PDA

View Full Version : thanks Bill



sweeneytodd
May 14th, 2008, 03:41 AM
we have to acknowledge the fact that if bill gates didn't create his empire, we would still be fiddling with old crappy 486 computers playing space invaders for the 20 millionth time. windows made the market through compatibility and enabled a competitive market, increased technology ten-fold, windows being so resource hungry demanded designers to pull their finger out and find a way to increase their technology and slice of the market.
So, like it or lump it.....from me, one big thank you to Mr Bill Gates
you can have your operating system, but thanks for bringing computers to us alot faster

LaRoza
May 14th, 2008, 03:45 AM
we have to acknowledge the fact that if bill gates didn't create his empire, we would still be fiddling with old crappy 486 computers playing space invaders for the 20 millionth time. windows made the market through compatibility and enabled a competitive market, increased technology ten-fold, windows being so resource hungry demanded designers to pull their finger out and find a way to increase their technology and slice of the market.
So, like it or lump it.....from me, one big thank you to Mr Bill Gates
you can have your operating system, but thanks for bringing computers to us alot faster

It is IBM really. The are the ones who were supposed to make the PC. They went shopping for an OS, and only came to Microsoft after they missed someone else (forget his name, but he wrote CP/M) because he was out of the office. MS didn't have the OS, but they accepted the contract and then bought QDOS and renamed it. It was all luck that MS was even considered. If they weren't, IBM would have just gone back to their original target, or found someone else.

sweeneytodd
May 14th, 2008, 03:56 AM
who made qdos, thats amazing, bill gets all the credit, i thought bill made dos and his mate made unix but wanted it to be open sourced

bsharp
May 14th, 2008, 04:25 AM
UNIX != Linux

UNIX was made in 1969 (i think) at Bell Labs.

Linux is technically just the kernel, created from scratch by Linus Torvalds in 1991 in order to make a UNIX-like OS to run on the i386 platform, who released the source code under the GPL.

gsmanners
May 14th, 2008, 04:43 AM
So, should we thank Adolf Hitler for helping make the world a more peaceful place? After all, if it weren't for him and his violent attempt to overthrow the world while murdering millions of Jews, efforts of modern diplomacy *might* not have advanced as quickly as they did.

bufsabre666
May 14th, 2008, 05:18 AM
i thank bill all the time, sure he hasnt helped open source that much but in some linux communities hes treated like hes a monster and an evil human being, but i also tank everyone else who help, apple, ibm, sun, etc

PurposeOfReason
May 14th, 2008, 06:02 AM
So, should we thank Adolf Hitler for helping make the world a more peaceful place? After all, if it weren't for him and his violent attempt to overthrow the world while murdering millions of Jews, efforts of modern diplomacy *might* not have advanced as quickly as they did.
Not really, but to his credit that all caused major medical advances. Just saying.

SomeGuyDude
May 14th, 2008, 06:04 AM
Asking Linux users to give Bill Gates credit is kinda an uphill battle. No matter what monumental accomplishments you point out in Gates's career, they're always going to find some way to explain how he deserves no credit and he's just a cheating scumbag.

By the way, to the poster who brought Hitler into the debate, congratulations. You're officially a member of the Total Toolbox Brigade. It's difficult to come across like more of an ******* than trying to bring the Holocaust into a discussion about computer software. Well done.

bufsabre666
May 14th, 2008, 06:12 AM
By the way, to the poster who brought Hitler into the debate, congratulations. You're officially a member of the Total Toolbox Brigade. It's difficult to come across like more of an ******* than trying to bring the Holocaust into a discussion about computer software. Well done.

ever hear of godwins law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law)?

Trenchbroom
May 14th, 2008, 07:27 AM
To me, here is the ranking order for who we have to thank for cheap, powerful & plentiful hardware today:

1. Internet. The computer industry struggled for 20 years to find the killer application that would facilitate every person, from child to grandparent, needing a computer. Word processing? Nice, but Granny only types one letter a year. Electronic bookkeeping? Nah, I'll stick with my accountant. Games? Hah! Kids stuff.

Being able to get pictures of little Timmy on his first birthday in between reading tips on Bridge and finding sewing patterns online? Sign me UP!

