To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Back then, Microsoft was considered the plucky young visonary upstart sticking it to the no-result daydreamers and imaginationless old stodgy businessmen alike... sort of the way George Lucas was considered back when he made THX 1138.
Heck, to illustrate the kind of competition they fought against: I had an IBM PC from the early 90s once. Their cases were kept locked by special keys that only Authorized IBM Distributors could open, so if as much as a cable came loose, you'd have to go back to them and pay to get it repaired -- and they typically would only repair it for a few years, after which you were expected to upgrade again. The case had a single point of control (somehow, they tied all the connectors to that one key), and if you tried to open your case any other way, you would not be able to get your computer repaired. Freedom from this sort of hardware lockin was revolutionary.
Not to mention they made software that other companies used to grow and thrive. How many companies used some form of MSBasic, or implemented the MSX standard?
Evil as Microsoft is considered nowadays, they slew far greater evils in the marketplace.




Member since:
2006-04-07
> I believe that Microsoft is really missing out on a
> stratagy that could LEGITIMATELY beat Linux and give
> the company the good name it had in the late 1980s by
> not following a stratagy like this now that their
> proprietary OS treadmill is at an end.
Microsoft had a good name?