22 Jun
1999
22 Jun
'99
5:09 p.m.
Sam said:
Its a "story" (fictional) about the early
days of Apple vs. Microsoft. I
don't even want to talk about it really. Just know it was horrible in
every way possible.
If anyone dares to pipe up and say they actually liked it I swear to you I
will unleash such a torrent of rage upon thee so please don't. Keep it to
yourself for your own good.
Ligh-en up Sam! It's not the Learning Channel and it's not the History
Channel. It's Turner, and they just colorized history a little. Partly
to keep the audience interested and partly to squeeze it all into 2 hours.
I enjoyed all of the scenes that take place in Albuquerque. (MITS, the
hookers, Bill getting arrested). :)
You just have to remember that not everyone on this list lives here in
California. In other places it not considered polite to tell people what
they can't think, what they can't say. :)
--Doug
=========================================
Doug Coward
Press Start Inc.
Sunnyvale,CA
=========================================
22 Jun
22 Jun
6:48 p.m.
Sam said:
The only problem with this is that for the majority of the people who
watched the show, what they saw was reality. We know better,
but they don't. So now people all over have this view of how things
went, and who these people are that at best is inaccurate, and at
worst is blatantly wrong.
A good example of this is the movie Amadeus. A very good and
very well made movie. However it portrays Salieri as what is
basically an evil egotist who actively engaged in some morally
questionable acts against Mozart. When in reality this was not
completely the case. It turns out that the movie is rife with
inaccuracies. However, ask people who've seen the movie what
they think about Salieri, they'll say he was slime.
While I agree that the _intention_ is to entertain, and so artistic
license is used, I think that there is a point where one should be
required to explicitly point out that what they are portraying is not
"historically accurate" . And some might even say that it is
morally wrong to take so much artistic license as to knowingly
make someone appear to be a much worse person than they
actually were just to "move the story along".
George
Its a "story" (fictional) about the
early days of Apple vs. Microsoft. I
don't even want to talk about it really. Just know it was horrible in
every way possible. If anyone dares to pipe up and say they actually
liked it I swear to you I will unleash such a torrent of rage upon thee
so please don't. Keep it to yourself for your own good.
Ligh-en up Sam! It's not the Learning Channel and it's not the History
Channel. It's Turner, and they just colorized history a little. Partly to
keep the audience interested and partly to squeeze it all into 2 hours.
I enjoyed all of the scenes that take place in Albuquerque. (MITS, the
hookers, Bill getting arrested). :)
You just have to remember that not everyone on this list lives here in
California. In other places it not considered polite to tell people what
they can't think, what they can't say. :) --Doug 
7:16 p.m.
The only problem with this is that for the majority of
the people who
watched the show, what they saw was reality. We know better,
but they don't. So now people all over have this view of how things
went, and who these people are that at best is inaccurate, and at
worst is blatantly wrong.
Exactly, imagine if the movie "Tora, Tora, Tora" had fictionalized an
invasion of Japan by the US that then prompted the Japanese to bomb Perl
Harbor. There is "artistic license" and there is "artistic license."
The technique is actually used in propoganda films quite a bit and is known
as "the big lie" and takes a huge untruth and wraps around it the very thin
veneer of truth so that the victim swallows the complete package.
--Chuck
7:20 p.m.
The only problem with this is that for the
majority of the people who
watched the show, what they saw was reality. We know better,
but they don't. So now people all over have this view of how things
went, and who these people are that at best is inaccurate, and at
worst is blatantly wrong.
Exactly, imagine if the movie "Tora, Tora, Tora" had fictionalized an
invasion of Japan by the US that then prompted the Japanese to bomb Perl
Harbor. There is "artistic license" and there is "artistic license."
The technique is actually used in propoganda films quite a bit and is known
as "the big lie" and takes a huge untruth and wraps around it the very thin
veneer of truth so that the victim swallows the complete package.
--Chuck 
23 Jun
23 Jun
8:37 a.m.
At 06:20 PM 6/22/1999 -0600, you wrote:
One wonders why those most defamed by the picture - Gates, Jobs, etc -
haven't
Charles E. Fox
Chas E. Fox Video Productions
793 Argyle Rd. Windsor N8Y 3J8 Ont. Canada
email foxvideo(a)wincom.net Homepage http://www.wincom.net/foxvideo
sued yet.
