Posts made by izcoder

Regardless of whether or not you believe the bible is a lie, what do you have to lose? If you live your entire life in the Christian way, by doing good for others and treating others how you would like to be treated, and then you die and find out there’s no heaven, what have you got to lose?

Good post YB, I completely agree with you.

I’m not in disagreement there, there’s a lot of programmers out there who prefer the Linux operating system. There’s even more who run the Windows operating system. (Particularly those concerned with commercial programming, eg. compatibility issues.) But you’re the one who made the comment that IE always crashes on you, that’s why I asked.

I have a Linux box and a Windows XP Professional box, and there’s advantages to both of them. I can clearly see why anyone would prefer Linux if they are a programmer (free, open-source, etc.) But I can’t for the life of me understand why anyone would switch to Mac OS X. Yes, I’m sure they’re be some backlash against that comment, but I guess I had it coming :lol:. Even those new Apple advertisements with the fools saying that they “switched over”, doesn’t convince me. Stability is not so much an issue anymore, as much as it was with Windows ME.

@TG:

Uh, Apple Clones are actually on the rise and beginning to take shape.

LOL, you make me laugh. :lol:
Anyways, that still doesn’t change that fact that in the early days, Apple f*cked up, and as a result people wouldn’t adopt Apple’s strategy because it required them to invest in completely new equipment, and lose all of their data.

@TG:

A little more buggy? Try comparing MS/OS to Lunix and Sun. MS, IE is especially buggy, I get internal errors all the time. You’re right, all Microsoft is trying to do is turn a profit to “please” its stockholders. It’s is impossible to write perfect software (there is no such thing as “perfect” to a code writer [like myself] only what is most efficient). Ask any code writer what he thinks of MS code and you’ll see pretty much the same answer. As for Apple, at least I would consider their products reliable, not perfect but definitely much better than MS.

I’m assuming you mean “Linux.” But I will agree with you there, many programmers are quick to criticize Microsoft (even though most of them are the hyprocritical type who have multiple Windows OS products.)

In all honesty Moses, if IE is so buggy and Microsoft products are not “up to par” with Apple’s, why are you using them? And don’t tell me cost, becuase you and I both know that switching to a Linux based solution costs to absolutely nothing.

@TG:

Although MS-DOS was the dominant operating system being used by IBM, it was not the only one, and certainly never the best. But Microsoft made sure that their dominance in the OS market for IBM PCs quickly turned into a near-monopoly. They devised a licensing agreement that required any company which desired to use MS-DOS on some of their computers pay Microsoft for each computer they sold, regardless of whether MS-DOS was on that specific computer. Since MS-DOS was already the dominant operating system, the business model of the majority of the IBM clone manufacturers depended on selling it with some of their computers. They were therefore left with no choice but to agree to Microsoft’s licensing plan.

First of all, you always have a choice. You are correct when you say that DOS was not the only OS available on IBM’s line of computers. But Microsoft realized what the other companies were doing wrong. As the other creators of Operating Systems were busy charging $400 and above for software that wasn’t worth it, Microsoft took a risk and charged less than a $100. This now made it very affordable to buy a computer, and thus thrusted Microsoft ahead of the competition.

@TG:

This was shown Microsoft’s abilities were shown in 1985, where they did steal Windows from Apple. At the time, MS were the dominant software provider for IBM clones as well as for the Macintosh. Although Microsoft was putting down the Macintosh by claiming that it was for lazy people and that it was less powerful than MS-DOS, they were at the same time well aware of its superiority in both ease of use and functionality, and seeking to mimic it in their own operating system. Microsoft approached Apple, requesting to license some of the key interface elements from the Macintosh for use in what was to be called Windows. Apple, of course, declined. Microsoft again used its dominance in one market – this time Macintosh software – to force the industry to bend to its wishes. It threatened to discontinue development of Macintosh applications unless Apple licensed portions of the Mac OS. This would have been a major blow to Apple, since Microsoft was the dominant software provider for the Mac. So Apple was strong-armed into licensing parts of their OS to Microsoft. Windows 1.0 was introduced later that year.
In 1990, Microsoft released Windows 3.0. By then, Microsoft had clearly gone far beyond its licensing agreement with Apple, and had stolen patented intellectual property. Apple took Microsoft to court, and many industry experts thought Apple had a very strong argument and was going to nail Microsoft. Apple lost the case.

Ahh, the beauty of our justice system. :wink:

@TG:

Windows does not have any better of an interface than OS-2 or MacOS; it merely has more products available for it, because of Bill Gates’ marketing strategy. Microsoft has always targeted developers, trying to make them develop only for Windows, so that the majority of applications would reinforce Microsoft’s monopoly.