Of course someone had to answer the call to meet the demand for cheap internet computing, which leads us to:

2. AMD and Cyrix. Without these two pioneers, willing to face Intel's monopoly in the X86 world, commodity-priced hardware would have been slow in coming. Or rather, FAST commodity-priced hardware; I have no doubts that Intel would have been very happy to keep selling 486 boxes almost into the 21st century for the under $1000 internet computer crowd. If Intel were the only player in town would we even have chips above 2 GHZ, let alone the multi-core beasts we have now? I doubt it.

I bought my first X86 box in 1996; a Pentium class machine for over $2000 US. For clock speed it was barely average at the time. Eighteen months later I bought an above average K6-2 machine for $700. I could have paid $1200 for the same system and a PII chip or $800 for a lobotomized 266 mhz Celeron. Huge difference. Soon, Intel had to drop chip prices to stay in the lower pricing market tiers while pushing out new chips at the high end to keep their fat margins up, all thanks to AMD and Cyrix.

With the fledgling internet on cheap computers, you needed software to help the newbie masses get their Bejeweled fix. So the next thanks goes to:

3. Microsoft for Windows 95. Yes, I hate them as much as the next Linux fan. And Windows 95 in many ways was a deeply flawed piece of software, I'll give you that. That said: plug and play, 32 bit software, DirectX, TCP/IP support (barely), a decent GUI and 100% compatibility for AMD/Cyrix chips (vital at the time when many MS-DOS applications would not run correctly on non-Intel hardware) means they deserve some love.

Unlike the pillaging of treasure that came soon after, Microsoft earned their millions with Windows 95 IMO.

barbedsaber
May 14th, 2008, 07:38 AM
this history lesson is so much more interesting than the history homework I am supposed to be doing.

JohnSearle
May 14th, 2008, 09:48 AM
who made qdos, thats amazing, bill gets all the credit, i thought bill made dos and his mate made unix but wanted it to be open sourced

If you're interested in a cinematic presentation of all this, then go check out Pirates of Silicon Valley. It's an excellent movie.

IMDB LINK: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0168122/

It presents all the crazy antics that went on in the forging of the two empires - Apple and MS.k

EDIT: I just found a documentary on the same subject that has gotten pretty high reviews on IMDB. IMDB LINK: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115398/

- John

toupeiro
May 14th, 2008, 04:24 PM
Thats funny, I've only ever known QDOS to be a DOS Shell, and not a complete stand alone OS. I still have QDOS III on floppy, I ran across it last week, I use to use it on top of MS-DOS because it had some pretty powerful tools for its time, like tree based directory pruning and merging. It cake out of a company called Gazelle systems Inc. Surprised they didn't get hit for name infringement.

bryncoles
May 14th, 2008, 05:40 PM
Asking Linux users to give Bill Gates credit is kinda an uphill battle. No matter what monumental accomplishments you point out in Gates's career, they're always going to find some way to explain how he deserves no credit and he's just a cheating scumbag.

By the way, to the poster who brought Hitler into the debate, congratulations. You're officially a member of the Total Toolbox Brigade. It's difficult to come across like more of an ******* than trying to bring the Holocaust into a discussion about computer software. Well done.

yes. you really should have been talking about IBM (again). they never get credit where its due. http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/ also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

(incidentally id like to think we all know the holocaust was an abhorrent crime, and shouldnt really be made light of)

aysiu
May 14th, 2008, 05:46 PM
I doubt that your speculations about what computing would be like without Bill Gates have any grounding.

Just because you saw events turn out a particular way doesn't mean that's the only way those events could have gone. If Bill Gates hadn't brought computing to the masses, someone else would have. If Google hadn't become the search engine giant it is now, another company would have. If Johannes Gutenberg hadn't invented the printing press, someone else would have.

Who knows? Perhaps if Bill Gates hadn't been around, we might not have one huge virtual monopoly control desktop/laptop computing. We might actually have real choice for most users.

Wobedraggled
May 14th, 2008, 05:47 PM
We should all be using Amiga's but that's just my point of view.

phr0ze
May 14th, 2008, 05:59 PM
I agree with Asyiu. Well before windows there were other graphical interfaces that were progressing along. In reality without Bill Gates, things were still going to happen.

fatality_uk
May 14th, 2008, 06:04 PM
The "genius" of Bill Gates is that he has bought virtually ALL of Microsoft's technology in from the start. Microsoft have "created" very little in the way of original software, and what has been created, quickly got left behind.

