Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Mar 2007 23:02 UTC
Permalink for comment 220917
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-06-26
Oh do shut up. Windows has been behind competitiors every year, year in year out. When Windows 1.0 was out, Lisa and Macs were years ahead.
When Windows 1.0 came out the Mac couldn't even run more than one program at a time. The Switcher that allowed task switching didn't arrive until 86 and the Multifinder didn't come until even later. The Lisa and Amiga obviously had Windows 1.0 beat though, but the design goals were obviously different. Windows 1.0 needed to run on common IBM compatible x86 hardware and be able to run DOS programs and these goals limited Windows 1.0 for obvious reasons. This is not to say that Windows 1.0 would necessarily been the best desktop OS at the time had those restrictions not been in place, but I think it's an imporant consideration when making such evaluations. I love technology for technology's sake as much as the next geek, but it needs to be accessible and accepted by its target audience to be useful.