Quite contrary to the wrong path that Apple took. I would go as far as to call Apple a monopoly also. (Although this has yet to be proven by the Justice deparment.) If Apple had the better interface and superior Operating System, why aren’t they in Microsoft’s position today? Let me tell you why. First of all, it has been the policy of Apple throughout the years to do things “by themselves.” Unlike Microsoft, which developed it’s operating system for the popular hardware at that time (x86), Apple chose not to persure that line of hardware, and instead only sold it’s operating system on hardware that Apple had built. This severly choked off the amount of sales Apple was able to gain, and it’s the primary reason that Apple is lagging behind today. When you buy Mac OS, what are you choices for hardware to run that Operating System on? 1 choice. Apple hardware. I rest my case…

@TG:

Who cares that the product is less stable than the San Andreas Fault and has more bugs than the Everglades? Which is why Win 95 and 98 are so buggy internal error! :evil:

Although Windows products tend to be a “little bit” more buggy, I think it’s all ties into the fact that Microsoft’s goal is not to provide realiable software, but rather to please it’s stockholders. Now, I’m not quite sure what you mean by “more bugs” but if you’re relating to hacker attack and such, then that’s really not their fault. It’s is IMPOSSIBLE to write perfect software, and in Apple’s case, it’s pretty much a “security thru obscurity” situation. Apple’s such a little fish in a big sea, who would want to attack them? Why attack the little guy, when you can gain more publicity attacking the richest company in the world?

Ok Moses, here you go. I did some reading and came across some surprising information. Looks like we were both a little bit off. Here’s the history of DOS:

1973

Gary Kildall writes a simple operating system in his PL/M language. He calls it CP/M (Control Program/Monitor).
(Control Program for Microcomputer)

1979

February

Apple Computer releases DOS 3.2.

July

Apple Computer releases DOS 3.2.1

1980

April

Tim Patterson begins writing an operating system for use with Seattle Computer Products’ 8086-based computer.
Seattle Computer Products decides to make their own disk operating system (DOS), due to delays by Digital Research in releasing a CP/M-86 operating system.

August

QDOS 0.10 (Quick and Dirty Operating System) is shipped by Seattle Computer Products. Even though it had been created in only two man-months, the DOS worked surprisingly well. A week later, the EDLIN line editor was created. EDLIN was supposed to last only six months, before being replaced.

September

Tim Patterson shows Microsoft his 86-DOS, written for the 8086 chip.
October
Microsoft’s Paul Allen contacts Seattle Computer Products’ Tim Patterson, asking for the rights to sell SCP’s DOS to an unnamed client (IBM). Microsoft pays less than US$100,000 for the right.

December

Seattle Computer Products renames QDOS to 86-DOS, releasing it as version 0.3. Microsoft then bought non-exclusive rights to market 86-DOS.

1981

February

MS-DOS runs for the first time on IBM’s prototype microcomputer.
July
Microsoft buys all rights to DOS from Seattle Computer Products, and the name MS-DOS is adopted.
August
IBM announces the IBM 5150 PC Personal Computer, featuring a 4.77-MHz Intel 8088 CPU, 64KB RAM, 40KB ROM, one 5.25-inch floppy drive, and PC-DOS 1.0 (Microsoft’s MS-DOS), for US$3000.

1982

May

Microsoft releases MS-DOS 1.1 to IBM, for the IBM PC. It supports 320KB double-sided floppy disk drives. Microsoft also releases MS-DOS 1.25, similar to 1.1 but for IBM-compatible computers.

1983

March

MS-DOS 2.0 for PCs is announced. It was written from scratch, supporting 10 MB hard drives, a tree-structured file system, and 360 KB floppy disks.
October
IBM introduces PC-DOS 2.1 with the IBM PCjr.

1984

March

Microsoft releases MS-DOS 2.1 for the IBM PCjr.
Microsoft releases MS-DOS 2.11. It includes enhancements to better allow conversion into different languages and date formats.
August
Microsoft releases MS-DOS 3.0 for PCs. It adds support for 1.2 MB floppy disks, and bigger (than 10 MB) hard disks.
November
Microsoft releases MS-DOS 3.1. It adds support for Microsoft networks.

1986

January

Microsoft releases MS-DOS 3.2. It adds support for 3.5-inch 720 KB floppy disk drives.
Microsoft releases MS-DOS 3.25.

1987

April

IBM announces DOS 3.3 for PCs, for US$120.
August
Microsoft ships MS-DOS 3.3.
November
Compaq ships MS-DOS 3.31 with support for over 32mb drives.

1988

Digital Research transforms CP/M into DR DOS.

June

Microsoft releases MS-DOS 4.0, including a graphical/mouse interface.

July

IBM ships DOS 4.0. It adds a shell menu interface and support for hard disk partitions over 32 MB.
November
Microsoft releases MS-DOS 4.01.

1990

April

Microsoft introduces Russian MS-DOS 4.01 for the Soviet market.
May
Digital Research releases DR DOS 5.0.

1991

June

Microsoft releases MS-DOS 5.0. It adds a full-screen editor, undelete and unformat utilities, and task swapping.
GW-BASIC is replaced with Qbasic, based on Microsoft’s QuickBASIC.
September
Digital Research Inc. releases DR DOS 6.0, for US$100.