--
Jim Strickland
jim(a)DIESPAMMERSCUMcalico.litterbox.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
BeOS Powered!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Prominant people are at the mercy of small minded individuals who try to
take advantage of their standing for personal gain. If the VIP defends
himself in court the resulting publicity only makes things worse.
You realize, of course, that I am going by hearsay, not experience.(sigh)
Regards
Charlie Fox
8:27 a.m.
At 06:48 PM 6/22/1999 -0500, you wrote:
While I agree that the _intention_ is to entertain, and so artistic
license is used, I think that there is a point where one should be
required to explicitly point out that what they are portraying is not
"historically accurate" . And some might even say that it is
morally wrong to take so much artistic license as to knowingly
make someone appear to be a much worse person than they
actually were just to "move the story along".
George
Hollywood movies have been making enemies in every field they have
tackled. They hire technical consultants then go their own way leaving the
consultant with egg on his face.
While it is far off the subject of computers, if you would like to see how
Hollywood has treated your friendly northern neighbour, I would suggest you
read "Hollywood's Canada", by Pierre Berton, ISBN: 0-7710-1223-3.
What about "Triumph of the Nerds"? I liked it, but did you more
experienced people find it accurate?
Regards
Charlie Fox
Charles E. Fox
Chas E. Fox Video Productions
793 Argyle Rd. Windsor N8Y 3J8 Ont. Canada
email foxvideo(a)wincom.net Homepage http://www.wincom.net/foxvideo
5:43 p.m.
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Charles E. Fox wrote:
What about "Triumph of the Nerds"? I liked
it, but did you more
experienced people find it accurate?
It's not Hollywood, it was entirely written by Bob Cringely, who also
writes computer articles in many magazines (among other things) and shown
on the People's Broadcasting Station. And yes, it was fairly accurate.
--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is Power
7:08 p.m.
New subject: ...
We were just given a GE Fanuc case. Apparently it held some sort of hard
drive, which has evaporated. Does anyone know what these things are?
8:29 p.m.
New subject: GE Fanuc ? was: Re:...
Upon the date 08:08 PM 6/23/99 -0400, Merle K. Peirce said something like:
We were just given a GE Fanuc case. Apparently it held some sort of hard
drive, which has evaporated. Does anyone know what these things are?
GE Fanuc is an OEM who makes CNC controls for installation onto machine
tools (if that's what you meant by the expression "these things"). Hard to
tell what HD belongs in it. Only good way I can presently think of is to
befriend a machine tool dealer or his service tech manager who are closely
connected w/GE Fanuc. Or perhaps a CNC engineer or maintenance tech at a
company who uses several GE Fanuc-equiped machining centers. Then you could
approach solving your questions about this unit.
Good luck, regards, Chris
-- --
Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian
Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net
Member of Antique Wireless Association
Check our redesigned website!
URL: http://www.antiquewireless.org/
24 Jun
24 Jun
7:21 p.m.
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Charles E. Fox wrote:
What about "Triumph of the Nerds"? I liked
it, but did you more
experienced people find it accurate?
I found it to be mostly accurate, and besides that it gave a fresh
perspective on the battle between Apple and Microsoft. The _Pirates_
movie is not even in the same league. Its in better company with shows
like "Beverly Hills 90210".
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 05/25/99]
8:09 p.m.
Rumor has it that Sellam Ismail may have mentioned these words:
I found it to be mostly accurate, and besides that it
gave a fresh
perspective on the battle between Apple and Microsoft. The _Pirates_
movie is not even in the same league. Its in better company with shows
like "Beverly Hills 90210".
I'd have to disagree there... BH90210 at least had *lotsa cute babes*...
;^>
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger --- sysadmin, Iceberg Computers
Recycling is good, right??? Ok, so I'll recycle an old .sig.
If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
8:18 p.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 139 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19990625/dd1136d8/at…
22 Jun
22 Jun
7:27 p.m.
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Doug Coward wrote:
Ligh-en up Sam! It's not the Learning Channel
and it's not the History
Channel. It's Turner, and they just colorized history a little. Partly
to keep the audience interested and partly to squeeze it all into 2 hours.