Samueltehg33k
May 14th, 2008, 06:14 PM
lets not forget apple
innovations
1.Cheaper cost
apple computers made the first "PC" because when the apple 2 came out it was the only affordable computer on the market.
2.Floppy discs
lets face it the floppy disc media was excellent infact it was still good until the late 90's
3.Killing the floppy
after the CD came out for computer media it was time to put this PoS down although i still see people using floppies
4.User friendly Unix
apple made unix mainstream if OSX keeps getting more succesful it may do well for linux aswell

but i'll still give gates some props

http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/6783/billgatesubuntuminiqp2ou6.jpg

aysiu
May 14th, 2008, 06:15 PM
The genius of Bill Gates is that he knows how to squash the competition by any means necessary.

racoq
May 14th, 2008, 06:17 PM
So, should we thank Adolf Hitler for helping make the world a more peaceful place? After all, if it weren't for him and his violent attempt to overthrow the world while murdering millions of Jews, efforts of modern diplomacy *might* not have advanced as quickly as they did.

That was a bad joke. I think ubuntu code of conduct clearly don't permit making jokes about a Anti Semitic genecide ... you should be more carefull, and respectfullof a sensitive matter, if the forum staff wanted you could be punished for this.

forrestcupp
May 14th, 2008, 06:19 PM
I think the real one to thank is the greed of mankind. That's the reason home computers keep getting better and better.

They start editing video and movies with computers, and the average guy says, "I want to be able to do that on my computer." They make awesome CGI animated movies where it's so realistic that you can see hair blowing in the wind, and the average guy says, "I want to be able to do that on my computer." So they make computers that can do whatever people's current line of greed wants.

Samueltehg33k
May 14th, 2008, 06:20 PM
The genius of Bill Gates is that he knows how to squash the competition by any means necessary.

exactly as you can see by my OS list i used windows alot although i felt i was pulled in dragging and screaming rather than intrigued and interested

Samueltehg33k
May 14th, 2008, 06:22 PM
That was a bad joke. I think ubuntu code of conduct clearly don't permit making jokes about a Anti Semitic genecide ... you should be more carefull, and respectfullof a sensitive matter, if the forum staff wanted you could be punished for this.

*thanks this post*

sweeneytodd
May 15th, 2008, 02:28 AM
I know it would of happened anyway, I just think it happened alot quicker than it would of if it wasn't for the unmatched greed and inspirations of bill, all the other os have been playing catch up, windows set the pace and if you wanted a slice of the market, you needed to compete with windows. Do u seriously think we would be where we are without windows. every other os doesn't need all that grunt that vista needs for example.
ubuntu i'd imagine has never rung up ibm and said we need faster processor power, more memory, 3d rendering e.t.c., get my point

uraldinho
May 15th, 2008, 02:50 AM
well.... it's all ifs and buts... I can't believe I'm actually playing devils' advocate here.

OK, someone older than me should confirm this, but weren't Unix and Apple products far too expensive to buy at the time? Gates created what is basically a monopoly, but others didn't do much better neither. If Jobs wasn't too busy admiring his beautiful creations instead of concentrating on selling some normally priced products, the whole industry might have been different. The same goes for Unix.. Wasn't the Unix world fragmented and non-functioning at the time?

Everyone wanted to make money, some followed sell few at high cost business model, while others followed sell many at low cost model. Sell many at low cost model won, and other opportunists/elitists lost. The true losers were the creative/innovative companies that really produced something different but didn't have the financial strength to fight the MS monopoly.

uraldinho
May 15th, 2008, 03:46 AM
So, should we thank Adolf Hitler for helping make the world a more peaceful place?

Well, although a very very bad example, there is a degree of truth to it.... post WWII, the politicians got their act together and set up League of Nations (later became UN), NATO, EU, etc. All those organisations were born as a result of the human tragedy suffered during the WWII.

But of course we aren't going to thank hitler for what he did, instead we draw conclusions from it.

