Microsoft is not usually considered (by anyone that has even a faint clue) to be a significant innovator in the computer industry. They're barely in the "top ten" with respect to the granting of software patents.
Support for the following things came out for Unix before they did for Windows NT...
Mail servers
Multi-user abilities
Telnet Serving
UDP
DNS servers
Real time tasking
IP
Gopher Serving
Multi-Tasking
Web Serving
TCP
File Sharing
Remote Access
Long Filenames
Crash Protection
Security
Proxies
Firewalling
Routing
IP Masquerade
IP Shaping
IP Port Prioritizing
IP Aliasing
Support for Intel x86
Support for PowerPC
Support for Digital Alpha
Support for MIPS
Support for Sun SPARC
Support for StrongARM
Support for HP PA-RISC
Support for Motorola 68K
The one thing that they have clearly conquered is the Not Invented Here syndrome; most companies are reluctant to adopt NIH technologies, whereas that's pretty much all that there is for Microsoft to adopt. They buy far more innovations than they create.
However, there are a few things that they've introduced:
Repairing the OS by reinstalling the OS.
Rebooting to update the system or to switch contexts.
Having a retarded method of software managment via a registry.
Probably the most fundamental design shortcomming in Win 95/98/NT is the registry. There is simply no partitioning between vital and trivial configuration data or between that which is intended to be static (which tends also to be vital) and that which is volatile. In practice all the configuration data endes up as being highly volatile. (Also binary configuation files need special tools to handle and don't contain comments) As you have many separate configuration files (and these are text files) in Linux the "single fault destroys everthing" scenario is less likely. | ||
-- <mark@grapefruit.ndirect.co.uk> Mark
Evans | ||
Making a GUI the kernel.
Being backward compatible to MS-DOS v2.0 and CP/M.
Combining the Internet browser and the system browser into one completely Barney-fied product (although this does reduce the bloat of the system).
Making the release of a new OS into a circus exhibit for all of the worlds mental midgets to attend, so that their microscopic little minds can be filled with visions of Microsofting themselves into a higher level of stupidity.
The backward slash as a standard directory separator.
An OS that is billed as a 32 bit system, but which is closer to being 8-bit...
The idea that "crashes are normal."
NASA explained a software problem on the Mars "Pathfinder" mission by explaining that:
It's like when Windows crashes, and you have to reboot your computer system...
Sometimes Microsoft does the best job of explaining why you don't want to go there today...
Micro$oft has a TV ad for their Internet Exploder (er, I mean Explorer :-) that uses the musical theme of the "Confutatis Maledictis" from Mozart's Requiem.
As the announcer asks "Where do you want to go today?", the choir sings: "Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" which can be interpreted assortedly as "The damned and accursed are convicted to the flames of hell" or (more literally, though probably less usefully) as "When the damned are confounded, and consigned to sharp flames "
Error: Keyboard not detected. Press any key to continue...
Microsoft is to quality software what MacDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Windows95, Word97, Excel95: With all the criticisms of Microsoft, at least they provide "best-before" dating on many of their products...
Just be thankful Microsoft isn't a manufacturer of pharmaceuticals.
Try the M$ spellchecker on this word: zzzz
The result shows that even some M$ programmers have a sense of humor!
MS versus GM...
At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated:
If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving twenty-five dollar cars that got 1,000 miles per gallon. | ||
| --Bill Gates (reputedly) | ||
Recently General Motors (allegedly) addressed this comment by releasing the statement: "Yes, but would you want your car to crash twice a day? "
Every time they repainted the lines on the road you would have to buy a new car.
Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart and drive on.
Occasionally, executing a maneuver would cause your car to stop and fail and you would have to re-install the engine. For some strange reason, you would accept this too.
You could only have one person in the car at a time, unless you bought "Car95" or "CarNT." But, then you would have to buy more seats.
Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast, twice as easy to drive, but would only run on five percent of the roads.
The Macintosh car owners would get expensive Microsoft upgrades to their cars, which would make their cars run much slower.
The oil, gas and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single "general car default" warning light.
New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
The airbag system would say "are you sure?" before going off.
If you were involved in a crash, you would have no idea what happened.
