Those type of people do not see it that way. They can blame it on something or someone else and in this case they would blame the action on the alcohol.
I'd not surprised to read about someone suing a sneaker maker because the shoe didn't move from the throttle to the brake pedal quick enough to prevent a crash.

LoB

For sure but do you really think he was referring to running Raspbian on a Raspberry Pi? It caught me off guard when I read "Raspbian" too but then I figured he was complaining about the Apple UI and instead of saying something like one of the lightweight desktop environments(LXDE, XFCE, etc) or something which doesn't roll off the tongue like Lubuntu, Xubuntu, etc he went with Raspbian OS.

That's my guess since as you mentioned, you just wouldn't want to be using that lowend rPi hardware for day to day compiling.

LoB

Find a copy of Watcom VX-REXX and you'll be amazed. I knew VX-REXX before seeing VB and could only guess VB was popular because Microsoft was marketing the heck out of it. The BASIC programming language is Bill Gates favorite after all.

LoB

Windows 11 for ARM runs on my M2 Air w/o issue under UTM as of about a month ago. I could even play some Steam games under it, albeit a bit more slowly than I would prefer, but working regardless.

It's been just fine for doing the minimal things I want to test in Windows w/o moving to the gaming machine.

Yes, they need to be booted. But haha, they are actually being hired to fix the broken parts and probably will be paid tens of thousands to add a few switches will will probably fail when some other part stops working. Then they'll be paid again. So NOT getting booted at all.

LoB

If I end up having to pay for your lack of preparedness, which I am, yes.

They have enough other characters that Mickey and Minnie have become obsolete. I was just there and we saw those two in only very limited circumstances.

>So UNIX software became obsolete because it was stuck on the UNIX platform? It could not be ported to Linux?

When Microsoft was pushing Windows NT at UNIX the usability in the corporate landscape was quite immature and there was maybe only RedHat providing corporate service contracts. Almost nobody had ever heard of RedHat at that time. So not, porting to Linux wasn't much of an option back then.

And I've run AT&T UNIX on Pentiums, Yddrasil Linux, Corel Linux and others on multi-CPU PCs(PB6) in my own corporate offices by getting management to open their eyes was not something I could sell them on. I'd had some of them tell me years later that they should have listened more to what I was saying and showing them.

What decade are YOU talking about? I was talking about when Windows NT went after the UNIX market, not 20 years later.

LoB

Seems quite out of place for a Microsoft executive to know and understand a business tactic which limits the competitions market position.
Microsoft has been such a small player and has never used those type of tactics every.
LOL and that headline almost caused me to experience an ASNR while drinking my coffee this morning.

LoB

And the BSOD became famous as engineers in their cubicles could be heard yelling 'shit, again?' then rebooting their Windows "workless-station" and going to get a coffee for 30 minutes while it restarted and they could recreate the work they lost. Ya, good times.

We had a room full of Solaris and HP workstations for CAD but what most didn't was that XWindow was a server and could run on a PC at a remote location.
My boss once found me in my office running an IBM OS on a PC when I was supposed to be in the Workstation Room working. Blew him away that I had the CAD software running on my PC in my office but the display size was a bit of a pain.

UNIX workstations were workhorses and reliable. From what I hear, Windows today might give them a run for the money in reliability but it's been what, 20 years for Microsoft to get there.

LoB

Microsoft was attacking UNIX from all sides trying to get companies to purchase Windows NT since it failed as a desktop OS to replace DOS/Windows. Besides the fake licensing of Win32 to UNIX software vendors( Bristol Win32/U for example ) they purchased a powerhouse in the movie and film industry, SoftImage.

Microsoft bought the company and forced them to make a version for Windows and tried to kill the UNIX version. The developers wouldn't have it and neither did their customers. Internally they kept the UNIX version updated and customers kept purchasing the UNIX versions. For one reason was that server farms were running 7/24 and for days at a time rendering images for the film industry. Crashing Windows NT on the server farms cost millions of dollars in lost time.

Microsoft eventually relented once they'd killed off most all other UNIX workstation software via the Win32 licensing bait and switch trick. They spun SoftImage off as it's own company again or they sold it but either way it was independent and without ties to Microsoft.

LoB

That's hilarious. When companies believed Windows could replace UNIX and they migrated it became quite obvious Windows was NOT reliable. When one UNIX server could run an entire SMB from email, purchasing, marketing, finance and more all running software services on one UNIX box 7/24 the Microsoft solution ended up eating millions in corporate profits. IT departments needed to purchase a Windows server license and hardware for each service the company wanted to run AND a 2nd one for each for fail-over to get even close to what the one UNIX box provided. 1 UNIX box became 4 Windows Server boxes and then 8 Windows Server boxes with all the failover machines. IT department budgets ballooned but the hook was set and those who made they choice to move from UNIX were not fired, they just purchased more software and more hardware.

Did you ever think of why Virtual Machine software became so popular so quickly? That's right, crashing Microsoft Windows machines were the reason. Most of those 8 Windows Server machines were sitting idle much of the 7/24. So one of those servers running 2 virtual machines(one active and one for failover) would cut the number of machines needed in half. Put a pair of corporate services on a single machine running 4 virtual machines and now you saved more and your hardware is started to see some CPU cycles.

Windows, Windows NT etc were pieces of shit software but Microsoft was a great marketing company and the leveraged their dominance gained by their shrewd licensing arrangements(often illegal) with hardware vendors.

LoB

You obviously never say any of the court documents nor articles about how Microsoft pulled a fast one by licensing Win32 source to a handful of companies for Win32-to-UNIX software compatibility then quadrupled the licensing fee effectively killing any software running on UNIX which used these tools. It was a huge porting effort to go from UNIX to Win32 but companies were promised they could then support one codebase and get a product which ran on both Windows NT and UNIX. They suckered thousands of UNIX software vendors and quickly a ton of UNIX software was obsolete.

hint: https://www.usenix.org/legacy/publications/library/proceedings/usenix-nt98/full_papers/paas/paas.pdf

LoB

Promises to release on a platform is just bullsh;t even if there are performance level specified. Microsoft is notorious for both dragging their feet on even the smallest of software projects when other platforms are targets.

This is like having a peanut vending machine for hand-feeding a captive T-Rex. Put any living/realistic deadly creature in you want the point is you do not feed that beast. Your lawyers and execs are very ignorant if they think they can compete with Microsoft while Microsoft puts apps/software on your platform.

LoB