On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 09:34 +1000, Tim Fairchild wrote: > Yep, Bill denies saying it. Of course he denies a lot of things :)
What he did or did not say misses the point. What matters is that DOS was badly designed in the first place. It got taken up because suits in industry trusted IBM as the dominant commercial player in computers and IBM didn't take Microcomputers seriously at the time. MS were slow into networking - Novell dominated in those early pioneering days with Unix on bigger computers. MS were slow into the Internet MS are now slow into XML based files. In the general large scale developments, far from being innovators, MS has been late in and has only managed to catch up because of its desktop operating system monopoly. Its why the popular myth that MS has been responsible for advancing technology is largely that. In the general scheme of things they have probably held things back at least a decade -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMSL --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
