Comment Re:I hope not (Score 1) 489
On the contrary, I think the BEST thing that happened to computers was to have a monstrously dominant OS to build upon.
It would have been the best thing to happen if it had been a decent OS. DOS wasn't it, nor was Windows before NT/XP. It was meant to be Unix. Even Microsoft meant it to be Unix- that is why they wrote Xenix. DOS, the "Quick and Dirty Operating System they bought in to fulfil their IBM contract because they had nothing else ready, was meant as a stop gap. But when MS did finish writing Xenix for the PC they only pitched it at the corporate and academic market and left the peasants up to their necks in the crap that was DOS.
Having a common platform to build upon was what allowed the golden age of the PC to explode.
I would not describe the dog's breakfasts that were DOS and Win 3.x and Win9x/ME as a "Golden Age". I would say there was a first Golden Age with the non PC, non Microsoft micros in the 80's when there was a DOS equivalent in CP/M, used on higher end micros. Then there was a second Golden Age that corresponded with the life of XP.
And the PC age did not exactly explode. As late as 1990 for example the Amiga 3000 was introduced, running Unix and superior to its contemporary PCs. It took about ten years for PCs to oust other micros, and for some time PCs were used mainly in clerical and admin roles. For home, non-PC micros prevailed for a long time, and techies ot work (when we could still make our own buying decisions) tended to use Unix systems for heavy lifting or things like Amigas for smaller odd jobs. At least where I worked.