Google

The uncertainty of a post-Microsoft world

Written on:January 25, 2010
Comments are closed

microsoft-evil Sure we all like to talk smack about Microsoft and how evil it is. Even though that crown is looking more at home on the heads of companies like Google and Facebook the freetard and OSS divisions of the great OS war dream of a day without Microsoft.

The thing is, what would this world really be like?

Would it really be as idyllic as many would have you believe?

Randall Kennedy over at Infoworld asks this question and while his thoughts will produce nothing but snickers of contempt from some he makes some interesting points. This is one such point

Such thinking is naïve, at best. Rather than freeing IT, the demise of Microsoft would plunge the industry into an apocalyptic tailspin of biblical proportions — no visions of hippie utopia here. The withdrawal of the Redmond giant’s steady hand would cause today’s computing landscape to tear itself apart at the seams, with application and device compatibility and interoperability devolving into the kind of Wild West chaos unseen since the days of the DOS big three: Lotus, WordPerfect, and Ashton-Tate.

For all its so-called evilness Microsoft has definitely provided a consistency – that is required within the corporate world – that has benefited our computing lives.

Let the slings and arrows commence on the count of 3..2…1…..

Related posts:

  1. FUSE and Microsoft staking its claim in the world of ‘social’
  2. Moving up in the world – migrating from XP to Windows 7
  3. Damn right Microsoft should kill off Internet Explorer
  4. OMG! It must be the end of the world as we know it
  5. The world of operating systems
Comments have been disabled for this post.
Sort: Newest | Oldest

This argument reminds me of the beginnings of personal computing: until IBM stepped in with the PC in 1981, hardware compatibility from one computer maker to the next was a pipe dream. Even sharing a floppy between computer makers (sometimes between computer models) was impossible – and I'm only speaking of Intel-based computers. When IBM produced the PC, it wasn't the most advanced personal computer by any stretch of the imagination, but it provided a common hardware base with published standards (even the full BIOS listing was provided in the technical manual). The industry grew from that base. I remember, Byte magazine even sported a full page ad, paid for by Apple, that said "Welcome IBM".

This argument reminds me of the beginnings of personal computing: until IBM stepped in with the PC in 1981, hardware compatibility from one computer maker to the next was a pipe dream. Even sharing a floppy between computer makers (sometimes between computer models) was impossible – and I'm only speaking of Intel-based computers. When IBM produced the PC, it wasn't the most advanced personal computer by any stretch of the imagination, but it provided a common hardware base with published standards (even the full BIOS listing was provided in the technical manual). The industry grew from that base. I remember, Byte magazine even sported a full page ad, paid for by Apple, that said "Welcome IBM".