This is How Microsoft Introduced Windows 1.0

[Tonkyboy]

I live in a little town in rural Norfolk, England, and I have a customer that I visit occasionally, who's husband still uses DOS, and refuses to use this "new fangled Windows thingy" as he calls it. The guy is about 90 though, and I think he uses his PC for his accounting. (He's loaded and I think he uses it to count his money).

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]jj463rd[/nom]There is a popular misconception that Xerox PARC created the GUI first.Folks read up about Douglas Englebart who demonstrated 2 networked computers using a primitive GUI that utilized Windowing elements and hypertext with a computer mouse,a revolutionary chorded keyset with video teleconferencing back in 1968 before even the ARPANET.Go to Wikipedia and read up about Douglas Englebart or The Mother of All Demos.The original 1968 demonstration has been saved and you can even watch it today.The demonstration occurred around the time of the Apollo 8 circumlunar moon shot.[/citation]
I wouldn't call Douglas Engelbart interface a true GUI, more like a precursor. Still the man was a genius and at that time he and his team presented technologies that today we take for granted.

 

[thebigt42]

I was still using my C-64/128 with Geos!

 

[Belardo]

[citation][nom]User69[/nom]Windows 1985, the introduction of multi-tasking. Apple 2010, still a work in progress. So sorry Apple, don't fret, there are plenty of idiots that will buy your stuff![/citation]

er... What are YOU talking about? In 1985, Windows 1.0 was useless. It wasn't multi-tasking. It couldn't handle over-lapping windows. GEOS for C=64/128 (especially 128) was far more usable and actually used by people. And UNTIL Windows95 came out in... late 1995, MS didn't have a consumer GUI OS. Windows 1.x~3.x are NOT Operating Systems, they are a shell - nothing more. It doesn't work without MS-DOS installed. Win3 only had semi-decent task-switching.

In 1985/86 - we had Amigas for $1000+ which *DID* pre-emptive multi-tasking. Apple didn't get multi-tasking until OS-X.

Under the hood, Windows is the messiest, sloppiest OS on the planet... even thou, Win7 is very good - by MS Standards. But even Apple still does some things way better than MS. Battery life on notebooks is killer because of the OS - not so much the technology... Run Win7 on a Macbook and its battery life is typical.

Before you say "MAC LOVER" - I never bought a Mac, but ran Mac emulation on my Amiga. I have an nice THinkPad for my notebook.

MS didn't have a good OS until Win2000/XP came out.

 

[killerb255]

I was six years old when Windows 1.0 was released. Unfortunately, my family was too poor to have had access to it back then...

 

[Belardo]

[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]But I always wonder how people can forget that MS did have a GUI, albiet not pretty but still a GUI, back in 1985. Most think Windows 3.11 was the first Windows GUI but thats not so.Ahhh the memories.[/citation]

It was the first usable GUI MS made for the masses... but it was still nothing more than a shell, not an OS. It had the same 1980 limited 8.3character file names. Meanwhile - Since 1984~85, Mac and Amigas had long file names with upper and lower case. Needless to say, going from Amiga to MS-DOS/Win3.1 was a SEVERE DOWNGRADE.

Lets put it this way, a 7Mhz 68000 Amiga with ADOS 2.0~3.0 would perform FASTER, boot faster, run programs faster than a 25mhz 486. I know because I had my 25Mhz Amiga next to my 100Mhz 486 back in 1995. We Amiga users were laughing at PC people getting their panties wet over Windows3.0. You really needed a 386 to get any kind of performance out of Win3. But of course, Bill gates/MS have the last laugh for taking over 90+% of the computer market.

At least MS is trying to make good OSes nowadays, they have nowhere else to go but down. Win7 is enjoyable and is modern... heck, even WinXP (2001) did things that were so... ugh... my 1990 Amiga wouldn't be so LOW-TECH to do.

Win95 - Hated that POS, but it was the only painful way MS can migrate people from pure crap to usable crap. Murdered two keyboards because of that OS.

Win98se - Best Win9x ever... so good, it lasted until 2005 or so.

