> THAT is the least useful "history" that
I have ever seen about it! "Bill
> gates created...Microsoft purchased the rights"???? and WHAT Intel OS was
> it?
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, William Donzelli wrote:
What is the big deal? Large corporations have been
"supplementing" their
history for a long time. It is actually a bit of a challenge to find one
that hasn't at some point.
I'm NOT objecting to "supplementing". (THIS TIME)
I'm griping that in an entire page purporting to be the history,
they provide only a couple of sentences, and those leave gaps so
big that they don't make complete sense. (When saying that Bill
Gates created it in a hotel room in Albuquerque NM (a somewhat
less important detail), and then saying "purchased rights", they
oughta explain why they would "purchase rights" to what they
had created! Even "purchased rights to IMPROVEMENTS in order
to make a better OS for YOU" would be a better "history")
Then they have multiple paragraphs about one particular [kludged]
modification to it.
I would RATHER see tham "supplementing", than the few almost
RANDOM unconnected snippets that they provide.
I DO object to the Cringely CRAP, wherein he has Microsoft cold
calling IBM to sell IBM on the idea of having an operating system!
NEVER HAPPENED. (IBM went to Microsoft, and Bill Gates did a
good job of peddling his stuff)
and then Cringely starts preaching into the camera that business
students should study his FABRICATED FICTION! (THAT is when he
should F OFF)
and the Killdall eulogy (which I really like) is done by people
who loved and admired Gary, and don't SEE anything out of place
about standing up IBM to "deliver some documentation manuals to
Oakland" (not delegatable?)
It also fails to mention some of the "culture clash" issues -
IBM was "shocked" at the working environment at DR, and there
were unsubstantiated reports that when the IBM people arrived
(looking a bit out of place for that community, some DR people
thought that it was a drug raid.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com