Re: www.microsoft.com sure needs a lot of silicon

In article <335F8C0F.14FEDF23_at_grim.reaper.org>, Grim Reaper <grim_at_grim.reaper.org> wrote:
>
>Srinivas Thimmiah wrote:
>
>|
>>
>> The tragedy is that Unix could have been at the stage that
>> NT is right now had Unix vendors agreed to an API level standard
>> many moons ago, but their hatred for Microsoft was only exceeded
>> by their hatred for each other (remember how OSF got started)?
>
>Since I'm new to the group, don't suppose you care to explain the OSF???
>to me.

    Didn't realize that I've been in the industry so long that people haven't heard about the wars for control over UNIX. If my memory serves me right, when AT&T had control over UNIX, they made a deal with Sun to standardize on one version which didn't sit quite well with DEC, HP et.al. who then proposed their own under the OSF (open software foundation) banner? One of the many "standards" that UNIX went through.

>
>> I hope UNIX vendors realize that they are not competing against
>> Microsoft but against the likes of Dell, Compaq, Gateway et. al..
>
>And as for this statement, you are half right, the reason Microslop is
>so popular with the companies like Dell, Compaq, gateway, etc is the
>fact MS is a hell of alot easier for the Computer newbie who has just
>bought a computer, and knows absolutely nothing, hey, just point and
>click, if you have a problem phone there technical support (I work as
>tech support for an ISP). I use linux, and it stays up 24 hours a day,
>as a mail server for the friends I give mail acounts to. So I know linux
>pretty well, and in the beginning I had a bitch of a time getting
>started.

    I doubt that many "Computer newbie"s will be buying servers (the fastest area of growth for these companies and with which UNIX vendors are battling it out) without knowing more than how to point and click. You can burn me at the stake for heresy, but perhaps the server field is now ready to standardize on ONE version of OS (just like the PC industry standardized on MS/DOS) for all the advantages of economies of scale and the only company which is delivering a solution (however bad it might be) is Microslop.

>What does all this rambling mean, it means a user will buy a computer
>that is easy to use, Bill Gates seems to have satisfied this need, what
>the user does not know, is that the fact MS products are about the most
>inferior products on the market, and the fact that Bill Gates has the
>world at his feed, was by bullying them into submission by threats that
>they would not support that manufacturers equipment if they did not use
>MS products (started with MS Dos), hence came the OEM agreement.

   Much as I hate Microsoft products, don't forget that other companies (most notably Apple) were at various times over the last 15 years in a good position to dethrone Microsoft but simply weren't able to figure out whether they wanted a) to be either a software company or a hardware company, (b) to be a high-end or low-end vendor or (c) short term profits or long term survival.

Regards. Received on Thu Apr 24 1997 - 00:00:00 CDT