Let's face it, without OS/2 there never would have been a Windows 95. Rising competition from OS/2 caused Microsoft to release a very cut down version of Cairo, and step up it's anti-competitive strong arming of IHVs and ISVs.
Competition from Linux is the only reason stability has increased in Windows, and is driving MS to address security issues.
Apple still has very little competitive influence, since it doesn't look to expand much outside of it's niche market. OS X was surgery to stop the bleeding, not a grab at extra marketshare.
The most important trend in software is translation of implementation independent models into implementation dependent code.
The OSR only exists because software development has been of such poor quality for so long. Face it, if the software does what it's supposed to do, nobody would ever care about the code being open source.
Free software is a bird of a different color. Kind of like free anything.;-)
> Remember, OS2 was killed by the falling out of Microsoft and IBM.
This is just wrong. OS/2 was killed by the Microsoft monopoly coupled with IBM's mistaken view of the importance of the desktop. (Also due to the anti-trust restrictions (real and perceived) IBM was operating under.)
According to http://www.os2ezine.com/20030916/page_1.html
RBC uses NCR computers running Windows. Maybe this is one of the systems affected by Microsoft's latest patch.
They should follow the other Canadian banks and use OS/2.
Think about how much cash Microsoft has, and how little it would cut into that cash to give every CIO of a major company a $10k kickback for standardizing on Windows.
Ever wonder why companies can "stay the course" in the wake of yet another virus crippling the infrastructure?
Not too funny.:-(
> - It's easy to use (before someone chimes in with their anecdotal "this happened to me once" situation, yes, for the majority of people Windows is very easy to use)
Ever worked with a complete computer newbie? I have a father in-law, who bought his very first PC (Windows XP). I steered him towards Windows, because I knew he wanted to be able to go into stores and buy software. If not for that requirement, I would have set him up with eComStation or a Mac. If he didn't have some support (me) handy, the thing would be strictly a dust collector.
> - Easy to download and install drivers. > - As a result, easy to go down to Wal-mart and buy a new printer and have it work in less than a minute.
See above. The real test of ease of use comes from the brand new user. Windows fails this test, as do all the other current OSes. Apple probably comes the closest just because they have a one-button mouse.;-)
> - Endless software, including lots of freeware. There's more software for Windows because Windows is easier to develop for,
The real reason is the "applications barrier to entry" imposed by Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior. Software development on Windows isn't any easier than any other platform.
> with no endless list of competing, inconsistent toolkits that exist simply to reinvent the wheel yet again and introduce another "choice"
So there's only one software development toolset available for Windows?
> - Old software still works. My experiences from my father in-law's garage sale purchases is that you have a 50-50 chance of getting older software working on XP. Some software you have to go to the command line and install.
95% of the market is using Windows due to Microsoft's anti-competitive practices, and the now established "applications barrier to entry". Linux is only making in-roads becuase it is free and has good developer support trying to make more user friendly. Apple is more or less just maintaining marketshare. eComStation (OS/2) is having to resort to this virtual machine to try to maintain it's user levels.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's face it, without OS/2 there never would have been a Windows 95. Rising competition from OS/2 caused Microsoft to release a very cut down version of Cairo, and step up it's anti-competitive strong arming of IHVs and ISVs. Competition from Linux is the only reason stability has increased in Windows, and is driving MS to address security issues. Apple still has very little competitive influence, since it doesn't look to expand much outside of it's niche market. OS X was surgery to stop the bleeding, not a grab at extra marketshare.
The most important trend in software is translation of implementation independent models into implementation dependent code. The OSR only exists because software development has been of such poor quality for so long. Face it, if the software does what it's supposed to do, nobody would ever care about the code being open source. Free software is a bird of a different color. Kind of like free anything. ;-)
> Remember, OS2 was killed by the falling out of Microsoft and IBM. This is just wrong. OS/2 was killed by the Microsoft monopoly coupled with IBM's mistaken view of the importance of the desktop. (Also due to the anti-trust restrictions (real and perceived) IBM was operating under.)
... this sort of news used to be exciting to us OS/2 users, until we found out that it doesn't mean diddly! :-(
According to http://www.os2ezine.com/20030916/page_1.html RBC uses NCR computers running Windows. Maybe this is one of the systems affected by Microsoft's latest patch. They should follow the other Canadian banks and use OS/2.
Think about how much cash Microsoft has, and how little it would cut into that cash to give every CIO of a major company a $10k kickback for standardizing on Windows. Ever wonder why companies can "stay the course" in the wake of yet another virus crippling the infrastructure? Not too funny. :-(
http://www.ubersoft.net Ask Alex. :-)
> - It's easy to use (before someone chimes in with their anecdotal "this happened to me once" situation, yes, for the majority of people Windows is very easy to use)
;-)
Ever worked with a complete computer newbie? I have a father in-law, who bought his very first PC (Windows XP). I steered him towards Windows, because I knew he wanted to be able to go into stores and buy software. If not for that requirement, I would have set him up with eComStation or a Mac.
If he didn't have some support (me) handy, the thing would be strictly a dust collector.
> - Easy to download and install drivers.
> - As a result, easy to go down to Wal-mart and buy a new printer and have it work in less than a minute.
See above. The real test of ease of use comes from the brand new user. Windows fails this test, as do all the other current OSes. Apple probably comes the closest just because they have a one-button mouse.
> - Endless software, including lots of freeware. There's more software for Windows because Windows is easier to develop for,
The real reason is the "applications barrier to entry" imposed by Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior. Software development on Windows isn't any easier than any other platform.
> with no endless list of competing, inconsistent toolkits that exist simply to reinvent the wheel yet again and introduce another "choice"
So there's only one software development toolset available for Windows?
> - Old software still works.
My experiences from my father in-law's garage sale purchases is that you have a 50-50 chance of getting older software working on XP. Some software you have to go to the command line and install.
95% of the market is using Windows due to Microsoft's anti-competitive practices, and the now established "applications barrier to entry". Linux is only making in-roads becuase it is free and has good developer support trying to make more user friendly. Apple is more or less just maintaining marketshare. eComStation (OS/2) is having to resort to this virtual machine to try to maintain it's user levels.
Does anyone really care if the AOL and MSN user base is combined? Aren't 90%+ of the home PC users still on Windows?