that's the point thoibm needed something that worked that didn't make the pc's compete with the minicomputers, it couldn't be 'too good' (tho it did pretty much kill off the minicomputer or at least blurr the meaning of it)
'adequate' was absolutely ideal, a simple system for a machine with 64k of ram (and I'm not sure it had that much) and a 4(?)mhz 8086, ibm could have made the hardware a lot better but that would have been a bad idea for their marketing, plus of course even then the base pc was a good few thousand dollars when it came out
thing is tho, dos is good enough (you could probably get away with running a business with it even today) and there's an absolute shitload of software for it (y2k issues notwithstanding)
besides, theres no point wasting time making things absolutely perfect when you can sell good enough, though might explain some software quality issues generally, never mind just microsoft
but it really does make no difference, we'd still be where we are today with computers irrespective of who was making the most money out of it.
/runs windows & linux and still has a dos machine for it's particular use and is just happy that anything even works at all because it all has a mind of it's own and just takes the piss when you need it to work the most :D
('adequate' was absolutely ideal, a simple system for a machine with 64k of ram (and I'm not sure it had that much) and a 4(?)mhz 8086, ibm could have made the hardware a lot better but that would have been a bad idea for their marketing, plus of course even then the base pc was a good few thousand dollars when it came out
thing is tho, dos is good enough (you could probably get away with running a business with it even today) and there's an absolute shitload of software for it (y2k issues notwithstanding)
besides, theres no point wasting time making things absolutely perfect when you can sell good enough, though might explain some software quality issues generally, never mind just microsoft
but it really does make no difference, we'd still be where we are today with computers irrespective of who was making the most money out of it.
/runs windows & linux and still has a dos machine for it's particular use and is just happy that anything even works at all because it all has a mind of it's own and just takes the piss when you need it to work the most :D
discomeats This canoe,
Sat 24 May 2008, 20:37,
archived)
yeah i totally agreeDOS was hardly the greatest thing ever, even by version 7 let alone version 3 or whichever piece of crap I first used. But it worked and it was relatively cheap -- as sick with myself as typing that has made me feel given the stupid cost of Windows. But it did what it had to so why waste another year of man-hours making it perfect if it worked so long as people didn't mind shutting their computer down once a day?
And compared to the user-friendliness of UNIX which feels like being kicked in the balls by fifteen Nazi guards, DOS is like being tickled by an inadequate lover. :)
/Has no computer that will run DOS anymore but does run DOSBox so he can sometimes play Warcraft and Grand Prix 2 and Elite II and other games from his wasted youth blog.
(And compared to the user-friendliness of UNIX which feels like being kicked in the balls by fifteen Nazi guards, DOS is like being tickled by an inadequate lover. :)
/Has no computer that will run DOS anymore but does run DOSBox so he can sometimes play Warcraft and Grand Prix 2 and Elite II and other games from his wasted youth blog.
boris the spider,
Sat 24 May 2008, 20:51,
archived)
have a icl 16mhz 386sxa (typical for icl) well designed system.. *cough*
but it's got an eprom programmer on it and the software is too shite to work on anything faster, I think the 386's too fast for it to be honest :)
tho £100 or so gets me a programmer that'll program about 4 times as many memories and do other things
I'm just loathe to throw out working hardware really :D
(but it's got an eprom programmer on it and the software is too shite to work on anything faster, I think the 386's too fast for it to be honest :)
tho £100 or so gets me a programmer that'll program about 4 times as many memories and do other things
I'm just loathe to throw out working hardware really :D
discomeats This canoe,
Sat 24 May 2008, 21:14,
archived)
An old 386!Probably has a Turbo button as well, to slow it down because it was too powerful...? :) I want my old 486 SX25. With the turbo button pressed it could even run some old programs without flashing them by at 128fps...
( boris the spider,
Sat 24 May 2008, 21:26,
archived)
no turbo button, I think it would explode due to quality issuestho it has to be said, that some games were so shittily written that they were an actual blurr on this machine
trying the same games on an early pentium just created a magnificent spazzing blast of alternate conciousness :D
(trying the same games on an early pentium just created a magnificent spazzing blast of alternate conciousness :D
discomeats This canoe,
Sat 24 May 2008, 21:36,
archived)