Canis familiaris
May 15th, 2008, 06:51 AM
we have to acknowledge the fact that if bill gates didn't create his empire, we would still be fiddling with old crappy 486 computers playing space invaders for the 20 millionth time. windows made the market through compatibility and enabled a competitive market, increased technology ten-fold, windows being so resource hungry demanded designers to pull their finger out and find a way to increase their technology and slice of the market.
So, like it or lump it.....from me, one big thank you to Mr Bill Gates
you can have your operating system, but thanks for bringing computers to us alot faster

Bill Gates did not produce the hardware. It was IBM, Intel, and AMD should be credited for that.

bsharp
May 15th, 2008, 07:05 AM
post WWII, the politicians got their act together and set up League of Nations (later became UN), NATO, EU, etc. All those organisations were born as a result of the human tragedy suffered during the WWII.

Not entirely true, the League of Nations was President Woodrow Wilson's brainchild after WWI ended in 1919. It was originally intended to be an organization which would rely on member nations's votes to resolve conflicts (much like a lawsuit). It was in the Treaty of Versallies (sp?), but was severely crippled because the US Congress refused to approve the US joining because of political tensions during that time between Dems and Repubs (Wilson, a Democrat, refused to consult the Republican-majority Congress on his fourteen points, of which the League of Nations was the most radical at the time). The U.N was born out of the ashes of the League of Nations to try to accomplish the same goals (and it has done a pretty shoddy job, IMO).

I'm studying for my U.S History Exam next week, and my teacher is extremely anal about details ](*,)

uraldinho
May 15th, 2008, 07:40 AM
OK, you are right... The League of Nations was set up post WWI, UN is post WWII. They both share more or less the same ideology.

jomiolto
May 15th, 2008, 09:25 AM
Have you by any chance ever heard of MS-DOS? I'm quite certain that in the 80s and even early 90s DOS had exactly the opposite effect on the development of computer hardware, because DOS had very bad support for anything past the original 8086 (no multitasking, only 16-bit, using more than 1MB of memory was a pain, etc.). Thankfully there were games (and some other applications) that took full advantage of more the advanced features of 286 and 386 -- and yes, Windows too when it eventually gained more popularity.

On the other hand, if the Unix operating systems would have been more widely used, I'm quite sure that there would have been much more demand for faster processors and more memory sooner, and especially 32-bit processors would have become a norm earlier than they did. Because 16 bits simply isn't ideal for Unix.

All of this is, of course, just speculation, and there is no telling what the computer industry would be like without Microsoft. It could be vastly more advanced (you must remember that Microsoft has also caused a lot of harm) or it could be less advanced. Personally I'd guess that technologically we'd be at about the same level, but there would be some major differences; for example, I don't think Intel architecture processors would have become so successful without Windows and instead we'd be seeing more of PowerPC, SPARC and whatnot. When it comes to software, I only see the monopoly as harmful, and I think we would have seen much more innovation in operating systems without Microsoft (just look at Apple) -- provided that someone else hadn't taken the same position.

(Sorry, if this post is messy and disorganized, I have too way many thoughts on the matter to get them in order in a short time ;)

Midwest-Linux
May 15th, 2008, 09:53 AM
The genius of Bill Gates is that he knows how to squash the competition by any means necessary.

Just like MSFT is doing right now by undercutting XP to $32 and even lower in some cases $16 to $22 so they get XP Home on those tiny laptops so that whole market won't go to Linux.

Tom Mann
May 15th, 2008, 10:39 AM
In response to the original post - it just goes to show that every cloud has a silver lining.

ZarathustraDK
May 15th, 2008, 12:53 PM
The ninth satanic statement applies here :

"Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years"

I salute Bill in recognition of him providing something for people to fight against, without him the computing industry would be a lot more apathetic place to be.

Apologies to any satanists out there.

Sef
May 15th, 2008, 12:53 PM
If Johannes Gutenberg hadn't invented the printing press, someone else would have.

Actually a Chinese printer, Bi Sheng, invented movable type printing.

