Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Mar 2007 23:02 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 221352
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
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
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-02-11
I just can't help myself. When Windows 1.0 came out, not only wasn't the Mac able to run more programs at a time, but neither was Windows 1.0 which didn't even have windows (sic!). The usefulness of Macs did come from the fact that some smaller applications, like the oh-so-famous calculator widget (desklets was their name in thos times?) could be ran along with the big application in front. As you note, in fact, the Switcher came out a few months after Windows.
How useful Windows 1.0 was for its audience can be seen in the number of copies it and Windows 2.0 sold. It was really not until Windows 3.0 that MS came even close, if not to MacOS (and surely not to the likes of Workbench or the already-around Unix workstations), at least to the likes of GEM.
BluenoseJake, you may want to know that widgets existed a long time before Konfabulator ;-).
As far as Lisa is concerned, I'd rather guess that the real problem was its price. A personal computer is a personal computer, and if a large institution can afford to pay -- how much was it? 9,995$? for a fscking computer, I can hardly imagine a home user spending that much in 1982.