To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Commodore and Atari would have said the same thing about using compatible devices, OSes, and architectures. They learned a hard lesson. It's about time Apple and Microsoft learnt it too.
Atari and Commodore died because they where obsolete,
having become obsolete because they couldn't compete with non-proprietary technologies...
in your theory FreeDos should be the dominating OS
Erm, no. In my theory (a) FreeDOS is even more obscure than Linux, (b) it doesn't provide anywhere near the capabilities of that OS (or Windows), and (c) Windows is the dominant OS because it is the successor of MS-DOS both as a programming platform, as Microsoft's flagship OS, and in having been installed on all PC's (an open hardware architecture) from 1990 onwards. That allowed it to wipe out all the other proprietary OSes for the PC (which were farther along in development than Linux when they were killed) except the PC Unixes - and Linux killed them.
having become obsolete because they couldn't compete with non-proprietary technologies...
What other alternatives?
But if FreeDos was Open Source why anybody was interesting in give it new life?, so Open Sourcing cannot be taking as a sure succes, right?
Edited 2006-10-05 16:37







Member since:
2005-07-28
Commodore and Atari would have said the same thing about using compatible devices, OSes, and architectures. They learned a hard lesson. It's about time Apple and Microsoft learnt it too.
Atari and Commodore died because they where obsolete, in your theory FreeDos should be the dominating OS and look, its almost dead despite being open source.
Edited 2006-10-05 16:23