The 'DOS Ain't Done 'til Lotus Won't Run' Myth 425
Otter writes "We've all heard the story of Microsoft's battle cry of "DOS ain't done till Lotus won't run". Adam Barr investigates the myth, interviewing various Microsoft and Lotus old-timers (including Mitch Kapor), and finds no basis for its legitimacy or any case of 1-2-3 actually not running. Whom to blame for Lotus Notes is not discussed."
Unacceptably Ridiculous (Score:2, Interesting)
On a more serious note though, the first reply in the article says it all.
Microsoft is a for-profit company, so it will do anything to make a profit. If billions of people are rushing out to buy Longhorn so that they can play Tux Racer, Microsoft will make sure "Longhorn ain't done til Tux Racer run".
It's also interesting to see from one of the comments:
Well, I submitted this to Slashdot. (And even added an Obligatory Stupid Inflammatory Remark at the end!) I have a pretty dismal track record of accepted submissions, though, and this one isn't likely to change it.
COME ON!! People are making fun of us!!!!!
I'm not anti-MS, but ... (Score:3, Interesting)
And there was an incident in the early pre-release days of NT where our boot sector code broke multi-boot with OS/2; in that case, despite claims of outrage from the Blue Ninja Clan, it was simply that we had never tested that configuration; once we heard about the bug, we fixed it and added it to our test mix.
This made me laugh; Windows installation has never been shy about overwriting LILO (and later GRUB), and the Linux user base has to be roughly as large as OS/2's was in its heyday. But hey, all's fair.
Lotus Notes... (Score:3, Interesting)
For a long time (ca. 1990s), it was considered superior to Microsoft Exchange, until the Internet came along (i.e. became popular) and everything changed.
Notes was actually quite a clever piece of software during its heyday. No one else could do replication at the time. The only thing that people hated about it was its price: it cost too much for what it did.
Re:Battle cry of neo luddites? (Score:1, Interesting)
Seriously, there is a good reasion for this particular hardware: logging of root logins on your loghost. Send them to lp1 so the hacker cannot delete them. Old dot maxtrix is good for this because it prints as soon as any data is available.
Re:I'm not anti-MS, but ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Battle cry of neo luddites? (Score:3, Interesting)
Didn't see a need? There WASN'T a need. 3.1 moved with the speed and grace of a wounded elephant in quicksand, while DOS spun like a top. It was the new apps (and lack of support for the old) that drove users onto Windows, not any virtues of the OS.
And Agenda!! Does anyone remember Lotus Agenda (a DOS app)? The PIM of the Gods! The most amazing open-ended information manager ever created, yet never to be seen or even re-envisioned again, like some kind of super-advanced crystal-technology from Lost Atlantis! Lotus replaced it with the cartoonish Organizer for Windows, and Life Turned a Page.
Am I a neo-luddite because I prefer to work in Xterm over pointing and clicking? Do I lose Geek Points for using fluxbox instead of KDE?
Re:Unacceptably Ridiculous (Score:3, Interesting)
That'd be me (the submitter). I was 0 for 10 on submissions (actually worse than that -- my streak goes back longer than the user info page tracks) due to my stubborn refusal to append an OSIR. I finally give in, and -- bingo!
Could this be the development that makes Linux the dominant desktop OS?
Re:I'm not anti-MS, but ... (Score:3, Interesting)
At that every version of Windows I've installed (win98 was the last) announced that I had OS/2 on my computer and would never be able to use it again. This was easily fixed by using fdisk to reset bootmanager as the bootable partition.
Win95 (at least the first one) also installed fine without a serial code if it found OS/2 on the harddrive. I was quite surprised when it would not install on a blank HD without a serial number.
Re:Not neo luddites... (Score:3, Interesting)
There were occasions when Luddites smashed frames in one part of a mill, but left alone identical frames in the same building - because one set of frames was owned by a boss who was driving down workers wages and conditions, and the other wasn't.
What I'm trying to say was that Luddites were just picky and choosy about how they adopted new technology, rather like the way you imagine yourself to be...
I'd be rather proud if someone called me a neo-luddite.
The MBR is not the place for a boot loader! (Score:3, Interesting)
For a rare change, this isn't Microsoft's fault. To the best of my knowledge, every "install" program for every version of DOS, Windows-as-an-OS, or OS/2 writes a new MBR (Maser Boot Record). The MBR was never, ever intended to contain an OS-specific boot loader. It contains the partition table, and the code to find the active partition and boot the PBR (Partition Boot Record). It has been that way since IBM and Microsoft created the IBM-PC hard disk MBR table format in the 1980's.
It is Linux (or rather, LILO, GRUB, and the like) that are doing something completely non-standard by installing application-specific software into the MBR. Granted, the IBM-PC platform is a collection of hacks and limitations, so doing something non-standard is often the only way to accomplish something, but that doesn't mean you can expect your non-standard approach to work for every situation.
When I install LILO or GRUB, I install it to the PBR of a primary partition, the way the PC spec says to. I usually use the same partition as my root and/or
Now, Microsoft could make things easier by updating their current (or next) installer to detect an existing MBR and offer the opportunity to leave it alone. Of course, questions like that would prolly just confuse the vast majority of their customer base. More importantly, Microsoft has shown over and over again that they're rather anti-social, so I would hardly expect them to go out of their way to support the non-standard behavior of their competition!