I get the point of this article... but in my opinion, Dvorak doesn't deserve the sarcasm quite as much as the other three.
He deserves everything his pointy little head worked so hard to earn. As a wise man one observed, "It's not what you put in your mouth that corrupts you, it's what comes out of your mouth..."
Err ... VisiCalc ... USCD Pascal ... Corvus Shared Hard Disk ...
From my personal experience:
Almost every enterprise in Silicon Valley bought Apple ][ computers. floppy drives, printers, etc. so they could run VisiCalc.* VisiCalc was largely used to bypass the long lead time (18-24 months) to get apps implemented by CIS (then Data Processing)
The UCSD Pascal programming language was far superior to BASIC for programming custom business applications and generalized apps such as database systems.
Corvus shared HDDs allowed larger/shared VisiCalc files and application files.
* Our clients included Apple, IBM, Fairchild Shlumberger, Applied Materials, Thorne EMI, Daimler Benz, Xerox, HP, various State and Local governments, Universities, School Districts. etc.
MicroSoft had nothing to do with any of this!
I am totally familiar with this early history (except the part played by Corvus). The Apple ][ was the first affordable computer and VisiCalc made it a powerful number cruncher in its day. If Digital Research had gotten a 16-bit version of CP/M out about a year earlier (and not had an anal retentive lawyer), Microsoft would have been bypassed for DOS when IBM went shopping and the story of computing in the 1980s would have been totally different.
I wonder how many people know that the first IMB PC relied on the user to back up to a cassette tape drive... no Hard Disk planned for or I/O provided.
His possible exposure to some sort of toxic experiment has created a quantum paradox where Dvorak is perpetually both writing and wronging at the same time, an uncertainty that must be seen to be believed.
This is probably one of the most clever, hilarious sentences I read in a long time!
I loved reading the iPhone death watch and it's amazing how many times Dvorak is featured on it.
I read somewhere that Michael Dell's statement had nowhere the glee or malice that we generally associate with it. It appears like he was pressed for his opinion and gave his honest opinion without trying to take a dig at anyone.
Realistically, no other company had anyone like Jobs, so there is no way anyone could have guessed what happened to Apple, besides Jobs himself.
this article is irony... (my hat is off to [url=http://twitter.com/danieleran]Daniel Eran Dilger [/url]because it is vety difficult to use irony properly, in a literary sense!...)
A definition of irony from Wikipedia... (quoted from "the compass of irony", via wikipedia)
[quote]Verbal, dramatic, and situational irony are often used for emphasis in the assertion of a truth. The ironic form of simile, used in sarcasm, and some forms of litotes can emphasize one's meaning by the deliberate use of language which states the opposite of the truth, denies the contrary of the truth, or drastically and obviously understates a factual connection.[2]
John Dvoark is a freakin' idiot. He's always against anything Apple. He always has been, even when it was on ZDTV/TechTV. Every time after a MacWorld he'd always downplay anything Apple announced as something that won't pan out and people won't want to use it when nearly every time (if not every time), it was the exact opposite.
Now, he spouts off on Leo Laporte's TWiT network. I think Leo only keeps him around because he's a friend.
Do they have Dvorak on for comic relief? I know it's fashionable to go against the grain on everything because it make you look like you know more than everyone else, but these are all HUGE swings-and-misses. Funny read, though.
I am totally familiar with this early history (except the part played by Corvus). The Apple ][ was the first affordable computer and VisiCalc made it a powerful number cruncher in its day. If Digital Research had gotten a 16-bit version of CP/M out about a year earlier (and not had an anal retentive lawyer), Microsoft would have been bypassed for DOS when IBM went shopping and the story of computing in the 1980s would have been totally different.
Indeed. I read that IBM sent two reps out to Digital Research to discuss using CP/M rather than going with Gates, but when they got there, the founder (Gary Kildall) was more interested in flying his personal plane than meeting with "suits" that day.
This page doesn't have the "I'd rather be flying my plane" anecdote but does fill in some of the blanks about how diff things COULD have been....
.....there is still a remnant of CP/M left in the PC world [in the 1990's]: all the various flavours of DOS running on 80x86 machines are direct descendents of CP/M and this is the story of how it happened:
The task force at IBM that designed and developed the original PC was called Project Chess. By the middle of 1980 they were talking to Microsoft about the design of their new machine and its software, particularly the BASIC which Microsoft were going to provide.