I enjoyed all of the scenes that take place in Albuquerque. (MITS, the
hookers, Bill getting arrested). :)
You just have to remember that not everyone on this list lives here in
California. In other places it not considered polite to tell people what
they can't think, what they can't say. :)
Ok, obviously everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but I would expect
everyone here to know the difference between fact and outright bullshit
(not to mention bad acting, terrible writing, etc). If anyone here were
to express a favorable opinion of that show then I'd be highly skeptical
of that person's ownership of a brain.
So being that its a long shot anyone would actually say they liked that
atrocity, I felt safe in making an outlandish threat to verbally assault
with prejudice anyone who expressed such a liking. But don't think I
won't do it either.
The fact remains, this show was terrible, and I could not adequately
express in words the utter contempt I felt for it, so I spewed. It was
too much to hold in.
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 05/25/99]
6:46 p.m.
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Sellam Ismail wrote:
everyone here to know the difference between fact and
outright bullshit
Please, list a few specific distortions of facts in the movie (except for
questions personality which are subjective).
--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is Power
8:04 p.m.
At 07:46 PM 6/22/99 -0400, Max Eskin wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Sellam Ismail wrote:
Check the ABC News story (URL in earlier message) for an example or two...
-jim
---
jimw(a)computergarage.org
The Computer Garage - http://www.computergarage.org
Computer Garage Fax - (503) 646-0174
everyone here to know the difference between fact
and outright bullshit
Please, list a few specific distortions of facts in the movie (except for
questions personality which are subjective). 
8:48 p.m.
Hello Max...
Here's a few:
#1 Jobs and Wozniak were actually working at Atari when they designed the
Apple 1 (and was the resource for most of the parts they used), in fact, it
was the revenues from Jobs' project Breakout that financed the trip to
India they mention oh so briefly in the script. Also, Nolan Bushnell,
president of Atari, was offered the opportunity to invest in their start-up
first... he declined, but put them in touch with "Valentine" who introduced
them to Mike Markula in the first place. These facts were completely
omitted.
#2 IBM came to Microsoft looking for an operating system for the IBM PC,
not the other way around. Microsoft originally sent IBM to Gary Kildall
(developer of CP/M) who refused to meet with them. IBM returned to Gates
who, in turn, bought the OS from Kildall himself for $50K and then licensed
it back to IBM. These facts were totally inaccurate in the film.
#3 Bill's hair was never that blonde.
xoxo van
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Sellam Ismail wrote:
van
burnham +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ van(a)wired.com +++
senior production manager +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
wired magazine ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
520 third street third floor san francisco california 94107
415.276.4979 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
everyone here to know the difference between fact
and outright bullshit
Please, list a few specific distortions of facts in the movie (except for
questions personality which are subjective).
--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is Power 
9:10 p.m.
#2 is incorrect...the movie is absolutely correct on that fact. Seattle
Computer Products developed QDOS for some product of theirs. The guys name
is Tim Patterson. Gates bought the rights for $50K, renamed it and licensed
to IBM. Little know fact is that SCP retained the right to distributed
MS-DOS at no charge as long as they bundled hardware...amazingly they were
the only ones...SCP (at this point called Patterson Labs) was shipping
MS-DOS with a 8088 chip (hardware) to get around the restriction..this was
sometime in the mid-80's. MSFT bought Patterson Labs thereafter, Tim
Patterson went to work for Phoenix Technologies (BIOS guys) and I don't know
what happened after that. I was buying DOS from Phoenix and remember
reading about in Computer Reseller News.
There is also a hidden story about IBM going to Digital Research and them
shooing them off. From a friend who worked at DRI as a sales guy and knew
Kildall well...he said the story was really bent out of shape. He said the
IBM showed up on the wrong day, Kildall was out flying his plane and was
unreachable. DRI/Mrs. Kildall spent the day on the phone with IBM's lawyers
trying to pound out an acceptable Non-Disclosure. If you any of you have
every dealt with IBM you know that they *rarely* every sign NDAs and their
legal staff is slow. So they left after a day of this. Gary was mad at his
wife..if he was there they would have talked without the NDA. This same
guy...one of the best OEM salesguys you'll ever meet was personally
recruited by Gates to join him around that point. He didn't like
Gates...besides that he was working at DRI, they were the damn king of the
hill! Don't feel bad for my buddy though he went on to make millions at
Phoenix Technologies and SystemSoft, probably not as much as if he went to
work for MSFT.
This story isn't as juicy as the ones in print.
