🚀 go-pugleaf

On 7/16/2010 9:24 AM, Mike Hunt wrote:
> On 2010-07-16, John Slade<hhitman86@pacbell.net>  wrote:
>> On 7/15/2010 7:22 PM, Malcolm Hoar wrote:
>>> In article<i1odag$kdp$1@news.eternal-september.org>, sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye) wrote:
>>>> And once again everybody blames Microsoft for the failings of
>>>> software companies that should know better.
>>>
>>> Yikes, try developing a Windows application. It's a constant
>>> battle dealing with inadequate and inaccurate documentation
>>> and MS bugs.
>>>
>>
>>       I guess this is why Windows has become the obscure failure
>> it is today...
>
> Monopolies are good that way.
>

       Microsoft isn't a monopoly and they never have been. They 
just put out a better product than the competition. Say what you 
want about Windows problems and there were many over the years, 
but Windows was better than the competition in many areas. 
Windows was easy to use and introduced standards like DirectX 
that helped compatibility. Also Windows came with tons of 
drivers and the ability to download drivers on installation. 
These reasons made people flock to Windows in the consumer and 
business markets. Companies like Apple who put out OSes to 
compete with Windows failed miserably. Apple didn't even have 
good mutlitasking until OS X was introduced. The previous OS 
versions were terrible. I know because I used them while I was 
using Windows 95, 98 and 2000. Those pre-OS X operating systems 
from Apple were plagued with issues and would crash often if 
more than one program was in use. This made Apple's OS only 
popular in schools, and then the schools finally came around.



      People think of Microsoft as a monopoly because they did 
much better than the competition. A true monopoly is ONE company 
controlling an industry. These days Windows 7 is selling very 
well in the retail market where people are making a conscious 
choice to use Windows rather than it being pre-installed on a 
system.

John