IBM also contacted Gary Kildall to ask about using CP/M-86, a new version of the operating system that Digital Research were developing to run on the Intel 8086 processor. For a variety of reasons Gary Kildall was not interested so IBM kept talking to Microsoft and by September that year they had formalized their plans to work together.
Microsoft were going to provide both the BASIC, which they had done many times before for other companies, and the operating system, which they had never done before!
Now, earlier in the year Seattle Computer Products who produced an 8086 computer kit hired Tim Patterson to create an operating system to run on their machine. Digital Research were slow in producing CP/M-86 and SCP thought it was hurting sales of their computer, so Tim wrote a system with the look-and-feel of CP/M for the new machine and called it the Quick and Dirty OS, QDOS.
SCP started shipping QDOS in August and they showed it to Microsoft in September when Microsoft modified the BASIC for the machine. So, there right under Microsoft's nose was an operating system just at the time when they needed one. In October Paul Allen from Microsoft contacted SCP and for just $50,000 bought the rights to sell QDOS, without telling SCP that it was for IBM.
Microsoft hired Tim Patterson and went on to convert QDOS to run on IBM's new machine. They even persuaded IBM to let them sell copies of the operating system separate from the PC. Thus were born PC-DOS, the IBM owned version, and MS-DOS, the Microsoft owned version.
Eventually Digital Research produced CP/M-86 for IBM PC in 1982 and finally converted it to DR-DOS in 1988. Thus all the major variants of DOS - PC-DOS, MS-DOS, and DR-DOS - are all directly descended from CP/M.
Digital Research were bought by Novell in 1991, and then Novell sold the rights to the software to Caldera in 1997.
the spectacular failure of Surface, a netbook that could disassemble itself into a paperweight and an expensive, rubbery keyboard.
The Surface is no more a paperweight than the iPad. It runs apps, just like the iPad, it can browse the web just like the iPad. You can play music (10 hours a month of full-length songs for free), watch movies, transfer your files directly via USB stick or hard drive and doesn't require any proprietary software to do so. It doesn't even run a full desktop OS (and before you start, neither does the iPad) and is therefore in no way like a netbook. And if you want to talk about the one that does run full Windows, the Surface Pro 2 has been widely praised and is closer in specs to a high-end MacBook Air than a netbook. And if someone wants to complain about 1/2 pounds difference they're either a professional mountaineer or they need to get off their lazy boy and exercise a bit. Maybe try lifting a few flashlights or something.
I think he still holds hope that people will eventually see that Windows 3.11 for Pen Computing is the future.
Haha. It's all very fun to laugh at Gates, but remember: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest transparently operated charitable foundation in the world. The foundation allows benefactors access to information regarding how its money is being spent, unlike other major charitable organizations such as the Wellcome Trust. As of 2007, Bill and Melinda Gates were the second-most generous philanthropists in America, having given over $28 billion to charity; the couple plan to eventually donate 95% of their wealth to charity.
The Gates Foundation has quickly become a major influence upon global health; the approximately US$800 million that the foundation gives every year for global health approaches the annual budget of the United Nations World Health Organization (193 nations), and is comparable to the funds given to fight infectious disease by the United States Agency for International Development. The Global Health Program's significant grants include:
The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria: Over $1.3 billion donated as of 2012.
Polio eradication: The Foundation provides 17% (US$86 million in 2006) of the world budget for the attempted eradication of poliomyelitis (polio).
The GAVI Alliance: The foundation gave the GAVI Alliance (formerly the “Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation”) a donation of US$750 million on January 25, 2005.
Children's Vaccine Program: The Children's Vaccine Program, run by the Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), received a donation of US$27 million to help vaccinate against Japanese encephalitis on December 9, 2003.
University of Washington Department of Global Health: The foundation provided approximately US$30 million for the foundation of the new Department of Global Health at the University of Washington in Seattle. The donation promoted three of the Foundation's target areas: education, Pacific Northwest and global health. The foundation also lead a study to increase access to high education globally.
HIV Research: The foundation has donated a grand total of US$287 million to various HIV/AIDS researchers. The money was split between sixteen different research teams across the world, on the condition that they share their findings with one another.
Haha. It's all very fun to laugh at Gates, but remember: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest transparently operated charitable foundation in the world.
You didn't see Steve Jobs doing that kind of thing.
