>>> No, they didn't!! Where are they now? The biggest advantage of a graphical
computing is the uniform interface capabilites and the ability to communicate to the
end user a farily complex set of commands with a comparatively simple set of
mouse/key strokes. This enables developers to bring mainstream power to the
masses. No Unix commands, no DOS commands, just point and click. The only
company that took full advantage of this paradigm early on was MSFT. Amiga and
Apple were to proprietary, and the same can be said for all of Unix.
And MSFT was any less proprietary? MSFT was just as proprietary as any other solution. Moreover it had no other advantages over any of the others (technically, it was inferior to every single alternative), except that it had the MSFT monopoly machine to make it the standard.
>>> Graphical computing as in GUI, as opposed to text based computing, as in
traditional Unix and DOS. MSFT beat allof these companies to the punch in
introducing graphically controlled productivity apps to the masses.
Once again, Unix, Mac, and Amiga came out with GUIs that were brought to the masses. And they were technically superior to MSFT products. What's more, it took MSFT a long time to get it right, with Windows 3.1. But they had this luxury because of their monopoly position. So they were not the first to bring these type of products to the masses but simply the most successful in marketshare terms. This success was not due to great technology, innovation, or making something better than others. It is arguable that the success was even due to MSFT marketing. It had more to do with the corporate mindset that was trained on "Big Blue" IBM solutions and would not look outside of IBM. And IBM blew it by giving control of the OS to MSFT. Thus it was MSFT that got the monopoly mantle from IBM. |
