Reasons I am GRATEFUL for Windows....

[traded]

I learned about overclcking on Windows based machines. I’m not sure if there has ever been a Mac where overclocking was as easy to do as it is on most Windows machines....sometimes I really wish I had that level of freedom with my MBP (in OSX)...Though I must admit, that maybe those capabilities exist and I simply don’t know how to implement them.

 

[cwa107]

The Amiga had all of these things way before Windows came out. Amiga was the one who brought it to the masses. Multitasking, task switching, minimize, maximize, etc... you name it the Amiga had it. But IBM took them out in one hit.

....

One thing I'm happy for in owning my windows PC... is I finally know what everyone is referring to when they say the "blue screen of death".

The Amiga OS (Workbench), MacOS and to a lesser degree, Windows were all children of the original XeroxPARC GUI design. They were pretty much developed in tandem and borrowed ideas from that design. I wouldn't say that Amiga pioneered any of those ideas, but they did do their own unique implementation (the original designer pretty much locked himself away from outside influence to avoid any legal ramifications).

I was a huge Amiga advocate. I ran Amigas all the way up until about 1995 when Gateway acquired the technology and pretty much shelved it. It was unique in its time. I wouldn't say that IBM killed the Amiga - Commodore, by virtue of its extremely horrific management and marketing killed the Amiga. It's a testament to its design and power that it did as well as it did considering how many times Commodore shot themselves in the foot.

If you really want to have an understanding of the early home computer wars and where a lot of this technology came from that we take for granted today and how it was developed, read On The Edge: The Spectacular Rise and Fall of Commodore. It starts out a little slow, but is an engaging and well-written book that doesn't suffer from some of the Silicon Valley revisionism that a lot of similar books do.

 

[baggss]

Windows offered a path to a GUI with the ability to run existing DOS applications. This was especially important for businesses who were already invested in DOS apps. People who worked with DOS/Windows at work liked to have the same thing at home for ease of use and compatibility as well. The other difference between Windows and the other systems is that Windows did not require you to buy a PC from IBM or MS. You could build your own machine to your liking and then load Windows. You can try and discount the contributions that MS has given to the computing world all you want but the truth will still be there. That does not mean that Microsoft is the best at everything but they do offer the broadest appeal.

The path to a GUI was offered by MS at deep discounts to business in order to lock them into the MS cycle. Cheap to get into, very difficult to get out of. MS's marketing wants you to believe that compatibility between home and work was a big issue but in reality it was not. People go with what they know and that is what MS was banking on. I've been using PCs at work and Macs at home for over 12 years now. Windows was not the only OS in town that didn't require you to by a PC from a vendor (ever heard of OS/2?), but 15 years ago 95% of the computer using public did not know how to build their own and were not so inclined. Where do you think Dell and Gateway came from?

Yes, the truth is out there. The truth is that MS forced the industry into a set of standards that still apply to day. Sadly those standards were not arrived at by an open consortium but by MS's backhanded tactics, shady dealing and downright illegal activities. MS forced the industry into what we know today because of greed, not for any other reason. Yes, the truth is there and no amount of glossing it over is going to change it.

All that being said, no one can say where the industry would be without MS and how it has shaped the computing world.

 

[Amen-Moses]

The Amiga was an amazing piece of hardware and software. It did not, however, bring anything to the masses because it never reached the masses.

You have to be joking here, the Amiga was easily the top selling home computer system of it's time closely followed by Atari in second place, noone could afford a PC at home back then!

Amen-Moses

 

[Amen-Moses]

The path to a GUI was offered by MS ..

Anyone remember GEM Desktop? Surely that predated any offering from MS.