I have long contended that Microsoft's one true breakthrough innovation is the UAE or GPF. Once you set the expectation that software cannot run without producing random, data-destroying interruptions, you have dramatically lowered the bar. And greatly simplified the process of writing software. Why struggle to produce solid code when there is always the option of dumping out to an error message? When "adequate" becomes the standard to which apps aspire, it is hardly surprising that many apps don't even make it that high.
Microsoft Orifice
Not There, Nice Try, New Toy, Not There, Necessary Trash, NinTendo, No Thanks, Not Today, No Tomorrow, Neutered Technology, New Terminology, Neanderthal Technology, Not Trustworthy.
(Internet|Infernal) (Exploder|Exploiter|Extorter|Exterminator|Imploder), Internal Error, Indeterminate Errors
MS Works? (make sure you have the interrogative there)
MS-DOG, Messy-Dog
MSE - Microsoft Sacrificed Engineer
MCSE - Mouse Click Software Experts, Minesweeper Champion Solitare Experts, Must Consult Someone Experienced, Moron Confused by Sun Equipment...
Lose 95
Outhouse Express, Look Out!!!, Out of Luck, Exploit Express
Windows '95 - A 32 bit patch for a 16 bit interface to an 8 bit OS designed for a 4 bit chip from a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition...
Windows95, Word97, Excel95: With all the criticisms of Microsoft, at least they include "best-before" dating on many of their products...
Microsoft: The People who Brought the Y2K Bug into Software Titling
Wintel: Wasteland of Useless Software
Arguing that Microsoft Windows is superior to any other platform because there are "more applications for Windows" is ludicrously foolish. This has been summed up very nicely as follows:
The PC is basically a wasteland of useless software. If the bazillions of programs out there actually amount to something, why is everyone using Microsoft Office, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, etc?
The average user doesn't need a million redundant applications, just a handful of ones that work.
<kaz@helios.crest.nt.com>Kaz Kylheku
Similar arguments were fairly usable in the "previous generation" when comparing MS-DOS to other platforms. If there were MS-DOS programs out there that amount to something, why was everyone using WordPerfect 5.1, Lotus 123, Quicken, ProComm, and dBase III+? (Although there certainly was more diversity in both packages in use, and in vendors...)
Nintendo games don't come with computer viruses.
The Nintendo doesn't complain if you shut it down wrong.
Anyone can uninstall games from a Nintendo.
The Nintendo runs fine with only 4MB of RAM.
The Nintendo doesn't lose its DLL files.
The Nintendo doesn't have to constantly check its filesystem for corruption.
Nintendo doesn't keep trying to install a web browser you don't want.
You can uninstall software without damaging the operating system.
The Nintendo doesn't need three service packs before it functions correctly.
And finally... No one would want to emulate Windows 95.
First they came for CP/M.
But I didn't speak up,
Because I didn't care about an operating system.
Then they came for WordPerfect.
But I didn't speak up,
Because their word processor was supposed to be so easy.
Then they came for Lotus 1-2-3.
But I didn't speak up,
Because their spreadsheet promised to be compatible.
Then they came for Netscape.
But I didn't speak up,
Because they gave me their web browser for free.
Then they came for the heart of our network.
But I didn't speak up,
Because their servers had such pretty buttons.
Then they came for me when I couldn't pay for an upgrade.
Bugs remained unfixed, security holes unplugged.
By that time there was no other option,
And no one was left to hear my voice.
-- <stox@dcdkc.fnal.gov> Ken Stox
Micorsoft Windows Rules The Universe
Some people can't spell, and can't argue, either.
Did you know that at one time, Microsoft was the largest vendor of Unix operating system software? Hard to believe? It's the truth! Microsoft used to sell Xenix, a version of Unix for 80x86 and 68K systems, which was quite widely used.
At one time, Microsoft considered that Unix was the OS to use for "server" systems, and that MS-DOS was preferred for single-user desktops. Once they started competing with OS/2 and Novell Netware, and got into attaching GUIs to everything, this changed, to the point that Unix was no longer considered competition, which was likely a mistake on their part.
At any rate, if Microsoft had either
Decided that Unix would be the "server platform of choice," or
Decided to "straight to war" against Unix, rather than first trying to fight off OS/2 and Netware,