From WikiPedia Printing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printing):


By 593 A.D., the first printing press was invented in China, and the first printed newspaper was available in Beijing in 700 A.D. It was a woodblock printing. And the Diamond Sutra, the earliest known complete woodblock printed book with illustrations was printed in China in 868 A.D. And Chinese printer Bi Sheng invented movable type in 1041 A.D. in China[1]. Sheng used clay type, which broke easily, but Wang Zhen later carved a more durable type from wood by 1298 AD, and developed a complex system of revolving tables and number-association with written Chinese characters that made typesetting and printing more efficient.

bufsabre666
May 15th, 2008, 01:12 PM
Actually a Chinese printer, Bi Sheng, invented movable type printing.

From WikiPedia Printing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printing):

yeah but he didnt print a bible so he gets no props

toupeiro
May 15th, 2008, 03:54 PM
Who knows? Perhaps if Bill Gates hadn't been around, we might not have one huge virtual monopoly control desktop/laptop computing. We might actually have real choice for most users.

If you consider the other players before DOS/Windows really became strong in the end user world, the runner-up on 80x86 hardware would have been IBM. We'd all be running OS/2 Vista and using Lotus Notes for document management and email right now. Another option considering their success at the time could possibly have been Sun Microsystems. I think for Suns sake, its better Microsoft was around, because they have been reinventing themselves to be a major open source supporter and IMO they have been doing a fantastic job. They would likely be a little more closed-minded towards open source if events had not transpired like they did.

days_of_ruin
May 15th, 2008, 04:08 PM
Well, although a very very bad example, there is a degree of truth to it.... post WWII, the politicians got their act together and set up League of Nations (later became UN), NATO, EU, etc. All those organisations were born as a result of the human tragedy suffered during the WWII.

But of course we aren't going to thank hitler for what he did, instead we draw conclusions from it.

UN is worthless.What human tragedy have they ever prevented?Or at least ended fast.Not Darfur.

aysiu
May 15th, 2008, 04:09 PM
Well, it's all speculation in the end. It's easy, now that things are acceptable to think they might have been worse; but they also could have been better.

This is all an intellectual exercise anyway.

Regardless, I don't thank Bill for anything.

days_of_ruin
May 15th, 2008, 04:10 PM
yeah but he didnt print a bible so he gets no props

And it wasn't as good.And it was in china and china is was even more isolationist then they are now.

days_of_ruin
May 15th, 2008, 04:11 PM
Well, it's all speculation in the end. It's easy, now that things are acceptable to think they might have been worse; but they also could have been better.

This is all an intellectual exercise anyway.

Regardless, I don't thank Bill for anything.

Same here.He did it to get rich.So why would anyone thank him?

rune0077
May 15th, 2008, 04:31 PM
I'm with everyone who said we would probably have had computers anyway, with or without Bill Gates. Technology has a way of evolving regardless of any human motivation - it's in the nature of technology to improve itself.

I'm not thanking Bill Gates for MSDOS, I'm not thanking Linus Torvalds for Linux, AT&T for Unix, Stallman for Open Source, hell, I'm not thanking anybody for any product - in fact, from a business point of view, the developers and manufacturers should be thanking the consumers for wanting to use their products in the first place.

toupeiro
May 15th, 2008, 04:51 PM
Same here.He did it to get rich.So why would anyone thank him?

Um, because he didn't get rich by always offering sub-par products?! I'm not one to defend Microsoft, but come on. I'm not saying you should thank him, but the stance that Bill and Microsoft have brought nothing substantial to personal computing seems pretty elitist.. If he did nothing of value to people, then he would not be rich. Yes, we would have had computers, for better or worse, but speculation aside, we have them now the way we got them, which was greatly driven in the beginning by Bill Gates.

aysiu
May 15th, 2008, 04:54 PM
But why do we either have to thank him or hate him? Can't we acknowledge that his actions have had both positive and negative effects on the computing industry and the international economy? I don't understand this line of reasoning. So because Bill Gates hasn't done only bad things, we should laud him?

toupeiro
May 15th, 2008, 04:59 PM
But why do we either have to thank him or hate him? Can't we acknowledge that his actions have had both positive and negative effects on the computing industry and the international economy? I don't understand this line of reasoning. So because Bill Gates hasn't done only bad things, we should laud him?

