>Many people can write code but none can package and sell it to the masses like Microsoft. Is his the best vision? Are his applications things of technical beauty? A resounding NO.
<rant>
You're full of it. Microsoft got where it is today because its products are superior. Period. Every Mac I've ever used crashes for inexplicable reasons. Its OS is years outdated and doesn't have geek features like preemptive multitasking and proper sandboxing of critical system functions. Word is the greatest word processor BY FAR, and I've used them all tracing all the way back to Appleworks (remember that? it was pretty cool in its time... word processor, spreadsheet, database... hmmm... isn't that a BUNDLE???) Internet Explorer, while on surface very similar to Navigator, has much cooler technology under the hood... a superior JIT Java compiler, more robust HTML parser, more scripting options, etc. etc. Plus it's fully exposed to other programs as objects; that's why AOL, Quicken, Notes, can integrate it seemlessly into their offerings. And Outlook Express is a way cool e-mail client. If Gates isn't a genius, all his competitors are fools. Which isn't that far-off of a thesis anyway...
</rant>
>If pressed, I would go so far as to say 40% market penetration is about 50% beyond the percentage of people capable or interested in using a full function computer. They are using the technological marvel that is the PC to "chat" about beanie babies.
Careful, you're showing your age. There probably isn't a single college student in this country without an e-mail account. Why?
Old fuddy-duddies may think the computer is too complicated and powerful. Geeks like Mark Oliver may slaver over the latest and greatest (hey Mark, I would be a great home for your old laptop...). But for the generation that has grown up with computers, they view it in its proper sociological context: a tool. |
