What would've happened if Tim Paterson didn't sell DOS to Microshit?

white people always lose to indians when it comes to tech

Then they'd develop it themselves. It's not exactly rocket science.

The only thing MS was ever good at making was BASIC interpreters. Everything else has been either bought, poorly copied, or outright stolen.

is that why they where nowhere to be found before "muh diversity" bullshit lol?

It's not because they were incompetent, it's because buying, stealing and poorly copying is easier and cheaper.

I’m inclined to believe it’s a combination of both incompetence and laziness, given the company’s overall product history.

>implying they didn't copy BASIC
>implying they were even the best interpreters at the time

"Lazy" doesn't make sense when you are talking about a company. It's not like the CEOs have to do any extra work, it's just the engineers. The fact is, Microsoft has never cared about making a good product, just making sales.

It’s on the CEO to make sure the engineers and designers don’t turn out some half-baked turd of a product. Abdicating that basic responsibility, that’s what I mean by being lazy.

And of course Microsoft has never given a shit, because being a monopoly means you don’t have to. If not for IBM’s help, Microsoft wouldn’t have survived the 80s.

The purpose of a commercial company is making sales. If turd sells it is just fine. Actually, many superior products failed commercially and lost to inferior competition. Firewire vs usb for example.

Every single time a fucking program isn't working on my computer and I look up my error on the Internet it's some Indian guy with a Youtube video I can't understand explaining how to fix it with an annoyingly loud techno song in the background. Every single fucking time.

Why??

>Actually, many superior products failed commercially and lost to inferior competition.
That's not true.
It might appear that way if you're only looking on the technical side of things, but you have to remember that every product also has a business side.
In the case of Firewire vs. USB, it was the cheaper business side of USB that allowed it to prevail.
Similarly, IBM mainframes are technically superior to UNIX servers, which are technically superior to x86 shitboxes, yet it's x86 that's running everywhere because it's more economical.

Of course I meant superior technically because if turd is "good enough" it can be more commercially successful than super good but expensive product.

Implying everyone else wasn't doing same including fag jobs.

Anyway gates was never super computer genius. He is or was a visionary enterpeneur and market man like jobs who got what kind of product he could sell.
Also offering msdos for free to countless ibm clones ensured consolidation of pc standards which doesn't exist before.
In such way, gates was much more freegiver than anyother as he helped to shape a free hardware standard that could run a single os that was compatible with a lot of software.

this. can someone explain why Jow Forums whiteknights for ibm so much? they're a fucking garbage company

By the time of 286, Ms was already being used by all ibm clones. In this sense, Ms done a lot for the industry stablishing a common os and common drivers.
People really overlook how much it was important to have a common os so everyone could work and delivery software and hardware for some standard that would actually work.
Gates basically saw that and gone to several integrators giving dos for free.
If not gates, someone else would have done this

>Implying everyone else wasn't doing same including fag jobs.

To my knowledge Jobs never carried out a scheme to steal a competitor's code, like Microsoft did to make its Windows video product competitive with QuickTime.

And at least you can say he knew what made a good product. The Macintosh UI was a huge improvement over Xerox's, which is why it became the standard that everyone else follows to this day. It plucked the graphical desktop out of obscurity and introduced it to mainstream consumers.

By contrast MS-DOS was just a third-rate CP/M clone with the same spartan command-line shell that all home computers up until that point used. Also it was never free; the licensing cost was just built into every PC's price -- the Microsoft tax -- just as it is today. Microsoft got paid for every PC sold, even if customers elected to pay extra for DR-DOS or some other competitor.

Consolidation of hardware and software platforms into a monolithic Wintel duopoly was the absolute worst thing to ever happen to the home computer market. It's convenient in the short term, until you realize that the future of computing is in the hands of one or two companies with no competitors to keep them in check, and innovation slows while prices go up. Google and Amazon had barely gotten started in the 90s and early 00s.

Another thing: Bill Gates was a spoiled rich kid whose parents had high-level connections to IBM and got him the contract to sell an OS. He's not a visionary; for fuck's sake it took until Netscape for him to realize that this internet thing wasn't just a passing fad. Jobs was absolutely right when he said that Microsoft has no taste. It's a company whose success is founded entirely on luck and personal connections rather than any technical or design merit.

Standards shouldn't come out of having a monopoly. That's what organizations like ANSI and ISO and IETF and W3C are for.

Microsoft was chinking companies before the chinks

Bill Gates was a spoiled rich kid whose parents had high-level connections to IBM and got him the contract to sell an OS

i rememebr AJ and a few others saying Gates Dad was pretty high up in the pentagon / intel circles... can anyone elaborate on this ...got any links ?

who's AJ?

You’re a fucking idiot.

alex jones - he's always right

thanks for your indepth documentation

This, fpbp and /thread. Good job, user.

Attached: 1542340917874.gif (245x285, 916K)