In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer
<spam@xxxxxxx>
wrote
on Mon, 14 May 2007 08:40:18 +0100
<5cglh4-jeq.ln1@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>> Why Doesn't Microsoft Have A Cult Religion?
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | "Now Windows is just part of the PC," Enderle said. "There are still
>> | those that admire the company and Gates, but the passion that exists
>> | around FreeBSD, Linux, and Apple simply has no analog in Windows.
>> | Great products come from passion -- when Windows lost that, it lost
>> | its heart."
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/05/why_doesnt_micr.html
>
> Windows "lost" its passion?
>
> Did it ever have any?
Word was presumably once best in class...though that was
a long long time ago. (Unfortunately, Google is being
reticent again, so I can't say exactly when at this point.
Certainly not in 2003.)
There might have been some passionate workers around BOB
internally, though the actual product came out with a
very loud thud, and is reminiscent of the Edsel in some
respects. (It had one redeeming feature, if one can call
it that: it was sickeningly cutesy. Yes, even Scuzzo the Rat.)
>
> I recall Windows as far back as 3.1, and from then up to and including
> Vista (beta) I have felt many things about Windows, but passionate was
> never one of them.
Windows 3.1 was an interesting hack which took off. It was
one of the first environments able to take advantage of
extended or expanded (I never can keep the two of them
apart) memory. Not sure which came first: Win3.1 or Desqview/X.
It's clear, however, which one won in the marketplace, though
X has come back with a vengenance on a far more powerful multitasking
platform than MS-DOS (namely, Linux).
>
> The Spectrum, yes. The Amiga, yes. Linux, yes. The rest ... <yawn>.
>
I can attest to the last two; can't say I've ever worked on a Spectrum.
:-)
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
fortune: not found
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
