Apple copying Windows? Ha. If you've tried the Windows Vista beta, you'd notice that the resemblence to OS-X (and some of the popular linux GUIs, but that's off topic) is almost scary. Take a look at the history of both companies to really see who copies who.
Back in the early 80's, Apple was almost solely responsible for popularizing the home PC, if not inventing it, with the Apple II's, LISA's, etc. Microsoft responded with Windows 1.0, 2.0, and the popular 3.0 & 3.1, which weren't much more than a DOS shell that looked almost exactly like Apple's first GUIs, which came a couple years earlier. And Apple actually made their own machines. Steve Jobs had a lot to do with this, especially in the mid-80's when he merged his NeXT project with Apple. Ever since the beginning, Apple has been ahead of Microsoft (as far as I'm concerned) in every aspect, except perhaps with their hold on the market, and that's paritally because Apple chooses to spend their money and resources on R&D instead of marketing tactics.
Nowadays, it's getting harder not to copy each other, as well as other companies & OS's, because the seemingly main goal is to make it look "prettier" than the others. Reliability and functionality are already rather attainable (except with the remaining bugs in Vista...oops) so the focus now becomes what the consumer will consider more when shopping for a new PC.
Stable? Sure. Can I do what I want with it? More. But this one looks prettier!
"The first TCP/IP wide area network was operational by 1 January 1983, when the United States' National Science Foundation (NSF) constructed a university network backbone that would later become the NSFNet. (This date is held by some to be technically that of the birth of the Internet.) It was then followed by the opening of the network to commercial interests in 1985. Important separate networks that offered gateways into, then later merged into the NSFNet include Usenet, Bitnet and the various commercial and educational X.25 Compuserve and JANET. Telenet (later called Sprintnet), was a large privately-funded national computer network with free dialup access in cities throughout the U.S. that had been in operation since the 1970s."
Granted, this is from Wikepedia, a not-completely-reliable source, but the information and timeline about Telenet, Usenet, NSF, etc. is all pretty accurate, as it matches a lot of other sources I researched.
Also keep in mind that we're talking about the birth of the publicly-viewable WWW here, not the birth of inter- or intra-networking, which came far earlier. To me, the "internet" we know, defined, is the medium and ability of public access to information at a remote site or location. So, in this sense, Telenet and similar companies were the first to provide public internet access, albeit limited dial-up, starting in the 1970's, thus 'giving birth' the internet medium. The 'web', by all other research I have done, also seems to be a product of these companies a short time later - something not mentioned in the Wiki article, which instead points to the NSF creating a small WAN at a university campus.
Although there are a lot of facts and timestamps, the "birthday" of the web is really just speculation. I don't think it's something that can be officially celebrated on a specific date. One thing is definitely true - it dates back much more than 15 years. The only reason this date is used is because it marks when it was released to the mainstream public as a service.
Not to be a troll (yet), but aren't such articles supposed to come at the end of the time period that they specify? As far as I know, the year is only half-over, unless one of the products of 2006 was a time machine, and that surely would've made the list.
...Or would it have? Perhaps it flopped during beta-testing by creating a lapse in the space/time continuum and disappeared in it. Who knows?
Hmm, is anyone else getting the feeling of déjà vu?
Now, to be a troll about the new/. layout, since everyone else is. I think it's rather well done; it looks nice and spiffy on my Firefox. Kudos to the contest winner for a job well done.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple copying Windows? Ha. If you've tried the Windows Vista beta, you'd notice that the resemblence to OS-X (and some of the popular linux GUIs, but that's off topic) is almost scary. Take a look at the history of both companies to really see who copies who.
Back in the early 80's, Apple was almost solely responsible for popularizing the home PC, if not inventing it, with the Apple II's, LISA's, etc. Microsoft responded with Windows 1.0, 2.0, and the popular 3.0 & 3.1, which weren't much more than a DOS shell that looked almost exactly like Apple's first GUIs, which came a couple years earlier. And Apple actually made their own machines. Steve Jobs had a lot to do with this, especially in the mid-80's when he merged his NeXT project with Apple. Ever since the beginning, Apple has been ahead of Microsoft (as far as I'm concerned) in every aspect, except perhaps with their hold on the market, and that's paritally because Apple chooses to spend their money and resources on R&D instead of marketing tactics.
Nowadays, it's getting harder not to copy each other, as well as other companies & OS's, because the seemingly main goal is to make it look "prettier" than the others. Reliability and functionality are already rather attainable (except with the remaining bugs in Vista...oops) so the focus now becomes what the consumer will consider more when shopping for a new PC.
Stable? Sure. Can I do what I want with it? More. But this one looks prettier!
"The first TCP/IP wide area network was operational by 1 January 1983, when the United States' National Science Foundation (NSF) constructed a university network backbone that would later become the NSFNet. (This date is held by some to be technically that of the birth of the Internet.) It was then followed by the opening of the network to commercial interests in 1985. Important separate networks that offered gateways into, then later merged into the NSFNet include Usenet, Bitnet and the various commercial and educational X.25 Compuserve and JANET. Telenet (later called Sprintnet), was a large privately-funded national computer network with free dialup access in cities throughout the U.S. that had been in operation since the 1970s."
Granted, this is from Wikepedia, a not-completely-reliable source, but the information and timeline about Telenet, Usenet, NSF, etc. is all pretty accurate, as it matches a lot of other sources I researched.
Also keep in mind that we're talking about the birth of the publicly-viewable WWW here, not the birth of inter- or intra-networking, which came far earlier. To me, the "internet" we know, defined, is the medium and ability of public access to information at a remote site or location. So, in this sense, Telenet and similar companies were the first to provide public internet access, albeit limited dial-up, starting in the 1970's, thus 'giving birth' the internet medium. The 'web', by all other research I have done, also seems to be a product of these companies a short time later - something not mentioned in the Wiki article, which instead points to the NSF creating a small WAN at a university campus.
Although there are a lot of facts and timestamps, the "birthday" of the web is really just speculation. I don't think it's something that can be officially celebrated on a specific date. One thing is definitely true - it dates back much more than 15 years. The only reason this date is used is because it marks when it was released to the mainstream public as a service.
That's quite a distance to travel for addiction councelling. Of course, if I travelled atop my Undead Steed then I'd arrive there 100% faster!
I wonder how Earth feels about that.
Not to be a troll (yet), but aren't such articles supposed to come at the end of the time period that they specify? As far as I know, the year is only half-over, unless one of the products of 2006 was a time machine, and that surely would've made the list.
...Or would it have? Perhaps it flopped during beta-testing by creating a lapse in the space/time continuum and disappeared in it. Who knows?
/. layout, since everyone else is. I think it's rather well done; it looks nice and spiffy on my Firefox. Kudos to the contest winner for a job well done.
Hmm, is anyone else getting the feeling of déjà vu?
Now, to be a troll about the new