View Single Post
Old 15 August 2002, 18:30   #37
Twistin'Ghost
Give up the ghost
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: U$A
Age: 26
Posts: 4,662
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Microsoft got to where it is today because of windows 3.1 and the software asociated with it... not because of web browsers for windows 9x that wasnt even created at the time.
To begin with, I disagree. There were many steps on the ladder that got M$ where it is today. And those steps are still being added to even now. You cannot credit it to Win3.1 - that version added large chunks to their customer list, but Win95 had a far greater impact. People bought computers just to run Win95. Regardless, I never suggested that my comments on their browser takeover was the pivotal point in M$ domination...you just merged two schools of thought from my message. I was merely covering one aspect in which M$ did not innovate. Unless you think anything in IE broke ground technologically. They certainly weren't the designers of how a browser should look and feel!
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
I dont credit M$ with alot of innovation, just smart buisiness practices early on. The might not have invented alot of technology but they did have the nack to see where things were going and get there first.
That makes no sense. If they didn't invent the technology (in other words, steal someone else's idea and release a buggier version of it bundled into your OS, making it the default by association and making it a bother to replace) then they didn't "get there first". They used an unfair advantage and gained dominance based upon end users' careless acceptance of that which is pre-installed. And I am not just talking browsers.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Bundling an office suite was a very smart thing to do early on when everybody was buing each package seperate from different venders. Each with its own interface, some even using dos, not being able to cut from one app and pasting into another etc.
Sorry, but the clipboard pre-dates Windows and Microsoft's implementation into their commercial apps. Yet somehow, every time M$ "gets their first", they get all the glory and called "innovators". No matter how much money M$ has, nor how much power, they can't seem to make one thing happen: creating something from their own ideas.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Whats wrong with buying companies out anyway? I do admit strong arming PC makers to only sell their windows product isnt nice, but they didnt start that until they owned the OS market anyway. As far as NT/2000 not being their own technology, well IBM didnt push OS/2 at all so thats IBM's fault by screwing over their own customers.
More hyperbole here. M$ doesn't have to strongarm PC makers to include Windows and they haven't needed to do this for some time. They strongarmed them to include their own apps installed as opposed to their competition. And you seem to think that if a company doesn't satifactorily market their product, another company can claim the technology as their own.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Proprietary HTML tags.. humm nobody ever put a gun to somebodies head and said to use those tags did they, something in them must have been worth using or nobody would have.

I expected a better response than this...
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
The reason M$ is where its at and Commodore/Amiga is dead is not because of technology.. its marketing. Some companies do it well and others fade into oblivion.
It used to only be marketing, I agree. Nowadays, it a combination of that and shrewd, smarmy business practices.
Twistin'Ghost is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.07764 seconds with 9 queries