RE: MS Rumors (closing statements?)

Laws, David (lawsd@magic.dcrt.nih.gov)
Sun, 23 Nov 1997 12:52:35 -0500

Most (if not 99.9%) of anti-Microsoft hype is due purely to the herd
mentality. It all started YEARS ago when MS was still located in New
Mexico. Bill et al wrote a BASIC compiler for the early micros. The MS
boys used to drive around in a van and demonstrate it to try and sell
it. This was when most systems used tape for uploading and storage.
They visited the Homebrew Computer Club in Silicon Valley and in their
excitement a tape was stolen (supposedly one that would run on the
pre-apples being developed by Woz and Jobs). The tape was duplicated
and given away free to all who wanted it. Bill found out and wrote a
letter to the early Dr. Dobb's journal (it wasn't called that
then...forgot exactly the name) about how whoever took the tape was a
thief and blah blah. This did not sit well with the early enthusiasts
who basically saw all software as public domain.

All the wannabe's of the world just got onboard the anti-Bill campaign
to 'belong'.

The rest is history.

-drl
david_laws@nih.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Lorrey [SMTP:retroman@together.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 5:39 AM
To: extropians@extropy.com
Subject: Re: MS Rumors (closing statements?)

I hear from people who want to do business with mocrosoft,
develop apps
for windows, etc. but are too cheap to get the full microsoft
training
in developing apps for windows (so what if they charge a lot,
its their
proprietary info, and they can charge whatever they want). Yet
they have
the gall to complain that there are "undocumented" features that
they
didn't know about. DUH. SOunds like a candidate for welfare...
>
> But maybe these people are all incredebly naive and don't
understand IT at
> all ;-). Sort of like us poor IBM-ers. Why is it that every
time M$ outfits
> a company with NT they come to IBM (or another IT consultant
company) for
> help with their suddenly HUGE security and systems-management
problems? Why
> is it that it takes three times as long to get Systems
Management software
> working in an NT Client-Server
(if_you_insist_on_calling_it_that)
> environment?.

maybe because IBM's systems management software was optimized
for OS/2,
that hugely successful operating system that spelled IBM's
demise.

>
> Isn't the fact that there are lot's of anti-MS sites around
saying something?
> I've never come accross an anti-IBM site (Or HP, Apple, SGI,
SUN, Corel....).
> But if anyone can locate one I'll be most interested in it's
content.

Its really not polite to kick someone when they are down....