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]Belardo[/nom]It was the first usable GUI MS made for the masses... but it was still nothing more than a shell, not an OS. It had the same 1980 limited 8.3character file names. Meanwhile - Since 1984~85, Mac and Amigas had long file names with upper and lower case. Needless to say, going from Amiga to MS-DOS/Win3.1 was a SEVERE DOWNGRADE.Lets put it this way, a 7Mhz 68000 Amiga with ADOS 2.0~3.0 would perform FASTER, boot faster, run programs faster than a 25mhz 486. I know because I had my 25Mhz Amiga next to my 100Mhz 486 back in 1995. We Amiga users were laughing at PC people getting their panties wet over Windows3.0. You really needed a 386 to get any kind of performance out of Win3. But of course, Bill gates/MS have the last laugh for taking over 90+% of the computer market.At least MS is trying to make good OSes nowadays, they have nowhere else to go but down. Win7 is enjoyable and is modern... heck, even WinXP (2001) did things that were so... ugh... my 1990 Amiga wouldn't be so LOW-TECH to do.Win95 - Hated that POS, but it was the only painful way MS can migrate people from pure crap to usable crap. Murdered two keyboards because of that OS.Win98se - Best Win9x ever... so good, it lasted until 2005 or so.[/citation]

Um sir, you must forget that up until pretty much Vista/7 Windows has been a shell over DOS. 95/98/2K and even ME still ran on top of DOS. While XP does not run on top of DOS in the same way, it still has a lot of DOS in it.

Vista/7 are DOS free.

Still a GUI is a GUI. It had graphics and not just text. Now I never said it was useful or amazing. But it still was a GUI.

 

[dustcrusher]

@echo off
prompt $P$G
DOS=HIGH,UMB
SET PATH=C:\DOS;C:\
SET BLASTER=A220 I5 D1 T5
LH MSCDEX.EXE /D:MSCD001
LH MOUSE.EXE /Y

I do NOT miss the old days in this respect...

 

[jsc]

1985? I was starting my second tour in Germany with an 8 bit Kaypro. Didn't get my first PC clone (a Northgate 286) until 1988.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]Um sir, you must forget that up until pretty much Vista/7 Windows has been a shell over DOS. 95/98/2K and even ME still ran on top of DOS. While XP does not run on top of DOS in the same way, it still has a lot of DOS in it.Vista/7 are DOS free.Still a GUI is a GUI. It had graphics and not just text. Now I never said it was useful or amazing. But it still was a GUI.[/citation]
The windows 2K ran on top of DOS??? That was funny. No NT based system run on top of DOS, they have their own kernel to boot windows.

 

[Be0wulf22]

[citation][nom]hang-the-9[/nom]And if you go back, Apple stole those ideas from Xerox.[/citation]

True! I see my comment got many votes down, but finally...someone who knows something. Thank you.

 

[Be0wulf22]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Wrong. Apple didn't invented multitasking or the gui. Unix for example in 69 had multitasking long before Apple even existed. The first GUI belonged to Xerox in 1973, 10 years before Apple. In 81 Xerox introduced the Star 8010 which was the first computer with a windows based GUI. The star also introduced other stuff like icons, folder, raster graphics. It was the first commercial computer with ethernet.Even though Microsoft copied Apple, Apple also copied Xerox first.[/citation]


Not 'Wrong'. I didn't say Apple invented multitasking. My statement as written is correct. And what you and others have said about Apple taking the idea from Xerox is also correct.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]Be0wulf22[/nom]Not 'Wrong'. I didn't say Apple invented multitasking. My statement as written is correct. And what you and others have said about Apple taking the idea from Xerox is also correct.[/citation]
If Apple didn't invented multitasking then how could have Microsoft have stolen multitasking from them? Has Apple licensed the use of a multitasking OS?

 

[HappyBB]

This brings back some memory.

 

[roleki]

[citation][nom]HappyBB[/nom]This brings back some memory.[/citation]
Yeah, about 256K.

As to everyone griping about who stole what from whom, a GUI was the eventual path down which every consumer OS would travel. Splitting hairs over where it first appeared, and feeling smug about it, would be like claiming Ford stole the 'enclosed vehicle with tires at four corners' concept from the Conestoga. What matters is which was eventually more successful, and hey, Apple lost that battle. Get over it, already.

 

[phredgarvin]

Right on!! I remember diggin that groovy little OS. Anything was great and innovative coming after the blazing fast 8086 and 8088 chips, and the faceless world of DOS.