🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <01bc072f$9490b4a0$60fc...@mans19.ios.com>,
Max Mansour <ma...@ziplink.net> wrote:
> Peter da Silva <pe...@nmti.com> wrote in article
> <5c0r63$8...@web.nmti.com>...
> > In article <01bc0257$9af3a3c0$7d80abcf@mike>, Ragu <rag...@iconn.net>
> wrote:
> > > i'd have to disagree with both of you. microsoft has done loads of good
> in
> > > getting us where we are with computers now,

> > In what way?

> > Here's a quick question: what's one single product originally produced by
> > Microsoft, or for which the Microsoft version was better than its
> competitors
> > in some real and substantial fashion.
> 
> MS Office 97. (I could name quite a few more, but you only asked for one)

So you're saying that Microsoft originally produced the product "office
suites"? Or are you saying that after 10 years of throwing money at the
product they've finally managed to make Microsoft Office a better suite
than Lotus or GeoWorks or Mac's Lisa suite or the Xerox Star office system
or the other companies that pioneered the office automation field in the
80s and as far back as the late '70s?

After all, the first suite I remember seeing was the Xerox Star in 1982 at
the National Computer Conference in Houston, and it was already pretty mature
by then... that's actually 15 years before Office 97 existed, an eternity in
the software business.

Or did you misunderstand?

Remember, we're talking about how Microsoft has "done loads of good
getting us where we are with computers now"... where they've innovated,
rather than played catchup (however effectively).

(replace the word "product" with "product category" if it makes things
 clearer... we're looking for innovation, not throwing money at a project
 after someone else has blazed the trail)
-- 

             The Reverend Peter da Silva, ULC, COQO, BOFH.

                  Har du kramat din varg, idag? `-_-'