base in such a short time (recall that 7.0 - 7.3 has all been released in roughly a year span) It often takes some ISV's six months to certify a piece of software.
It's a good thing Homer Simpson doesn't live in NYC... he had a tough time when Springfield was split into two area codes... Imagine if he had a cell phone in NYC!
I'm waiting for the EA World and EA Land. I want to rid the Sim Roller Coaster! Envision it now - Celeb's doing commercial spots with "You've just won the SuperBowl - now what are you going to do?" [big football dude] "I'm gonna go to EA World!" I can hardly wait!
What! No more "Greatest Bach hits?"