As I said, I am not saying anyone has to thank him, but I am saying he has made very vast contributions to personal computing. My statements are in response to the why, which seem to surround all the negative that he and his company have brought, as if there were no fruitful contributions by him or his company. I don't understand that line of thinking. Bill Gates has done a lot of good and bad, and from a stance of analysis, because he has made some negative contributions, does not erase the positive ones, or vice versa...

sweeneytodd
May 16th, 2008, 12:12 AM
we'd be ten years behind without bill, so what was around ten years ago.? 1ghz processor with max 1 gb memory

the thing is, unix does need so much power because of its multi tasking qualities, windows's single thread input is where the computing power needed to lift its game

what do we have now, quadruple processors and you will probably need it to run windows 7

quick question what is the lowest you can run hardy on, 32mb memory and 5gb hard drive probably, then again you don't even need a hard drive do you

LaRoza
May 16th, 2008, 12:20 AM
the thing is, unix does need so much power because of its multi tasking qualities, windows's single thread input is where the computing power needed to lift its game


Wrong. Linux is the mostly commonly used operating system on super computers. Linux is ahead for 64 bit use and Linux doesn't have high system requirements which allows the hardware to be used for productivity. It is true the average person would have lesser hardware for general use without Windows, but that hardware would certainly exist and be used by people. Windows requires amazingly high system requirements for basic use. Linux doesn't have such limitations.

sweeneytodd
May 16th, 2008, 12:35 AM
its probably got more to do with configuration why supercomputers use linux, it not because they need all that power. anyhow whats the lowest you can run hardy on.

rune0077
May 16th, 2008, 12:36 AM
quick question what is the lowest you can run hardy on, 32mb memory and 5gb hard drive probably, then again you don't even need a hard drive do you

That would be understating it, I think. If I remember correctly, you need 256mb RAM (64mb for the server version).

sweeneytodd
May 16th, 2008, 12:42 AM
i just looked
300mhz processor
64mb memory
4gb hard drive
vga 640 x 480
cd rom

not much a

rune0077
May 16th, 2008, 12:43 AM
i just looked
300mhz processor
64mb memory
4gb hard drive
vga 640 x 480
cd rom

not much a

No, that's pretty impressive for how much quality you get for your quantity.

sweeneytodd
May 16th, 2008, 12:47 AM
this is my point!!
would computers be so technologically advanced today without windows because you can still run hardy on a 486 computer

LaRoza
May 16th, 2008, 12:50 AM
this is my point!!
would computers be so technologically advanced today without windows because you can still run hardy on a 486 computer

Windows makes higher spec hardware more common because it requires it. It would still exist if not for Windows. Without Windows, consumers wouldn't have to waste money on hardware they don't need, and people who do need it (or want it) could get it and take advantage of using it for things other than running the OS.

oo-boon-too
May 16th, 2008, 12:53 AM
So, should we thank Adolf Hitler for helping make the world a more peaceful place? After all, if it weren't for him and his violent attempt to overthrow the world while murdering millions of Jews, efforts of modern diplomacy *might* not have advanced as quickly as they did.
A+.
Seriously, that was an amazing statement;):KS

sweeneytodd
May 16th, 2008, 01:13 AM
i agree totally, i think it would of happened slower though. i don't think dual processors would of been around yet cause it seems logical windows wanted it so their single thread input was processed faster and seem to be multitasking, whereas, to my belief, unix was already dealing in a multi tasking enviroment, and to my knowledge which is limited, they could still run 64 bit without dual processors by increasing the bus width to 64 bit with the software to utilize it, so theoretically this would of happened before any advancement of processing power because there was no need for it, getting the info to the processor would of been priority.

So I guess this is a conclusion
computers would of dropped 32 bit along time ago and major advancements on bus speeds would of been achieved, maybe 128 bit or more, point is windows stunted this because their os couldn't handle it and they had a bigger share of the market, so i have changed my opinion i'm not thanking bill anymore as i think windows stunted the expansion of the bus

20thCenturyBoy
May 16th, 2008, 02:57 AM
That was a bad joke. I think ubuntu code of conduct clearly don't permit making jokes about a Anti Semitic genecide ... you should be more carefull, and respectfullof a sensitive matter, if the forum staff wanted you could be punished for this.

That wasn't a joke.

Depressed Man
May 16th, 2008, 02:57 AM
Actually a Chinese printer, Bi Sheng, invented movable type printing.

