__/ [JEDIDIAH] on Wednesday 01 February 2006 22:30 \__
> On 2006-02-01, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> __/ [Nigel Feltham] on Wednesday 01 February 2006 19:13 \__
>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>> "Everyone on the IE team (even the lawyers who reviewed the license
>>>> terms below) wants to make your web browsing experience safer and
>>>> easier," the agreement says.
>>>> From there, it gets pretty unfunny pretty quick.
>>> Why, does it continue "but can't be bothered so here's another dose of
>>> the same unreliable crapware we've been forcing on you for the last 20
>> 20 years? Who were Microsoft in the 1980's? They had no monopoly or
>> momentum going for them at the time. The lock-in strategy was probably in
> Where the HELL were you.
> In the 80's I personally knew people that were making money
> reconditioning crappy old PC's to sell to people fixated on DOS. The mantra
> at the time was "It's gotta be DOS compatable man".
Yes, I remeber as a child. I was a victim too and I carry with me some of
that child abuse to this day.
>> diapers. Then came munchkins (&FUD), a blind eye to piracy, and dishonour
>> for standards, which in obscure ways evolved into lock-ins.
>> Many of us innocently fell for that 'charm' of Windows 3, including
> Charm and Windows 3x don't even belong in the same newsgroup
> together. That version of Windows did close to nothing to insulate you
> from the extremely user hostile crappiness of DOS. It even made the PC
> version of GEM look better by comparison.
I did not know anything either than a variety of DOS'es and IBM or
IBM-compatible computers at the time. Maybe it was cattle effect and maybe
that's all that the shops were willing to stock.
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Seeing bad movies only encourages them"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
11:55pm up 15 days 19:11, 11 users, load average: 1.16, 0.75, 0.55
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms