My report on Firefox 3.5

[KE6DF]

When a company is implementing a new technology like the GUI at first, they have the choice of:

1. Building a machine with sufficient power to implement the new technology properly in all (or most) it's glory -- and then price it based on cost. And then bring the cost down over time.

2. Build a machine at the price point the market will bear, implementing as much of the new technology as you can at that price point making all the compromises you need to to hit the price point. And then add features as  hardware costs fall and hardware capabilities improve.

Number 1 above was the Lisa.

Number 2 above was the Mac.

Both strategies can work, but Apple's business model was based around selling low cost machines therefore number 2 worked for it.

What they needed to make strategy number 1 work would have been a business model more like Silicon Graphics (at that time). In other words go after the small high end niches where customers were willing to pay.

We also haven't mentioned NEXT -- Job's other company. It tried to split the difference and failed. But, by the time he started NEXT the winners in the PC market were already established.

As for the debate between Mac and Windows and UNIX, for people in the business world trying to get a job done, it all comes down to the application software -- which platforms run it well.

I think MSFT has a lock on the corporate world (Global 2000 biggest companies) that Apple has never been able to touch, and won't IMHO. Neither will Linux for most desktops.

Linux is making some inroads in G2000 IT shops as servers. But usually it's for less critical applications where big company support (like IBM standing behind the system) isn't crucial.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Very good points. You summed up the trade-offs nicely.

It's also interesting to note that the guy that invented the Web (WWW) did it on a NeXT machine.

Google and other web apps vendors are trying to make the idea of an OS irrelevant or much less important. If you think about it, as bandwidth increases, local processing power (and the associated OS) become less important. Everything can run remotely. Will we go back to the dumb terminal days?    What will we argue about then? 

[Pete, WA2CWA]

  Even if it did I have a pretty high threshold of pain.  I worked with a lot of the early AT&T 7300 series running Unix along with having to deal with SCO Xenix on other machines.  Couple that operating system with hardware reliability issues and any problems today are a picnic by comparison. 

Rodger WQ9E

The AT&T PC-7300, Unix PC, was loved by so many, and inventory moved so well  , that one our distribution warehouses used the new stock as 7 foot high wall dividers. We donated a truckload of them to some university in Mexico and they sent them all back unopened. And then there was in the same time frame as the PC-7300, the infamous AT&T PC-6300+, which was touted as a DOS/Windows/Unix PC. I still have an original AT&T/MS Windows User's Guide manual (pre-Version 1) that was used with this machine and the DOS/Windows machine PC-6300. 

[N3DRB The Derb]

it doth not matter anymore. macs are great windows machines. run XP like crazy.

but the "real windows" machines cannot run OS X, nor any of the great apps apple has for OS X.

Pete, have you ever used a modern mac using OS X?

[WQ9E]

The AT&T PC-7300, Unix PC, was loved by so many, and inventory moved so well  , that one our distribution warehouses used the new stock as 7 foot high wall dividers. We donated a truckload of them to some university in Mexico and they sent them all back unopened. And then there was in the same time frame as the PC-7300, the infamous AT&T PC-6300+, which was touted as a DOS/Windows/Unix PC. I still have an original AT&T/MS Windows User's Guide manual (pre-Version 1) that was used with this machine and the DOS/Windows machine PC-6300. 

I can understand the use of the 7300 as a room divider but I had nothing but good experiences with the 6300+.  Running DOS, it significantly outperformed the IBM PC-AT and didn't have those hateful CMI hard drives.  For those who didn't experience the fun, CMI brought voice coil head positioning technology out before it was ready.  After a few weeks or months, some of the drives would work when cool but not when hot and others were just the opposite.  The only thing you could rely upon was they would all get flaky sooner rather than later. 

Those old AT&T PC's had the nicest keyboard feel of any computer I have used before or since.  I picked up a 6300+ pretty cheap in 1985 and that PC went through the doctoral program with me including many painful dissertation writing hours.  It finally died from a lightning surge in the early 90's.  I probably still have the documentation somewhere also.

Rodger WQ9E

[Pete, WA2CWA]

My post had three lines; you only read the first two.

From the Microsoft site:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/WinHistoryDesktop.mspx

"Many longtime PC users trace the Microsoft Windows® operating system to the 1990 release of Windows 3.0, the first widely popular version of Windows and the first version of Windows many PC users ever tried. However, Microsoft initially announced the Windows product seven years earlier and released the first version in 1983."

This is not to be confused  with Microsoft Windows Version 1 which was released in 1985.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

I can understand the use of the 7300 as a room divider but I had nothing but good experiences with the 6300+.  Running DOS, it significantly outperformed the IBM PC-AT and didn't have those hateful CMI hard drives.  For those who didn't experience the fun, CMI brought voice coil head positioning technology out before it was ready.  After a few weeks or months, some of the drives would work when cool but not when hot and others were just the opposite.  The only thing you could rely upon was they would all get flaky sooner rather than later. 

Those old AT&T PC's had the nicest keyboard feel of any computer I have used before or since.  I picked up a 6300+ pretty cheap in 1985 and that PC went through the doctoral program with me including many painful dissertation writing hours.  It finally died from a lightning surge in the early 90's.  I probably still have the documentation somewhere also.

Rodger WQ9E

As a DOS machine, I liked it too, but it was terrible as a Unix machine. I used every one of those early machines  since I was in the PC Product Management group at that time. I still have here one of their 6386 WGS machines. Still runs fine. Going my inventory the other day, I found some of those power supplies used in all those Olivetti machines, along with mother boards for the 6300, 6300+, 6310, and, I think, for the 6312. In the same pile of stuff, I also found unopened ROM upgrade kits for the 6300+ and ROM upgrades for several other machines, plus a bunch of hard disk controller boards, video cards, and assorted other boards for those machines. Most of this stuff was being junked after we killed the line. These things were stored and forgotten until I found them the other day.

[w1vtp]

Come to think of it -- I have a complete system that used DOS 4 and WINDOWS 1!!  I looked at the manual and boy was it really  crude.  MAC was way ahead of Windows 1 -- but when I asked the price after a demo of Mac I was floored -- $$ was way too high.  So I ended up with Windows (DOS)

If anyone is into ancient computer stuff -- I have the computer, all the DOS, windows 1 disks.  FREE if you want -- I can bring it to Near-Fest this fall

Al

[KE6DF]

"That was because when Gates saw Apple's GUI in 1983 he just had to steal it or the GUI concept in general."

Of course, Gates and other engineers at MSFT had to be aware of what was going on at Xerox PARC with the Alto.

But even then, Microsoft was getting big, and as any young engineer knows, it's hard to get a large company to do things that seemingly undermine their current business (DOS in this case) -- even if the new ideas will save their bacon a few years later.

Gates had an advantage moving MSFT in new directions when the market demanded it -- a controlling interest in the stock.

BTW, I was a young software engineer working in Silicon Valley and knew about the XEROX work and had met socially or professionally many of the key players in the PARC project well before the 1983 time frame.

And so had practically every other software engineer in the Valley.

Nothing Apple came out with in 1983 was all that much of a surprise. All of us knew what was coming for years at that point.

Dave

[K6JEK]

SRI and Doug Engelbart.  As long as we're recounting history let's remember Doug, inventor of the mouse, internet pioneer (remember the IMP!) and visionary.  He showed me his five (1,2,3,4,5) button mouse.  For awhile he used two of them and no keyboard.  He chorded letters. Can you imagine?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Engelbart

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Doug Englebart invented the mouse while at SRI in the 1960's and he even demonstrated a crude multi-window environment in the late 60's. Some of the SRI people moved over to PARC in the early 70's and the Alto and Star grew out of their efforts.

I posted this about 10 back in the thread. I failed to point out his also demonstrated a remote connection with his system too. The video is on the Web. It's worth watching. Englebart was well ahead of his time.

[K6JEK]

Doug Englebart invented the mouse while at SRI in the 1960's and he even demonstrated a crude multi-window environment in the late 60's. Some of the SRI people moved over to PARC in the early 70's and the Alto and Star grew out of their efforts.

I posted this about 10 back in the thread. I failed to point out his also demonstrated a remote connection with his system too. The video is on the Web. It's worth watching. Englebart was well ahead of his time.

Sorry I missed it.  Thanks for bringing Doug Engelbart and SRI into the conversation.  The demo is sometimes called the "Mother of all Demos."  The young guy in the demo is Jeff Rulifson.  I worked with him for many, many years.  That's how I met Engelbart, tagging along with Jeff.

[ka3zlr]

Going on a coupla weeks now and I have no Complaints..

73
Jack.

[K6JEK]

Doug, inventor of the mouse, internet pioneer (remember the IMP!) and visionary. 

...

The net actually started at Stanford
...

Stanford Research Institute was one of the first four nodes of the ARPANET, along with UCLA, UCSB and University of Utah.  I think by this time SRI was independent of Stanford University.

[Bill, KD0HG]

I've got a unused copy of IBM's OS2 Warp in the original box right here on my bookshelf, if anyone wants it.

[WQ9E]

Bill,

But you also need the Piece of S**t 2 computer to go with Oh S** 2 operating system.  They only work properly as a matched pair 

One of my less diplomatic moments as a brand new not yet tenured assistant prof was to observe during a committee meeting that I hoped someone got a kickback for ordering 100 PS2's so at least there was a rational reason for that decision.

[WQ9E]

My previous post was dripping with sarcasm and you could install OS-2 still although drivers for peripherals might be an issue on a new system.  But the best reason for running OS-2 now would be an authentic vintage setup maybe attached to a Yaesu FT-980 running with its then fairly new "CAT" system. 

I still have my FT-980 and what a joy it would be to combine a sluggish operating system with poorly designed hardware controlling a transceiver where the only thing louder than the receiver phase noise is the poorly designed power supply/cooling fan.  The FT-980 was the first non-kit brand new piece of gear I purchased.  I still have it and the used Drake C line I bought from the store the same day.  I still use the C line quite a bit; the FT-980 is nice to look at.

Bill, you could be the modern day OS-2 guru 

[Bill, KD0HG]

Bill, you could be the modern day OS-2 guru 

Where can I get a copy of "OS-2 For Dummies"?

[KE6DF]

To do along with a complete OS/2 system, how about a new Edsel?

This is still one dealership left -- if only in cyberspace.

 

http://edsel.net/oldindex.html

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Bill, you could be the modern day OS-2 guru 

Where can I get a copy of "OS-2 For Dummies"?

Here ya go:
http://www.amazon.com/OS-2-0-Dummies-dummies/dp/1878058762%3FSubscriptionId%3D0JRA4J6WAV0RTAZVS6R2%26tag%3Dworldcat-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D1878058762

[N3DRB The Derb]

I was a os/2 nerd. I had every version but Warp. there was one cool feature about OS/2 that was not true for either windows or the mac of that time running system 7 - it simply never crashed. ever. I cant recall my OS/2 system ever having crashed and burned. IIRC, most of the ATM machines until around 1993 ran a tailored version of OS/2. banks used a crapload of system 370's at the time too.

[Bill, KD0HG]

Bill, you could be the modern day OS-2 guru 

Where can I get a copy of "OS-2 For Dummies"?

Here ya go:
http://www.amazon.com/OS-2-0-Dummies-dummies/dp/1878058762%3FSubscriptionId%3D0JRA4J6WAV0RTAZVS6R2%26tag%3Dworldcat-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D1878058762

Pete, sometimes you scare me.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Well, most of us use radios that are 40-70 years old, why not old computers. I bet Opcom had some VAXes or a PDP-11 floating around in his Bunker of Doom!

My previous post was dripping with sarcasm and you could install OS-2 still although drivers for peripherals might be an issue on a new system.  But the best reason for running OS-2 now would be an authentic vintage setup maybe attached to a Yaesu FT-980 running with its then fairly new "CAT" system. 

I still have my FT-980 and what a joy it would be to combine a sluggish operating system with poorly designed hardware controlling a transceiver where the only thing louder than the receiver phase noise is the poorly designed power supply/cooling fan.  The FT-980 was the first non-kit brand new piece of gear I purchased.  I still have it and the used Drake C line I bought from the store the same day.  I still use the C line quite a bit; the FT-980 is nice to look at.

Bill, you could be the modern day OS-2 guru 

[ka3zlr]

I was always amazed by Card Punching an how many cards needed for a program once upon a time. But them programs ran...

73
Jack.

[KB2WIG]

pdp/11 , asr33, paper tape and time share...
roll up yer progrm in yer KoDak can and walk lika enginear
chicks dig it



klc