Why is DOS so bad?
What about Win95 then?
But MS has the apps I want
MS/DOS/Win95 Alternatives
Yea, but won't these be hard?
But, what about networking?
The Quick Story of MS/DOS
In late 1980 IBM wanted to produce its own line personal computers.
They needed an operating system for it. IBM approached Bill Gates,
who suggested they talk to Gary Kildall of Digital Research for a copy
of his CP/M for 16 bit computers. Through an odd twist of fate, which
no one is exactly sure of, IBM never got in touch with Mr. Kildall.
So Bill Gates contacted Tim Patterson of Seattle Computer Products
and purchased a copy of his 86-DOS (previously QDOS - Quick and Dirty
Operating System) for $50,000.
Microsoft then made a deal with IBM to provide DOS with their new
line of PCs. In August 1981 IBM introduced their new line of
microcomputers sporting Microsoft's DOS.
But the story doesn't end there. Even though IBM had a license to
use and produce DOS, Microsoft had retained the same license. So, when
other companies started realizing the success of IBM's line of
computers they started looking into it and realized they could clone
them. Hence was born the IBM compatible (clone). Now, these clones
needed an OS to run on. To maintain compatibility with IBM's PCs they
chose to run MS/DOS. However, retailers of computers had to obtain
licenses to sell MS/DOS with their computers. Microsofts licensing
policy required that the retailer to pay for a copy of DOS for each
computer they sold, not for each copy of DOS they sold. So every
person who bought a computer from one of these retailers had to
pay for DOS, whether or not they wanted or recieved it. This was done
under the guise of recieving DOS for free, when in actuality the
price was absorbed in the cost of the computer itself (which was raised
to cover it).
About DOS
Most of us know about the infamous 640k limit (barrier). One has to
wonder why it existed. Well, the answer to that is quite simple. The
limit originally was a hardware barrier, not software. The original
IBM PC's memory addressing method could only address 1 Megabyte of
memory. Of that they decided to set 384k aside for system things. Hence,
the original 640k barrier. In 1984 though, IBM introduced the
PC/AT, a 286 processor that could address 16 Megabytes. This should
raise the question of why the kept the 640k barrier of the original
computer. After all, with the advent of the 286 Unix compatible OS's
were quite common on microcomputers, and unix had no such barrier. This
means that the barrier was kept on the DOS platform only.
Microsoft claims that the barrier was kept for compatibility, this is
ridiculous, the only thing that had to be kept compatible was the
OS itself. . .all other programs would still have run just fine.
One will notice that shortly after the ability to address 16 Meg
came out the LIM (Lotus/Intel/Microsoft) Expanded Memory Specification
was released. A specification that they could license out for money.
It became another way for those companies to make more money from an
unsuspecting public.
Also, keeping the 640k barrier paved the way for Microsoft to
market its Windows Operating Environment (not System). This provided
another product for people to purchase, another $90 on top of
DOS's $60. Windows supposedly "broke" the 640k barrier and supposedly
allowed PCs to multitask. This is odd, since at the time Unix clones
had been multitasking on PC's since about 1984. Windows 3.0 (the
first usuable Windows) was introduced in about 1991. So Microsoft
was behind 7 years. . .and then not even properly.
And now Win95. . .
So in 1995 Microsoft introduced to the world its much expected
Win95 (nee chicago) 2 years and several name changes after its
expected release date. Win95 created the biggest shaking of the
computer market since the introduction of the PC. Stores stayed
open late on the night before the release date so they could start
selling it as soon as allowed by Microsoft License agreement. So
now MS has a "true 32 bit, multitasking OS" available for $89.
This is rather ironic since it is not all 32 bit, much of it is
still 16 bit. It is also ironic because several free unix clone
multitasking OSes have been avaliable free of charge for about 4
years before that. On top of that the GUI elements of the OS were
billed as revolutionary, when in reality they are just a rip off
of the Motif GUI elements, which had been in development since
the early 1980's.
Read some of my Observations of
MS
Email me Your Opinion
On this page: the facts are facts; the opinions are opinions.
Do not confuse one for the other.
My opinions are mine entirely, should
they be the same as any of my employer's/service provider's/friend's/enemy's/
dog's/cat's or your opinion it is entirely by coincidence. The opinions
expressed on this page in no way reflect anyone else's opinions.