OT CGW Article

Ack · #1 July 27th, 2003, 08:09 PM

I was just looking at the August 2003 Computer Gaming World mag and MM & Shrapnel got a nice little mention for Space Empires: Starfury. Unfortunately it was under the title of "The best games you've never seen" (pg 54). But hey it was a positive mention and any publicity of this type is good for all of the SE games.

A quote from the Mag that I found funny as hell...

"Does Microsoft Even Make PC Games Anymore?" (pg 66).

"That depends on whether you consider Microsoft Train Simulator 2.0 to be an actual game or an interactive scrensaver."

Slynky · #2 July 27th, 2003, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ack:
A quote from the Mag that I found funny as hell...

"Does Microsoft Even Make PC Games Anymore?" (pg 66).

"That depends on whether you consider Microsoft Train Simulator 2.0 to be an actual game or an interactive scrensaver."

Actually, if you think about it, a lot of software from MS was just a buyout of another product/company. I'm sure PowerPoint fits this Category and perhaps Excel and Word (though I don't care enough to do some research). Even then, stuff with their name on it, I believe, was contract work or some sort of subsidiary of some kind.

Ruatha · #3 July 27th, 2003, 08:45 PM

Didn't they but DOS from another programmer/company in the beginning, and then reprogram it, not starting from scratch though?
But windows 1.0 was their original product wasn't it? The code I mean, if it was their ideas is up for discussion, let's not get into that!

[ July 27, 2003, 19:46: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Slynky · #4 July 27th, 2003, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ruatha:
Didn't they but DOS from another programmer/company in the beginning, and then reprogram it, not starting from scratch though?
But windows 1.0 was their original product wasn't it? The code I mean, if it was their ideas is up for discussion, let's not get into that!

Actually, since I'm so OLD, I remember the story. IBM decided to join the "Apple II" fun by making their own personal computer. They hired a small company practically working out of a garage, Microsoft, to write their OS. Through a lack of foresight or flimsy contracting (or perhaps even allowed), Microsoft was allowed to expand on the OS they wrote for IBM and the rest, as they say, is history.

Baron Munchausen · #5 July 27th, 2003, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ruatha:
Didn't they but DOS from another programmer/company in the beginning, and then reprogram it, not starting from scratch though?
But windows 1.0 was their original product wasn't it? The code I mean, if it was their ideas is up for discussion, let's not get into that!

Yes. Microsoft had produced some programs before IBM came to them, but not an OS. Only some BASIC interpreters. They agreed to supply IBM with an alternative OS to the CP/M they expected to field as their main choice. But the guy that owned CP/M wouldn't deal with IBM for some reason. He blew them off and MS got to be the main OS supplier for the PC. The way they got their OS ready in time to meet IBM's deadlne was to buy out some guy who'd already programmed an OS for the 8086 that he called 'QDOS' for 'Quick and Dirty OS'...

As I recall, MS stopped paying him royalties after Version 3.1 or 3.3 or something like that because they had completely re-coded it. But he still made quite a bit of money for his 'Quick and Dirty' programming way back in the late 1970s...

[ July 28, 2003, 01:29: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Arkcon · #6 July 27th, 2003, 09:19 PM

As I recall, they licenced MS-DOS to IBM for use in their PC hardware for like, $USD 1 -- provided IBM included Microsoft interpreted BASIC. Orgininal IBM PC's boot the interpreter if they can't find the MSDOS.

IBM got to keep that sweet deal even up to the PS/2 -- the low end 286 models have MS interpreted BASIC(with cassette commands

) in their roms.

It's a pretty widely know rumor that Bill Gates hates IBM because of their original deal.

Ack · #7 July 28th, 2003, 12:52 AM

Even funnier is that originally IBM forcasted its total PC sales to 200,000 units. Then again, having been subjected to numerous technology forcasts and road maps that accuracy is about on par.

I've no love of Microsoft, but I don't think the computer industry would have advanced anywhere near as fast without them. They pretty much established a uniform standard for PCs everywhere. It has been my observation that an industry is prohibited from advancement until a single standard is agreed upon. Either this occurs through mutual agreement or competition.

Think VHS vs Betamax. The VCR didn't really take off until Sony established VHS as the dominate format. You'll find numerous other examples where a market was stagnated due to competing formats. Off hand I can think of:

US Cellular Phones (CDMA, TDMA, GSM, Irridium...)
Asia and Europe with a single standard are much further ahead in technology.

Wireless (Bluetooth and that other IEEE standard)
Neither have been able to gain much foothold.

High Efficiency Cars
Hydrogen vs Electric vs Hybrid vs Gas
There are numerous technical difficulties to be surmounted on this one.

Electricity (AC, DC)
Edison vs Tesla (I think)

Will · #8 July 28th, 2003, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ack:
Electricity (AC, DC)
Edison vs Tesla (I think)

Yeah, but vice versa... Edison was convinced of the superiority of Direct Current, while Tesla (who actually had *REAL* scientific training) knew that Alternating Current was the way to go for distribution. Both still exist today because they can fulfill different niches. AC is best for transmitting over long distances (there are only two or three major DC transmission lines in the US), while DC is easier to work with in circutry, and easier to make portable (batteries are DC).

And is it just me, or has the topic of this thread already been posted? I'm getting this weird d�j� vu feeling...

Loser · #9 July 28th, 2003, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ruatha:
Didn't they but DOS from another programmer/company in the beginning, and then reprogram it, not starting from scratch though?
But windows 1.0 was their original product wasn't it? The code I mean, if it was their ideas is up for discussion, let's not get into that!

Oh lets! XEROX PARC, 'nuf said, we're done.

Actually just about everything Microsoft has ever produced was bought from someone else. Even the Internet Explorer was and still is written by some slice of academia. Once they got enough leverage to buy other people's good work and, importantly, improve on it they were golden and near unstoppable.

The only thing I can think of that they did all on their own was Microsoft BOB, and anyone who remembers that knows why everyone else doesn't.

I may not have any love for Microsoft, but I do have to say that they are good at what they do.

Ack · #10 July 28th, 2003, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Yeah, but vice versa... Edison was convinced of the superiority of Direct Current, while Tesla (who actually had *REAL* scientific training) knew that Alternating Current was the way to go for distribution. Both still exist today because they can fulfill different niches. AC is best for transmitting over long distances (there are only two or three major DC transmission lines in the US), while DC is easier to work with in circutry, and easier to make portable (batteries are DC).

Any competition that ends up with an electrocuted elephant is not good competition.

[QUOTE}
And is it just me, or has the topic of this thread already been posted? I'm getting this weird d�j� vu feeling...
[/quote]

Undoubtedly it has already been discussed here. With that I intend to let this topic die...