Amen-Moses

 

[NaplesBill]

The path to a GUI was offered by MS at deep discounts to business in order to lock them into the MS cycle. Cheap to get into, very difficult to get out of. MS's marketing wants you to believe that compatibility between home and work was a big issue but in reality it was not. People go with what they know and that is what MS was banking on. I've been using PCs at work and Macs at home for over 12 years now. Windows was not the only OS in town that didn't require you to by a PC from a vendor (ever heard of OS/2?), but 15 years ago 95% of the computer using public did not know how to build their own and were not so inclined. Where do you think Dell and Gateway came from?

Yes, the truth is out there. The truth is that MS forced the industry into a set of standards that still apply to day. Sadly those standards were not arrived at by an open consortium but by MS's backhanded tactics, shady dealing and downright illegal activities. MS forced the industry into what we know today because of greed, not for any other reason. Yes, the truth is there and no amount of glossing it over is going to change it.

All that being said, no one can say where the industry would be without MS and how it has shaped the computing world.

I an assure you that MOST people I know use Windows and PCs for the very reason you stated(which is essentially the same as what I stated) about people using what they know. That in essence means compatibility between work and home. Most people do not want to learn multiple OSs or multiple applications. I have been supporting systems, users, servers, etc. since Dos and I can tell you with 100% certainty that most people chose to use Windows at home because they used it at work. I have used every version of OS/2 from version 2.1. I have also used many flavors of Linux, every version of Windows from version 2.0 and I've even loaded other variations of Unix. Both you and I are the exceptions and not the rule. And yes, there are many other options over building your own PC. That choice and the price points forced by that competition are a large part of the reason why PCs are more successful. It's also that choice and variation that cause PCs to have more issues than a closed architecture like Macs.

Microsoft has no doubt become the giant they are through strong arm tactics. Many of those tactics lacked any morality whatsoever. They used the FUD factor to the extreme. I can think of several instances where they purposely disabled competitors products at the DOS kernel level. They are far from perfect but they have advanced computing in many good ways. That is the truth I speak of. I love to hate MS just as much as the next guy but I also realize that many of their contributions have benefited most of us. Microsofts greed goes all the way back to OS/2 and Windows 3.0. Windows 3.0 was supposed to be the stepping stone to OS/2 and Presentation Manager. In Windows 3.0 it was called Program Manager but was essentially the same thing. It was intended to introduce people to the GUI concept and be the stepping stone to get to OS/2. I personally feel that the world would have benefited greatly if the original Windows to OS/2 path had been followed. I am a big OS/2 fan and I wish IBM had been better able to market it. IBM marketing is the second worse there is next to Commodore.

 

[NaplesBill]

You have to be joking here, the Amiga was easily the top selling home computer system of it's time closely followed by Atari in second place, noone could afford a PC at home back then!

Amen-Moses

It didn't reach the masses. It may have been top selling but that was when the home computing market was in it's infancy and did not represent a very large percentage of the population. They had a great window of opportunity but the blew it. As I said the Amiga was ahead of it's time and poorly managed by Commodore.

 

[NaplesBill]

Anyone remember GEM Desktop? Surely that predated any offering from MS.

Amen-Moses

Have you ever heard of GeoWorks Ensemble? It was an amazing GUI that was written entirely in assembler. It performed amazingly well, even on an XT. Unfortunately, it didn't include a DOS kernel and MS subsequently MS crippled it with every release of DOS. It ran great on DR Dos though.

 

[christm]

One thing that I learned from using a Pc was that your hair really does grow back in thicker after having pulled it all out..........

lol

 

[Amen-Moses]

Have you ever heard of GeoWorks Ensemble? It was an amazing GUI that was written entirely in assembler. It performed amazingly well, even on an XT. Unfortunately, it didn't include a DOS kernel and MS subsequently MS crippled it with every release of DOS. It ran great on DR Dos though.

Yep.

http://www.breadbox.com/

Amen-Moses

 

[cwa107]

You have to be joking here, the Amiga was easily the top selling home computer system of it's time closely followed by Atari in second place, noone could afford a PC at home back then!