-Chandra
-----Original Message-----
From: CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu
[mailto:CLASSICCMP-owner@u.washington.edu]On Behalf Of van burnham
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 9:49 PM
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
Subject: Re: Pirates...
Hello Max...
Here's a few:
#1 Jobs and Wozniak were actually working at Atari when they designed the
Apple 1 (and was the resource for most of the parts they used), in fact, it
was the revenues from Jobs' project Breakout that financed the trip to India
they mention oh so briefly in the script. Also, Nolan Bushnell, president of
Atari, was offered the opportunity to invest in their start-up first... he
declined, but put them in touch with "Valentine" who introduced them to Mike
Markula in the first place. These facts were completely omitted.
#2 IBM came to Microsoft looking for an operating system for the IBM PC,
not the other way around. Microsoft originally sent IBM to Gary Kildall
(developer of CP/M) who refused to meet with them. IBM returned to Gates
who, in turn, bought the OS from Kildall himself for $50K and then licensed
it back to IBM. These facts were totally inaccurate in the film.
#3 Bill's hair was never that blonde.
xoxo van
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Sellam Ismail wrote:
Power
van burnham +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ van(a)wired.com +++
senior production manager +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
wired magazine ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
520 third street third floor san francisco california 94107
415.276.4979 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
everyone here to know the difference between fact
and outright bullshit
Please, list a few specific distortions of facts in the movie (except for
questions personality which are subjective).
--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is 
9:36 p.m.
#2 IBM came to Microsoft looking for an operating
system for the IBM PC,
not the other way around. Microsoft originally sent IBM to Gary Kildall
(developer of CP/M) who refused to meet with them. IBM returned to Gates
who, in turn, bought the OS from Kildall himself for $50K and then licensed
it back to IBM. These facts were totally inaccurate in the film.
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Chandra Bajpai wrote:
#2 is incorrect...the movie is absolutely correct on
that fact.
The movie was correct about SCP, (although the sign in the movie, ...).
But the movie was still completely wrong about MICROS~1 approaching IBM
about the idea of an OS ("It's called DOS") IBM approached MICROS~1 for
BASIC and CP/M.
Seattle
Computer Products developed QDOS for some product of theirs. The guys name
is Tim Patterson. Gates bought the rights for $50K, renamed it and licensed
to IBM. Little know fact is that SCP retained the right to distributed
MS-DOS at no charge as long as they bundled hardware...amazingly they were
the only ones...SCP (at this point called Patterson Labs) was shipping
MS-DOS with a 8088 chip (hardware) to get around the restriction..this was
sometime in the mid-80's.
At one point, Patterson's company was called
Falcon Technology.
MSFT bought Patterson Labs thereafter, Tim
Patterson went to work for Phoenix Technologies (BIOS guys) and I don't know
what happened after that. I was buying DOS from Phoenix and remember
reading about in Computer Reseller News.
Further interesting details:
Patterson was about to fold up his company and sell off its assets. A
few biggies (AT&T?, ...) were interested in an unlimited royalty-free
MS-DOS license. Microsoft filed suit to block the sale, claiming that it
was 1) non-transferrable, 2) for v1.00, NOT all subsequent (THE EXACT same
contract-writing incompetence as the Apple v MICROS~1 suit!). In a
bizarrely uncharacteristicly sensible move, MICROS~1 made the purchase,
eliminating the whole problem rather than letting it blow up into further
lawsuits.
There is also a hidden story about IBM going to
Digital Research and them
shooing them off. From a friend who worked at DRI as a sales guy and knew
Kildall well...he said the story was really bent out of shape. He said the
IBM showed up on the wrong day, Kildall was out flying his plane and was
Unconfirmed UL:
When the IBM people showed up on the wrong day in a phalanx of blue suits,
some of the DRI people thought that it was a drug raid.
unreachable. DRI/Mrs. Kildall spent the day on the
phone with IBM's lawyers
trying to pound out an acceptable Non-Disclosure. If you any of you have
every dealt with IBM you know that they *rarely* every sign NDAs and their
legal staff is slow. So they left after a day of this. Gary was mad at his
wife..if he was there they would have talked without the NDA. This same
guy...one of the best OEM salesguys you'll ever meet was personally
recruited by Gates to join him around that point. He didn't like
Gates...besides that he was working at DRI, they were the damn king of the
hill! Don't feel bad for my buddy though he went on to make millions at
Phoenix Technologies and SystemSoft, probably not as much as if he went to
work for MSFT.