From WikiPedia Printing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printing):

Yup, the Chinese invented alot of things that made their way west through the Middle East. Though the difference was, the modification made in Europe by Johannes Gutenberg was to make it faster.

On a side note, I find it interesting how countries like to blame each other for copying software and ideas when none of them would even be where they are without Chinese inventions. Not saying that copying is good or bad, but it is the cause of most beneficial change (you take the idea and improve upon it). It's even how businesses do it (though they've gotten themselves caught up in such a big patent mess).

And back to the original post.

Yes, we do have Bill to (partially at least) thank for where we are today. Would we be where we are right now without Microsoft and Gates? Maybe. We could be behind. Hell, we could even be even farther forward for all we know.

Tatty
May 16th, 2008, 03:21 AM
its probably got more to do with configuration why supercomputers use linux, it not because they need all that power. anyhow whats the lowest you can run hardy on.

Ubuntu != Linux

Ubuntu is a version of linux designed specifically for home users, so it is certainly not the most streamlined version, but it is still much slimmer than windows.

Look at distros like Puppy and Damn Small to see how small linux can be, and still contain a fully functioning desktop.


Im fully with the argument that all the changes in computers would have happened anyway. And we would still be using just as powerful machines as ever.
Moores law states that computing power will double every 18 months, and this has stayed pretty much on track for the last 40-odd years, both before and after microsoft. The existance of windows has not changed this progress at all.

sweeneytodd
May 16th, 2008, 04:34 AM
apart from hitler and chinese printers, i wouldn't of bothered upgrading my computer if i had always used linux, and thats where the buck stops isn't it, if the main chunk of people using computers didn't need to upgrade hardware, why would there be any urgency to increase computing power

as for hitler, there would of been someone to take his place as most men fantasize about running the world, bush isn't any better, how many people have died from his decisions,

I think the Chinese would of ripped the idea off someone else though. someone was saying something about chinese inventions, can you please name one?

oo-boon-too
May 16th, 2008, 08:39 AM
People always strive to have more of what they don't need. It's a basic human instinct, or at least, everyone posseses this trait. There are many examples of this. Why did man go to the moon. Why do we send sattelites off into space past the moon. Why do we create any technology at all? Why aren't we currently bashing things with broken bones while we watch a giant tower in awe?

Sure, you may think that these thing are completely off the main idea. But really, they aren't. Why did we go to the moon? Maybe curiosity, or, just to beat the russians. Why make better hardware? Curiosity, or maybe to beat the Japanese (Haha...). Everyone wants to have the next best thing. Call it greed, call it the desire for technology, call it whatever you want.

markbuntu
May 16th, 2008, 09:09 PM
It was not bill gates and microsoft that drove the need for advancement in PCs, it was the games and the gamers and they still do.

Anyway, here's a few things Bill Gates did for the free software community:
Tried to make giving away free software illegal

Tried to stop the internet from being open to the public and then tried to get control of it.
Continually threatens lawsuits against free software users and companies
Claims linux infringes on Microsoft patents but refuses to disclose these patents

Basically invented pay for use software and anticompetitive agreements with pc manufacturers and sellers that must pay microsoft for every pc they sell wether it has ms software on it or not. This basically makes all pcs about $100 more expensive than they would be otherwise.

Depressed Man
May 16th, 2008, 09:31 PM
apart from hitler and chinese printers, i wouldn't of bothered upgrading my computer if i had always used linux, and thats where the buck stops isn't it, if the main chunk of people using computers didn't need to upgrade hardware, why would there be any urgency to increase computing power

as for hitler, there would of been someone to take his place as most men fantasize about running the world, bush isn't any better, how many people have died from his decisions,

I think the Chinese would of ripped the idea off someone else though. someone was saying something about chinese inventions, can you please name one?

The compass and gunpowder are just some of them. You could argue paper, but I think it was one of the few things that was created in several different civilizations around similar times (using different methods and materials). Then there were kites, the Chinese had the first idea for a helicopter (it was a children's toy). Aot of inventions were in response due to war though. :(

There was this documentary I watched in one of my classes detailing the history of some of modern warfare's weapons. Some of the ones from China were landmines (that would fire bamboo shards) when an army walked over them. Then they had a really primitive flamethrower (a group would carry it around) Really vicious stuff.

*sighs* What people make when they're busy killing each other.