1993

March

Microsoft introduces the MS-DOS 6.0 Upgrade, including DoubleSpace disk compression. 1 million copies of the new and upgrade versions are sold through retail channels within the first 40 days.
November
Microsoft releases MS-DOS 6.2.

1994

February

Microsoft releases MS-DOS 6.21, removing DoubleSpace disk compression.
April
IBM releases PC-DOS 6.3.
June
Microsoft releases MS-DOS 6.22, bringing back disk compression under the name DriveSpace.

1995

February

IBM announces PC DOS 7, with integrated data compression from Stac Electronics (Stacker).
April
IBM releases PC DOS 7.

In August of 1995 Microsoft introduces Windows 95, it includes MS DOS 7.0 but it’s clear that DOS is going to die a slow death.

LOL.

Hey F_alk, you’re completely missing my point. Although you criticize my argument, you fail to explain how Mr. Gates “stole” Windows. Maybe it’s because you can’t explain it. You want to know why you can’t explain it? Becuase he didn’t steal it! Microsoft developed Windows ON THEIR OWN.

Moses, explain to me please how it’s stealing when Microsoft paid the creators $50,000. Sounds to me like a legitimate sale.

Yea, but how else to you stop an enemy who doesn’t care if they die?

You’ve gotta be kidding me, DOS? I did not steal DOS! He hired the creator of DOS onto Microsoft and then along with other Microsoft employees, they developed it into a sellable product.

And strike two. He didn’t steal Windows either. Mac didn’t have and probably never will (unless they dramatically change their business style) a substantial ground in the computer market. Windows is far from similar to the Mac OS, the only similiarties lie in the fact that they both utilize a GUI. I would even go as far as to say that they aren’t even in competition with one another…

@TG:

Bill Gates ran around swindling and stealing other people’s stuff, then calling it his own.

Elaborate on that please. And please don’t say Windows, 'cuz that just isn’t true. :wink:

@TM:

I think what Sir Izcoder was trying to point out is that in war, you care less about the causalities the enemy takes and more on how many causalities your own men will take.

That’s was precisely my point. I didn’t say anywhere that American lives were more valuable than Japanese, but in times of war, the most important thing is protecting your own people. Japan was clearly the agressor, and it’s their own fault that they suffered so many casualities. The Japanese soldiers didn’t care if they died, as long as they killed American’s. Now how were we supposed to stop that? Bombing their city made a lasting impression on them, and they realized that they couldn’t beat us.

@FinsterniS:

Another BIG problem is the fact the governement are often making decision not because it is right, but to be reelected; that is just stupid.

I completely agree with you there, with a few notable exceptions…number one being the dropping of the atomic bombs. Not a very popular move by the president, but it had to be done. (Most people who disagree with the dropping don’t realize how lucky they really were, becuase an invasion of japan would’ve cost millions of american lives.)

Hey guys, I found some very interesting statistics on this topic…check it out: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/dcf/duc.htm

By better politicians, I mean ones that regard the safety of American citizens over that of a political agenda. Case-in-point, is George W. Bush, in which he granted amnesty to the illegal aliens living in our country. Purely a political move for the Mexican vote, it’s also a danger to our country and a burden on our resources.

I would like to hope that they’re making the wisest of choices also, but it doesn’t always happen. :wink:

Most of the population doesn’t “want” drugs either.

In my opinion, with better politicians, wiser choices, and the military guarding our borders, we’d have a lot better chance of curbing the drug traffic into this country. I don’t think it’s a waste of money at all to try and protect harmful substances from entering this country.

@TG:

America spends at least $20 billion a year to fight a losing battle against drugs.

We’ve spent billions of dollars on research to fight AIDS also. Is AIDS gone yet? No. But it’s making a difference…

@HortenFlyingWing:

He should of ran in 96 and 9-11 would of never happened.

Believe it or not, he’s got a point here. Clinton had every oppurtunity to take out Osama, but he chose not to. Osama was even in a snipers gunpoint, but Clinton wussed out and backed down…

I don’t think it matters whether they’re liberal or conservative…they’re all full of a bunch of half-truths anways…

My biggest problem with this entire situation is that media tends to focus on situations in which the victim was a minority. I have yet to see anyone speak out against a white police officer being shot by a black man. When this sort of situation happens, people wave it off as not being “racially motivated.” Yet, when a black man was shot by a white police officer (in self-defence mind you), protestors (led by a black citycouncilman) stormed our freeway (seattle) and shut it down for hours in protest of a racially motivated shooting. Now, where was the outrage when the white police officer was shot a couple weeks ago? Where was that citycouncilman? I guess it’s only important enough to protest against when a black man dies…

Anyways, that probably has nothing to do with the post I started, but oh well. Don’t get me wrong, it’s an absolute shame when anyone dies, and I’m not mad at the officers or at the black community. My problem is with the hypocrites in the media and in government.