This story isn't as juicy as the ones in print.
-Chandra
Was your friend one of those interviewed in the Computer Chronicles
eulogy?
10:05 p.m.
Chandra Bajpai wrote:
#2 IBM came to Microsoft looking for an operating system for the IBM PC, not the other
way around. Microsoft originally sent IBM to Gary Kildall (developer of CP/M) who refused
to meet with them. IBM returned to Gates who, in turn, bought the OS from Kildall himself
for $50K and then licensed it back to IBM. These facts were totally inaccurate in the
film.
#2 is incorrect...the movie is absolutely correct on that fact. Seattle
Computer Products developed QDOS for some product of theirs. The guys
name is Tim Patterson. Gates bought the rights for $50K, renamed it and
licensed to IBM. Little know fact is that SCP retained the right to
#2 is partially correct according to the biographies I have read of that
transaction. IBM did approach MS first, and was referred back to DR by
Gates. When whatever happened at DR happened, IBM returned to MS. Gates then
took on the challenge and then bought the OS from Seattle Computer Products
(not DRI), and of course the rest is history.
9:20 p.m.
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, van burnham wrote:
#2 IBM came to Microsoft looking for an operating
system for the IBM PC,
not the other way around. Microsoft originally sent IBM to Gary Kildall
(developer of CP/M) who refused to meet with them. IBM returned to Gates
who, in turn, bought the OS from Kildall himself for $50K and then licensed
it back to IBM. These facts were totally inaccurate in the film.
MICROS~1 did NOT buy from Kildall. Q-DOS (which later became MS-DOS and
PC-DOS) was written by Tim? Patterson of Seattle Computer Products. In
"Pirates", the sign on the building reads "Seattle Computer Company".
Was it ever called that?
Was $50K the correct amount?
The true story would be even more interesting than the show, what with
the whole Kildall/IBM meeting story, "Project Commodore", etc.
I've always loved the revisionist version by Kildall's friends that it was
a "legitimate business trip to deliver some documentation to Godbout".
Yeah, right. "Legitimate business" for the CEO to blow off IBM in order
to be his own courier delivery boy. (ref: Computer Chronicles eulogy
show)
11:42 p.m.
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, van burnham wrote:
#2 IBM came to Microsoft looking for an operating
system for the IBM PC,
not the other way around. Microsoft originally sent IBM to Gary Kildall
(developer of CP/M) who refused to meet with them. IBM returned to Gates
who, in turn, bought the OS from Kildall himself for $50K and then licensed
it back to IBM. These facts were totally inaccurate in the film.
Ugh! More mis-information! This has been hashed out enough times that it
should be standard issue lore. Gates bought QDOS from Seattle Computer
Products.
#3 Bill's hair was never that blonde.
And Steve Ballmer's head is much pointier in real life.
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 05/25/99]
11:37 p.m.
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Max Eskin wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Sellam Ismail wrote:
In all honesty, I only watched the last half (enough to determine the
first half is not worth going out of my way to catch on the re-run), and I
niether have the time nor the inclination to go through the trouble of
listing every technical and historical detail that was inaccurate (there
are plenty).
My biggest gripe is the way the personalities of the major players were
cast: Gates the snivelling little weasle (ok, this part may be accurate :)
and Jobs the meglomaniacal cult leader (hmm, this sounds accurate too).
The worst insult was the depiction of Steve Wozniak. I've had the
pleasure to meet him in person and he's nothing like the doofus he was
made out to be in the show.
Its just all around an insult to the culture that I know and love and grew
up with. It trivializes it into this abhorent melodrama, akin to what
you'd see on a daytime soap, only 10 times as sappy.
Blech.
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 05/25/99]
everyone here to know the difference between fact
and outright bullshit
Please, list a few specific distortions of facts in the movie (except for
questions personality which are subjective).
9323
days inactive
9325
days old
21 comments
16 participants
participants (16)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
at258＠osfn.org -
cbajpai＠mediaone.net -
cfandt＠netsync.net -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com -
dastar＠ncal.verio.com -
dcoward＠pressstart.com -
foxvideo＠wincom.net -
g＠kurico.com -
jim＠calico.litterbox.com -
jimw＠agora.rdrop.com -
marvin＠rain.org -
max82＠surfree.com -
van＠wired.com -
zmerch＠30below.com