Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 12th Jul 2009 14:03 UTC
Google Even though everyone's talking about it, fact of the matter is that Google's Chrome OS is currently nothing more than an internet announcement, with a supposed release date of somewhere in 2010. Google chief executive Eric Schmidt has now stated that netbooks running Chrome OS could appear as early as this year. In addition, Schmidt also talked about his position at Apple's board of directors.
E-mail Print r 1   · Read More · 55 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 373034
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: can't wait
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 12th Jul 2009 21:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: can't wait"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

How about getting a computer on every desk, in every home? I find that a pretty big innovation.

In addition, they pioneered the model where software is not tied to the hardware (very uncommon when they started in the home business), which played a major - if not the only - role in making computing affordable.

People always say "yeah well, someone else would've done it if MS didn't do it", but that's a nonsense argument. You might as well say the same about Einstein's Theory of General Relativity.

Innovation isn't just about features, it's also about concepts.

I won't go into your Windows 7 remark, because I don't want to emberass you by listing the amount of inconsistencies in for instance Mac OS X.

Edited 2009-07-12 21:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: can't wait
by sbergman27 on Sun 12th Jul 2009 21:52 in reply to "RE[3]: can't wait"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

How about getting a computer on every desk, in every home? I find that a pretty big innovation.

I dispute that one, for sure. It's hard to imagine an alternate history in which that did *not* happen. Once IBM released the IBM PC as an open hardware platform it was pretty much a given. And IBM's decision to let MS hold the ownership of DOS guaranteed that Microsoft would be the one to ride that wave. (All that is in retrospect, of course. But it looks pretty obvious now.) Maybe, in later years, they've had some innovative *business practices* which helped them do that. But even there, companies like Standard Oil probably hold prior art.

If they had been really, really stupid, they could have failed to ride the wave. I'll give them that much.

But it is ever-falling hardware prices which have resulted in the ubiquity of PC's. That and the Internet... the significance of which MS actually managed to miss until late in the game.

Edited 2009-07-12 22:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: can't wait
by cjcoats on Mon 13th Jul 2009 15:35 in reply to "RE[4]: can't wait"
cjcoats Member since:
2006-04-16

Imagine if DEC hadn't seriously dropped the ball when Apple wanted to use the Alpha for the Mac (instead of its eventual PPC). And imagine if _that_ had been an open hardware platform.
<P>
But I'm dreaming...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: can't wait
by kaiwai on Sun 12th Jul 2009 22:00 in reply to "RE[3]: can't wait"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

How about getting a computer on every desk, in every home? I find that a pretty big innovation.


Oh Jesus f--king Christ, I can't believe that of all people you're suckered into this "Microsoft created the PC revolution" horse shit. If Microsoft didn't exist then Apple, Atari, Amstrad or some other vendor would have taken the position of Microsoft. 20 years ago computers were accessible; hell, I remember in my area alone filled with lower middle to middle income people owning Amiga 500's and swapping disks to get the latest games.

So please, don't humour me with this horse shit that some how we should be all bending over and worshipping Microsoft for something that was an inevitable - Microsoft were in the right place at the right time with competitors too inept to do anything about it.

In addition, they pioneered the model where software is not tied to the hardware (very uncommon when they started in the home business), which played a major - if not the only - role in making computing affordable.


Make computers affordable! what a monumental load of absolute horse shit. I remember in Australia in 1988 when the cost of a PC at the best of times was at least 2 times the amount of an Amiga and didn't even do 10% of what an Amiga could accomplish.

So please, cut the crap - I don't know what the f--k you've been smoking but the reality is that 20 years ago the PC was an over priced novelty that only gained any traction because, as I said, the competitors were so shocking at getting their stuff into the enterprise. It is the enterprise that dictates the direction of the end user - if the enterprise is using PC's, then by crikey, end users will be doing the same thing.

I've cut the rest of your post because it adds nothing to the discussion what so ever. Windows 7 is an abortion when it comes to UI consistency; 8 generations of widget kits, numerous different look and feels, no consistent short cut keys - different with each application. Its a disaster area and in the 20 years it has existed Microsoft hasn't raised a damn finger to address those issues.

Yes, I want my damn operating system to look eye pleasing and well designed both at the core and the UI level - Microsoft fails monumentally when compared to the effort that volunteers put in when compared to GNOME. At least in the case of GNOME they make an effort to conform to some sort of HIG, and when HIG violations are found in applications, the issues are addressed rather than ignored for 3 release cycles.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: can't wait
by lqsh on Sun 12th Jul 2009 22:16 in reply to "RE[3]: can't wait"
lqsh Member since:
2007-01-01

Didn't IBM approach Microsoft when they were looking for an OS for their PCs? So here, IBM innovated by pursuing this relationship. Show me the innovation.

MS-DOS was based on QDOS. Show me the innovation.

Windows 1.0 borrowed UI elements (legally I think) from Apple. Windows GUI was based on Apple's Lisa and early Mac OS. Show me the innovation.

From Windows 3.0 on, Microsoft was pretty much playing catch up with Apple on the GUI front. Show me the innovation.

Microsoft's dominance is due to a good sales team and anti-competitive business deals, not innovation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corp...

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: can't wait
by Adurbe on Mon 13th Jul 2009 10:56 in reply to "RE[4]: can't wait"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

IBM did approach Microsoft.

Microsoft brokered a deal where they could resell their OS to multiple manufacturers. Famously, IBM let them as there was 'no money in software'

Windows copied Lisa. Lisa copied Xerox. Xerox copied NLS yadda yadda yadda...

A few of the things that microsoft have developed which I think are industry leading

Visual Studio
DirectX
Windows 2000 (MS made something you could call a server!)
Exchange

My examples may/may not suit your criteria for 'inovation' but in my opinion were not all ground breaking but were all industry defining products

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: can't wait
by james_parker on Tue 14th Jul 2009 20:14 in reply to "RE[3]: can't wait"
james_parker Member since:
2005-06-29

In addition, they pioneered the model where software is not tied to the hardware (very uncommon when they started in the home business), which played a major - if not the only - role in making computing affordable.


Microsoft adopted this model from Digital Research and CP/M.

Reply Parent Score: 1