No, because he had more class than to publicise his charitable efforts.
Comments
He deserves everything his pointy little head worked so hard to earn. As a wise man one observed, "It's not what you put in your mouth that corrupts you, it's what comes out of your mouth..."
I am totally familiar with this early history (except the part played by Corvus). The Apple ][ was the first affordable computer and VisiCalc made it a powerful number cruncher in its day. If Digital Research had gotten a 16-bit version of CP/M out about a year earlier (and not had an anal retentive lawyer), Microsoft would have been bypassed for DOS when IBM went shopping and the story of computing in the 1980s would have been totally different.
I wonder how many people know that the first IMB PC relied on the user to back up to a cassette tape drive... no Hard Disk planned for or I/O provided.
I think he still holds hope that people will eventually see that Windows 3.11 for Pen Computing is the future.
His possible exposure to some sort of toxic experiment has created a quantum paradox where Dvorak is perpetually both writing and wronging at the same time, an uncertainty that must be seen to be believed.
This is probably one of the most clever, hilarious sentences I read in a long time!
I loved reading the iPhone death watch and it's amazing how many times Dvorak is featured on it.
<RANT>
Another old poster in a new guise with an axe to grind against DED? Get in line...
I read somewhere that Michael Dell's statement had nowhere the glee or malice that we generally associate with it. It appears like he was pressed for his opinion and gave his honest opinion without trying to take a dig at anyone.
Realistically, no other company had anyone like Jobs, so there is no way anyone could have guessed what happened to Apple, besides Jobs himself.
A definition of irony from Wikipedia... (quoted from "the compass of irony", via wikipedia)
[quote]Verbal, dramatic, and situational irony are often used for emphasis in the assertion of a truth. The ironic form of simile, used in sarcasm, and some forms of litotes can emphasize one's meaning by the deliberate use of language which states the opposite of the truth, denies the contrary of the truth, or drastically and obviously understates a factual connection.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony
[2]. http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Compass_of_Irony.html?id=7PsNAAAAQAAJ
[/quote]
Now, he spouts off on Leo Laporte's TWiT network. I think Leo only keeps him around because he's a friend.
You should audition for a part with HBO. The amount of fellatio you perform in this article would make a pornographer blush.
Do they have Dvorak on for comic relief? I know it's fashionable to go against the grain on everything because it make you look like you know more than everyone else, but these are all HUGE swings-and-misses. Funny read, though.
I am totally familiar with this early history (except the part played by Corvus). The Apple ][ was the first affordable computer and VisiCalc made it a powerful number cruncher in its day. If Digital Research had gotten a 16-bit version of CP/M out about a year earlier (and not had an anal retentive lawyer), Microsoft would have been bypassed for DOS when IBM went shopping and the story of computing in the 1980s would have been totally different.
Indeed. I read that IBM sent two reps out to Digital Research to discuss using CP/M rather than going with Gates, but when they got there, the founder (Gary Kildall) was more interested in flying his personal plane than meeting with "suits" that day.
This page doesn't have the "I'd rather be flying my plane" anecdote but does fill in some of the blanks about how diff things COULD have been....
The task force at IBM that designed and developed the original PC was called Project Chess. By the middle of 1980 they were talking to Microsoft about the design of their new machine and its software, particularly the BASIC which Microsoft were going to provide.
IBM also contacted Gary Kildall to ask about using CP/M-86, a new version of the operating system that Digital Research were developing to run on the Intel 8086 processor. For a variety of reasons Gary Kildall was not interested so IBM kept talking to Microsoft and by September that year they had formalized their plans to work together.
Microsoft were going to provide both the BASIC, which they had done many times before for other companies, and the operating system, which they had never done before!
Now, earlier in the year Seattle Computer Products who produced an 8086 computer kit hired Tim Patterson to create an operating system to run on their machine. Digital Research were slow in producing CP/M-86 and SCP thought it was hurting sales of their computer, so Tim wrote a system with the look-and-feel of CP/M for the new machine and called it the Quick and Dirty OS, QDOS.
SCP started shipping QDOS in August and they showed it to Microsoft in September when Microsoft modified the BASIC for the machine. So, there right under Microsoft's nose was an operating system just at the time when they needed one. In October Paul Allen from Microsoft contacted SCP and for just $50,000 bought the rights to sell QDOS, without telling SCP that it was for IBM.
