In comp.os.linux.advocacy, nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on 29 Apr 2007 12:10:14 -0700
<1177873814.636922.255770@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> He also estimated that half
>> > a megabyte of RAM would be enough for everyone. Either he's a fool, or he
>> > thinks wishfully.
>>
>> You're obviously the fool here. The 1/2 megabyte of RAM limit (640k)
>> was imposed by the hardware design of the original PC. It had
>> absolutely nothing to do with Gates.
>>
>> You ought to try posting facts instead of lies sometime.
>
> Roy never said that Gates was responsible for the 640K limit, just
> that he predicted it would be enough.
Roy is in error, as it turns out. (I thought the same
thing until I found this out. Bill Gates in fact had
to go on record denying he made that statement 15 years
later -- in the BloomBerg Business News, 1996-Jan-19,
and then a year after that in WIRED, 1997-Jan-16 -- and
AFAICT no one's ever found the original report where he
did make that statement to the press.)
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates#Misattributions
> He's not lying about that.
No, but he is in error. This is not in itself a bad thing, just
a correctable situation. ;-)
> If
> you want to say that Gates' error in this case was no worse that that
> of Intel, then that's agreed. In any case Roy's main point is that
> Gates has often been wrong in his predictions about the future of
> computing, and in this he is correct.
Agreed here. Of course Gates (or the unidentified person in lieu
thereof) is not the only one who made such interesting errors.
http://www.thoughtmechanics.com/2007/04/21/some-very-funny-and-totally-wrong-predictions-of-the-past/
(http://digg.com/offbeat_news/Some_very_funny_and_totally_wrong_predictions_of_the_past)
Ken Olson in 1977 is probably extremely chagrined that
he didn't try to pursue the online gaming market. ;-)
(Or any other home computer related market, a GUI-based
OS in particular.)
Another collection:
http://wilk4.com/humor/humore10.htm
though it does misattribute the 1981 statement.
> Just to add another example,
> there is Microsoft's miserable experience with security, all because
> they never foresaw the security implications of having their OS
> attached to the internet. Microsoft's "chief software architect" has
> been brilliant at marketing and screwing the competition, but
> technically mediocre.
>
Amiga was technically excellent and mediocrely marketed, to the point
of killing Commodore.
It's a sad world.
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Useless C++ Programming Idea #1123133:
void f(FILE * fptr, char *p) { fgets(p, sizeof(p), fptr); }
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
