Quote from bwolinsky:
What the fuck, dude... anyway, who gives a shit about 86-dos, that was so inferior to anything on the market at the time, or Xerox OS? These are totally irrelevant and nothing was copied. The idea of an OS was common knowledge, and certainly everyone came up with their own version. I recall packard bell's Navigator was a real flop, microsoft must have copied off them, too. Eventually everyone chose windows because of the same facts that programs were more stable and there was a greater variety of them. All of those OS systems were completely obsolete almost six months after they were released. You seem to be basing your argument on a quite poorly researched Wiki article alleging copying when the only figment of copying I can see is the idea of an operating system. That does not imply blatant copying.
Think about windows. There's decades of work built into it, and you seem to think the advances were copied from somewhere else. You're sorely mistaken here.
What does this have to do with the future of the US? I'll tell you, it's the same Neo-Marxist rhetoric that thinks communism is the best form of government. Ideas like patents are not beneficial in those societies, so I must conclude you are one, too. If not Neo-Marxist, then Neo-Fascist, without the blowing up of your body in crowded areas.
Either way, the best way to deal with them is with a smart bomb.
I'm probably not going to get anywhere with you, as you've lost touch with reality.
The reason why products were built for windows was due to the luck in become the os for the ibm-spec pc, microsoft then started to sell the os to the clones.
Microsoft then started to give kickbacks to oems to sell MS software in place of other software in order for the oem to receive discounts, not by bulk alone. That is anti-competitive, according to the law and that is the problem.
The basic "innovation" itself did not come from MS, there were other companies and projects with various technologies, all MS did was reverse engineer or bought that tech and incorporate it into windows, they used their monopoly position in the os market, to then use it as a wedge for other products like IE, Office, etc. That is the point.
Taking an idea and incorporating it, is not innovation, it is imitation, that is my point.
Ibm wanted cp/m originally, for whatever reasons, the contract was broken off and IBM picked a cp/m clone DOS, those are the facts.
Of course patents for real "innovation" are necessary, but all MS did was take previously designed products in other forms and incorporate it with Windows.
By the way, there is a large difference between state capitalism, the MERGER of state and corporate powers which is the system we are currently going into judging by the bailouts and the actions of the public-private FED (geithner worked for the private NYFED), and socialism.
There may be innovation from the Business-side, but from the technology side there was not any thing other then taking previously implemented tech and adding it to Windows. That is the history of MS.