Amen-Moses

That could be better said of the Commodore 64. The Amiga sold close to 6 million units worldwide. It had a much wider following in Europe, but didn't make much of a splash in the States. Among its contemporaries in terms of technology, the Amiga didn't fare nearly as well as the PC or Mac, but it did handily outsell the Atari ST models in the end.

 

[jamesx]

i learned a lot about anti-virus/ anti spyware. i still use windows machines everyday for our business because the software we use does not work on a mac. i love my new mac, but sometimes a windows machine is better suited for the job. i would really like to see mac accessories and software become as available as windows software. i guess its just supply and demand. it sure seems like macs are getting more popular.

 

[cwa107]

Yep.

http://www.breadbox.com/

Amen-Moses

Fascinating. Is that the same GEOS as designed by Berkley Softworks back in the day? I think that was my first exposure to a GUI (at that time on a C64).

 

[NaplesBill]

Yep.

http://www.breadbox.com/

Amen-Moses

That's awesome, I had no idea they were still around.

 

[baggss]

I am a big OS/2 fan and I wish IBM had been better able to market it. IBM marketing is the second worse there is next to Commodore.

HAHAHAHAH! I couldn't agree more!

 

[Amen-Moses]

Fascinating. Is that the same GEOS as designed by Berkley Softworks back in the day? I think that was my first exposure to a GUI (at that time on a C64).

Yep, much developed though. Looks like it had a brief renaissance on pocket devices as well.

Amen-Moses

 

[NaplesBill]

I forgot to add that another reason I'm grateful for Windows is that it keeps me employed! LOL

 

[cwa107]

I forgot to add that another reason I'm grateful for Windows is that it keeps me employed! LOL

LOL - true. Look at it this way, as long as Microsoft is around, those of us that know how to fix their stuff will always have a job

 

[Amen-Moses]

That could be better said of the Commodore 64. The Amiga sold close to 6 million units worldwide. It had a much wider following in Europe, but didn't make much of a splash in the States. Among its contemporaries in terms of technology, the Amiga didn't fare nearly as well as the PC or Mac, but it did handily outsell the Atari ST models in the end.

Well you might have noticed that I'm yurrup based!

Over here the PC cost around 2000 pounds and the Amiga (and Atari) around 500 so it is no surprise that the Amiga was more popular in the home.

Personally I went the middle ground and bought an Acorn machine at about 1000 pounds, it was a more "serious" machine than the Amiga and way more usable than the PC (and it had the first "proper" GUI even if the multitasking left something to be desired).

Schools also were mostly Acorn based (with a lesser showing from RM) so a whole generation of us grew up using Amiga/Atari/Acorn at home and Acorn in schools. It wasn't until the early 90's here that the PC was even an affordable alternative and even then it had no usable GUI.

Amen-Moses

 

[cwa107]

Well you might have noticed that I'm yurrup based!

Over here the PC cost around 2000 pounds and the Amiga (and Atari) around 500 so it is no surprise that the Amiga was more popular in the home.

Personally I went the middle ground and bought an Acorn machine at about 1000 pounds, it was a more "serious" machine than the Amiga and way more usable than the PC (and it had the first "proper" GUI even if the multitasking left something to be desired).

Schools also were mostly Acorn based (with a lesser showing from RM) so a whole generation of us grew up using Amiga/Atari/Acorn at home and Acorn in schools. It wasn't until the early 90's here that the PC was even an affordable alternative and even then it had no usable GUI.

Amen-Moses

I read Amiga Format and CU Amiga magazines for years, so I was familiar with the European Amiga scene. I think the reaction you've gotten to that post is mostly from those of us in the States, who had no clue that the Amiga was ever largely popular in the international market. Most of us have never heard of an Acorn, Spectrum or BBC Micro either.

Here in the States, the low-end A500 was the best known model in the home user market. The Video Toaster-equipped 2000/3000 & 4000s did make a pretty significant dent in the non-linear video editing market, but were largely unknown to the general public.