Re: 1 small news...

["HotPop" <mmphadke@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> > IBM made PC - It was a open hardware and made possible creation of
> > Microsoft, by giving it exclusive right to develop O/S for it.

 IBM too had their own PC DOS & OS2 -the best multitasking/ multithreading
OS other than Linux.
Both lost market because IBM did not follow it up properly. Still OS/2 is
used n US to a sizable vol.

> > Microsoft Created a great porting of CP/M in the name of MS-DOS.

> Ok... Lets start from the beginning. MS never wrote DOS! It was written
> by Tim Patterson. They never wrote NT! It was a Digital product which
> they stole..

> > It also created many good application packages to help spreading of PC.
> > (Otherwise MAC and Sinclare Spectrum was much better machines at that
point
> > of time)

MS was not the only company to develop apps. In fact in the days of DOS
there were very few apps made by MS.
Even today MS apps for windows are not many.

> > Microsoft had also created Xenix - first multi-platform UNIX
implementation.
> > Xenix led to development of Minix.

I beg to differ. If Iam correct Minix was developed first. That is where
Linus Torvalds started from.

> > Microsoft forced IBM to develop better hardware specs to support GUI on
the
> > line of MAC (in the line of X-windows)

Yes , I agree. They still doing the same. But the issue here is the
definition of best hardware is
being redefined with dev. of Windows. I believe better hardware should do
more work rather than wasting resources in GUI.
GUI  should be the meance of working with an app. & not be the main app.

> > 286 machines were lacking in most department (after all Intel chips were
not
> > supposed to handle GUI, these were just extensions of original 8085).
These
> > led to development of 386/486 & finally P-II(MMX) where it could
ultimately
> > match the performance of MACs.

I doubt. The MAC & Wintel PC are fundamentally different as far as hardware
is concerned. The MAC was built from grounds up to use GUI. Still today MAC
isprefferes for heavy duty graphics work.

> > Better CPU on PC, Availability of Minix had led the way to Linux.
> > In some way Linux was the similar happening of IBM's strategy. If PC was
> > open hardware, Linux is open software.

Does Linux require processor running at 100's of MHz & tons of RAM? Ability
to run on a config as low as 386/4MB has been one of the major resons of
Linux becoming popular. As far 286 is concerned, Linux being pure 32 bit OS
it was never intended to run on a 286.

> >
> > But, to think of it without Microsoft there would have been no PC (as we
see
> > it today). No Xenix and possibly no Linux.
I don't find words here to reply. Only I can say If MS would not have been
there, IBM PC DOS & OS/2 & forgot to mension DR-DOS(The only single user OS
on PC to offer multitasking before windows) would have conitnued the show.
Linux never depended on MS to develop. Do you mean to say had MS not been
there Intel would not have developed better CPUs?? very surprising.!!!


> > Just as centralised hardware concept is almost a thing of the past
> > corporation like MS is also a good bridge. They will be remembered - as
> > great milestones.

My dear friend, I think you are not watching the developement properly. Even
MS is moving towards centralizing with Terminal server, Citrix Winframe,
ASP, IIS, DOCM & lot more. Same for non-MS. There is Java, Web browser based
apps, Jini, Info appliances & lot more. We are again towards centrilzation
while still retaining power at client.
> >
> > Linux and Open Software is where the future is - faster we realise is
the
> > better.
> >
That is the only point I agree with you 100%.

Regards

Manoj



- --------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information on Linux in India visit http://www.linux-india.org/
The Linux India mailing list does not accept postings in HTML format.

------------------------------