Microsoft hired Tim Patterson and went on to convert QDOS to run on IBM's new machine. They even persuaded IBM to let them sell copies of the operating system separate from the PC. Thus were born PC-DOS, the IBM owned version, and MS-DOS, the Microsoft owned version.
Eventually Digital Research produced CP/M-86 for IBM PC in 1982 and finally converted it to DR-DOS in 1988. Thus all the major variants of DOS - PC-DOS, MS-DOS, and DR-DOS - are all directly descended from CP/M.
Digital Research were bought by Novell in 1991, and then Novell sold the rights to the software to Caldera in 1997.
the spectacular failure of Surface, a netbook that could disassemble itself into a paperweight and an expensive, rubbery keyboard.
The Surface is no more a paperweight than the iPad. It runs apps, just like the iPad, it can browse the web just like the iPad. You can play music (10 hours a month of full-length songs for free), watch movies, transfer your files directly via USB stick or hard drive and doesn't require any proprietary software to do so. It doesn't even run a full desktop OS (and before you start, neither does the iPad) and is therefore in no way like a netbook. And if you want to talk about the one that does run full Windows, the Surface Pro 2 has been widely praised and is closer in specs to a high-end MacBook Air than a netbook. And if someone wants to complain about 1/2 pounds difference they're either a professional mountaineer or they need to get off their lazy boy and exercise a bit. Maybe try lifting a few flashlights or something.
And do you mean the "expensive rubbery keyboard" of which Apple is developing their own version? (Oh and by the way, the Touch Cover was widely praised, even here http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/174488/apple-exploring-new-ipad-smart-case-with-integrated-multitouch-keyboard). Also, I have actually used the Touch Cover and it is in no way "rubbery". It's covered in a felt-like material and is actually quite rigid.
Please, go back to the actually intellectual and well-researched rants.
I think he still holds hope that people will eventually see that Windows 3.11 for Pen Computing is the future.
Haha. It's all very fun to laugh at Gates, but remember: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest transparently operated charitable foundation in the world. The foundation allows benefactors access to information regarding how its money is being spent, unlike other major charitable organizations such as the Wellcome Trust. As of 2007, Bill and Melinda Gates were the second-most generous philanthropists in America, having given over $28 billion to charity; the couple plan to eventually donate 95% of their wealth to charity.
The Gates Foundation has quickly become a major influence upon global health; the approximately US$800 million that the foundation gives every year for global health approaches the annual budget of the United Nations World Health Organization (193 nations), and is comparable to the funds given to fight infectious disease by the United States Agency for International Development. The Global Health Program's significant grants include:
The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria: Over $1.3 billion donated as of 2012.
Polio eradication: The Foundation provides 17% (US$86 million in 2006) of the world budget for the attempted eradication of poliomyelitis (polio).
The GAVI Alliance: The foundation gave the GAVI Alliance (formerly the “Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation”) a donation of US$750 million on January 25, 2005.
Children's Vaccine Program: The Children's Vaccine Program, run by the Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), received a donation of US$27 million to help vaccinate against Japanese encephalitis on December 9, 2003.
University of Washington Department of Global Health: The foundation provided approximately US$30 million for the foundation of the new Department of Global Health at the University of Washington in Seattle. The donation promoted three of the Foundation's target areas: education, Pacific Northwest and global health. The foundation also lead a study to increase access to high education globally.
HIV Research: The foundation has donated a grand total of US$287 million to various HIV/AIDS researchers. The money was split between sixteen different research teams across the world, on the condition that they share their findings with one another.
Just to name a few.
If you want to grace yourself with reading about the rest of his incredibly generous and life-saving endeavors, go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_&_Melinda_Gates_Foundation
You didn't see Steve Jobs doing that kind of thing.
Oh, and he's also a Knight.
The Surface is no more a paperweight than the iPad...
...It doesn't even run a full desktop OS (and before you start, neither does the iPad) and is therefore in no way like a netbook.
Please, go back to the actually intellectual and well-researched rants.
So how does the surface compare to the 64bit desktop class architecture Apple's A7 ARM based CPU brings to the game?
Haha. It's all very fun to laugh at Gates, but remember: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest transparently operated charitable foundation in the world.
You didn't see Steve Jobs doing that kind of thing.
No, because he had more class than to publicise his charitable efforts.
http://www.apple.com/au/product-red/