• Re: what killed os/2

    From Vlk-451@VERT/INREALM to Tracker1 on Thu Jan 7 03:56:52 2021
    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: Tracker1 to poindexter FORTRAN on Mon Jan 04 2021 03:34 pm

    On 1/3/2021 10:27 AM, poindexter FORTRAN wrote:
    While IBM charged an arm and a leg for their SDKs, Microsoft would find a way to get them to people for a fraction of the cost or give them away. They knew better than IBM that developer momentum was key.

    Developers... developers... developers...

    He was so sweaty. Did no one have the gumption to tell him to chill out?

    ■ Crystal Palace, Orbitsville ■

    ---
    ■ Posted via InnerRealmBBS ■
    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Inner Realm BBS - Charlotte, NC - innerrealmbbs.us
  • From MRO@VERT/BBSESINF to Vlk-451 on Thu Jan 7 01:51:03 2021
    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: Vlk-451 to Tracker1 on Thu Jan 07 2021 03:56 am

    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: Tracker1 to poindexter FORTRAN on Mon Jan 04 2021 03:34 pm

    On 1/3/2021 10:27 AM, poindexter FORTRAN wrote:
    While IBM charged an arm and a leg for their SDKs, Microsoft would
    find a way to get them to people for a fraction of the cost or give
    them away. They knew better than IBM that developer momentum was
    key.

    Developers... developers... developers...

    He was so sweaty. Did no one have the gumption to tell him to chill out?


    balmer was such a weird guy. another thing is i saw him portrayed as a big dumb jock sometimes. he is a real smart guy. i'm not going to name off everything but go check it out for yourself. his education and accomplishments are quite impressive.

    he turned microsoft into a money maker. yes he made a few bad decisions.

    he's worth over 71billion. jesus christ. another weird thing is how he's no longer friends with gates.
    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Dr. What@VERT/DMINE to HusTler on Thu Jan 7 10:24:00 2021
    HusTler wrote to Nightfox <=-

    That reminds me of how Microsoft tried to claim Internet Explorer was integr to the OS (Windows) during their anti-trust lawsuit in the late 90s..

    I thought it was? Isn't that why it loaded so fast?

    Nope. So Internet Exploder is made up of different elements. Many elements are part of the OS. Just like your program can say "pop a dialog to ask
    the user for a file name" without having to define exactly what that dialog
    box looks like.

    So, Microsoft (disingenuously) claimed that the browser was part of the OS.
    It was actually the other way around: IE used parts of the OS to do things. Obviously, you can't remove the "ask the user for a file name" dialog from
    the OS because that would break all the software that needs it.

    Anyone who's developed Windows applications knows that Microsoft lied on
    the stand about this.


    ... "Hex Dump" - Where Witches put used curses?
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    ■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to MRO on Fri Jan 8 21:18:00 2021
    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: MRO to Moondog on Wed Jan 06 2021 07:11 pm

    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: Moondog to Nightfox on Wed Jan 06 2021 02:43 pm


    That reminds me of how Microsoft tried to claim Internet Explorer was
    integr

    Nightfox


    If it shipped with 95 in the first place, I would've believed them.

    my windows 95 had it. i didnt have internet at the house.
    it's possible i got it from some update on a cd. cant remember

    My copy didn't have it

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From MRO@VERT/BBSESINF to Moondog on Sat Jan 9 14:29:04 2021
    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: Moondog to MRO on Fri Jan 08 2021 09:18 pm


    If it shipped with 95 in the first place, I would've believed
    them.

    my windows 95 had it. i didnt have internet at the house.
    it's possible i got it from some update on a cd. cant remember

    My copy didn't have it


    well i did a search online. britannica says july 1995 is when ie 1.0 was released as an addon to win 95.

    then wikipedia sez win85 was released august 1995

    now we should all know you can't trust what you read online. people post untruths and it gets spread around and it becames untruths.

    i'm sure it's possible some people got win95 sans ie and some with.

    i had the floppy version which was a weird version.
    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to MRO on Sat Jan 9 16:01:26 2021
    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: MRO to Moondog on Sat Jan 09 2021 02:29 pm

    well i did a search online. britannica says july 1995 is when ie 1.0 was released as an addon to win 95.

    then wikipedia sez win85 was released august 1995

    now we should all know you can't trust what you read online. people post untruths and it gets spread around and it becames untruths.

    i'm sure it's possible some people got win95 sans ie and some with.

    i had the floppy version which was a weird version.

    I remember Windows 95 coming out in August 1995. So I'm skeptical of that July 1995 date for IE 1.0 if it was an add-on for Windows 95. I remember there being a Plus Pack or something for Windows 95 that was released later (after Win95 was released) that may have included IE 1.0.

    I used Windows 95 (floppy disk upgrade edition) when it was released and don't remember it including IE.

    Nightfox

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From MRO@VERT/BBSESINF to Nightfox on Sat Jan 9 18:50:08 2021
    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: Nightfox to MRO on Sat Jan 09 2021 04:01 pm

    I remember Windows 95 coming out in August 1995. So I'm skeptical of that July 1995 date for IE 1.0 if it was an add-on for Windows 95. I remember there being a Plus Pack or something for Windows 95 that was released later (after Win95 was released) that may have included IE 1.0.

    I used Windows 95 (floppy disk upgrade edition) when it was released and don't remember it including IE.

    okay did you look at wikipedia and see that? because that's what it says pretty much. remember, the internet is not always right and anybody can edit wikipedia.

    i'm looking at a copy of the lawsuit online and they dont mention that ie was added in an update. that very thing would have helped their case greatly.

    there's a lot of misinformation on the internet.
    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to MRO on Sat Jan 9 20:42:42 2021
    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: MRO to Nightfox on Sat Jan 09 2021 06:50 pm

    I used Windows 95 (floppy disk upgrade edition) when it was released
    and
    don't remember it including IE.

    okay did you look at wikipedia and see that? because that's what it says pretty much. remember, the internet is not always right and anybody can edit wikipedia.

    No, I'm talking about my own personal experience. I was saying I had an actual copy of Windows 95 that I used when it came out and saw myself, and I don't remember it including Internet Explorer. I remember there being a Windows 95 expansion that came out later (Microsoft Plus, I think), which I think included Internet Explorer for Windows 95.

    there's a lot of misinformation on the internet.

    Yes, I know. Even Abraham Lincoln was quoted as saying you can't trust everything you see on the internet just because there's a quote next to someone's face. ;)

    Nightfox

    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Nightfox on Sun Jan 10 10:20:00 2021
    Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-

    No, I'm talking about my own personal experience. I was saying I had
    an actual copy of Windows 95 that I used when it came out and saw
    myself, and I don't remember it including Internet Explorer. I
    remember there being a Windows 95 expansion that came out later
    (Microsoft Plus, I think), which I think included Internet Explorer for Windows 95.

    Yeah, if I recall, Windows 95 OSR2 came out later and included some crude
    USB support and had Internet Explorer "built-in".




    ... Wait, this is a *scene*?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    ■ Synchronet ■ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org
  • From Badopcode@VERT to Nightfox on Mon Jan 11 07:51:35 2021
    Re: Re: what killed os/2
    By: Nightfox to MRO on Sat Jan 09 2021 04:01 pm

    I remember Windows 95 coming out in August 1995. So I'm skeptical of that July 1995 date for IE 1.0 if it was an add-on for Windows 95. I remember there being a Plus Pack or something for Windows 95 that was released later (after Win95 was released) that may have included IE 1.0.
    Yep you right to be skeptical. 1995 it was still Mosiac. MS had just bought Mosaic. The Plus pack came out after 1995 release. I can't swear it didn't come out somewhere at the end of 95 or the beginning of 96. Too many years ago. But IE 1.0 was identical to Mosiac in 95 it just had extra crap in the about and I think they redid the loading animation when fetching a page. Netscape client and servers were a big thing at the time.
    I was not a big fan of the web because all the applications for the web at the time was a huge money grab and crappy trade secrets. What am I saying? It's still a cesspool. A few areas have gotten better though.
    ---
    ■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to Dr. What on Thu Jan 21 18:52:45 2021
    On 1/7/2021 8:24 AM, Dr. What wrote:

    Nope. So Internet Exploder is made up of different elements. Many elements are part of the OS. Just like your program can say "pop a dialog to ask
    the user for a file name" without having to define exactly what that dialog box looks like.

    So, Microsoft (disingenuously) claimed that the browser was part of the OS. It was actually the other way around: IE used parts of the OS to do things. Obviously, you can't remove the "ask the user for a file name" dialog from the OS because that would break all the software that needs it.

    Anyone who's developed Windows applications knows that Microsoft lied on
    the stand about this.

    I think the biggest point of integration is that the MS-HTML engine was integrated with the new Help format that they came up with... Of course
    that leave the actual IE and Outlook Express executables relatively thin
    at that point.

    Of course by the time the actual anti-trust suit took place, every other
    OS came with a browser in the box. They did a lot of cringy things with
    some of the integrations with the browser (Active-X in particular) that
    were far worse than having a browser in the box.

    The fact that Outlook/Outlook express enabled the JS engine in
    "local/full" trust mode by default was a huge issue. Several registered active-x components that allowed full disk access was another. It was
    largely a shit-show. All of that said, I don't fault them for including
    the render engine in/with the OS. But I do find them responsible for so
    many other stupid things surrounding it.

    --
    Michael J. Ryan
    tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS
    ---
    ­ Synchronet ­ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Dr. What@VERT/DMINE to Tracker1 on Sat Jan 23 09:02:00 2021
    Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-

    The fact that Outlook/Outlook express enabled the JS engine in "local/full" trust mode by default was a huge issue. Several
    registered active-x components that allowed full disk access was
    another. It was largely a shit-show. All of that said, I don't fault them for including the render engine in/with the OS. But I do find
    them responsible for so many other stupid things surrounding it.

    The problem with Microsoft "security" was that they constantly focused on the business market
    where companies could afford to put up firewalls and email virus scanners.

    So Microsoft naively thought that they would be running in a trusted environment - just as the Internet
    picked up speed.


    ... The earth is 98% full. Please delete anyone you can.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    ■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA