[Plug] PLUG List Nettiquite - Propriety, MS-bashing, etc.

[Gregory.Josephs@phila.gov]

Kenny Vale writes:

<quote> Folks,
     I'm guilty.  I've posted back and forth emails to the PLUG list in the
past, and will refrain from doing so in the future.  Unless there is a direct
benefit to the group integtral to the email, I will not.....
1) post replies to queries to the list
2) engage in on-list conversations
3) stray too far from topic (the occasional anecdote or comment
notwithstanding).

Anyone second this?

I realise hat this is nothing more than good Nettiquette, but is something I
have been disregarding.

Peace,
Vale
<end quote>

I have been enjoying this list, even though I don't yet have a Linux box to work
on.  It's true, some of the anti-Microsoft stuff is juvenile, but not (given MS'
numerous shortcomings) offensive.

Back in 1981 when the IBM PC first came out, you could key in programs to run
against ROM Basic, or you could choose one of three disk operating systems -
CP/M, MS-DOS, or (as I recall) an engine to run Berkeley p-code.  CP/M-80
(Control Program for Microprocessors) from Digital Research was the leading OS
on 8080/Z80 processors, and CP/M-86 was thought technically superior to MS-DOS. 
But you could buy MS-DOS for $25., while CP/M-86 was (as I recall) about $85. 
By the time Digital Research realized it would not win, CP/M had slipped so far
behind MS-DOS in market share that it never recovered.  From then on, Microsoft
made slow technical improvements to MS-DOS while maintaining as much backward
compatibility as possible, depending on the rapid improvement of hardware to
give the illusion of progress, and no competitor was able to move in on
Microsoft's franchise.

But when P.C. hardware was finally powerful enough to support a windowing
product, there was no guarantee that Microsoft would come out on top.  IBM gave
them a run for their money with OS-2, and we are all lucky that IBM failed. 
There were other would-be windowing systems, some based on MS-DOS and some
independent (remember the Commodore Amiga?), but none could beat Microsoft's
business plan - aggressive price/performance, backward compatibility, and
windowing apps (MS Word was developed in-house, while Excel was purchased). 
Remember that even MS-Windows version 3.0 was marginal; only version 3.1 really
took off.

As a (mostly) end-user nowadays, I like MS office (circa version 6).  It was a
tremendous improvement over the incomplete, inconsistent, and incompatible
products previously available.  I laugh when people complain about bloat - much
of that size is needed for genuine added value like online documentation, online
tutorials, an extensive selection of import/export tools, internationalization,
hardware compatibility, spell check, grammar check, thesaurus, macro language,
etc.  I remember when such tools were simply not available, even as third-party
tools, for major productivity apps.  Another major hit on size and performance
is due to the move to object-oriented software.  I am not enthusiastic about all
this objectifying, but the big thinkers (software engineers and the like) seem
to think it is unavoidable for systems with many millions of lines of code.

Looking back, I think Microsoft won their market share in open competition three
times - first with MS-DOS, then with Windows 3.1, then with Microsoft Office. 
And I think all of us P.C. users have benefitted from the intense competition,
from the greed (if you will) of all the companies involved.  Of course that is
all in the past.  All we know of the future is that it will be the same in some
ways, and different in some ways.  Which ways will be the same, and which ways
will be different - now that's anybody's guess.

Of course, my memory is slipping nowadays, and others may remember the past
differently.

GregJ

_______________________________________________
Plug maillist  -  Plug@lists.nothinbut.net
http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug