Gaming Happy birthday Windows.

[Urza]

would like a word with you, Apple.

And?

Both Gates and Jobs saw the presentation from Xerox PARC about the same time. Gates blew it off, Jobs saw the potential and made it his primary objective to bring it to the consumers. Once the Lisa hit markets, Gates realized his mistake and scrambled to make a new partnership with IBM to create their own implementation.

Microsoft of course saying "fuck you" to IBM halfway into development and releasing Windows 1.0.

 

[_Chaz_]

would like a word with you, Apple.

And?

Both Gates and Jobs saw the presentation from Xerox PARC about the same time. Gates blew it off, Jobs saw the potential and made it his primary objective to bring it to the consumers. Once the Lisa hit markets, Gates realized his mistake and scrambled to make a new partnership with IBM to create their own implementation.

Microsoft of course saying "fuck you" to IBM halfway into development and releasing Windows 1.0.

So when Microsoft steals something, it's called "unscrupulous business practices", but when Apple steals something, it's called "bringing it to the consumers"?

I think I understand now, thank you for clearing that up.

 

[Urza]

So when Microsoft steals something, it's called "unscrupulous business practices", but when Apple steals something, it's called "bringing it to the consumers"?

I think I understand now, thank you for clearing that up.

Assumptions much?

The "unscrupulous business practices" I was referring to have nothing to do with the PARC demonstration. Xerox didn't put any focus on this research project, nor did they patent any of the technology developed there. From a creative standpoint the theft of ideas is reprehensible, however Xerox wasn't taking it anywhere so it was just as well.

No, the practices I was referring to are creating a joint software partnership with a company you have a long history with, half-assing it while developing a competing product in secret, and then reneging on the deal and crushing them. Or how about paying off OEMs to not include competitor software in their shipping machines? Eschewing any and all open standards, making everything proprietary to lock in software vendors? There's enough amoral direction from Gates to fill books upon books.

You obviously know very little about this history, and are pulling at straw trying to start an argument for some reason.

 

[mysticwaterfall]

^I would hardly say that MS developed a competing product in secret and then turned away from IBM right away. It's hard to develop a project "in secret" which had 3 major releases spanning years before it became popular. (With Windows 3.x)

One could make an argument about the whole development of NT coming from MS's work on OS 2 turning into NT, but by the point the whole relationship had gone south anyways. Which, IBM certainly wasn't blameless in as you would have everybody believe. There insistence on 16 bit protected mode only in OS 2 1.3 just because they had sold a lot of them was retarded, amongst other things.