Re: Rewriting computing history...

[pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <3DFFB8FC.ED6DD6A5@usa.net>, Jeff Thomas  <a2forever@usa.net> wrote:
 
> What I find really annoying is how some big players in the computer
> industry are trying to rewrite microcomputer history, by presenting a
> distorted picture of what really happened.
> 
> Microsoft would be the worst one by trying to claim credit for
> everything they done without mentioning which companies they brought or
> copied from. For example on the "Windows Me" loading screen it says,
> '1981-2000' - in 1981, there was no Windows!
 
Windows ME runs on top of MS-DOS, and MS-DOS was around in 1981....
 
> Perhaps, Apple ought to retaliate and put '1976-2002' on their
> loading screen!!
 
If they did _and_ if they also made the Mac backwards compatible
to the Apple II, I wouldn't mind at all....
 
Likewise if Microsoft had bought Digital Research, and made Windoze
backwards compatible all the way back to CP/M-80, then Windoze
could put '1976-2000' on their loading screen too....
 
And hey!  Why not make Windoze (or the Mac) backwards compatible to
the ENIAC, to be able to put '1946-2000' on the loading screen.... <g>
 
> I hate that Apple has so few references to Apple II computer, like
> pretending it never existed
 
That's probably because you could run the Apple II without a GUI,
and using a computer without a GUI is _evil_ in Apple's world....
 
> and that the Macintosh was the saviour of the company, when in
> actual fact the reverse is true for the entire decade of the 1980s.
 
There was an internal fight within Apple Computer for years between
The Apple II camp and the Mac camp.  The Mac camp won that fight....
Sure the Mac preyed on Apple II, but since the Mac won, they get
to write the history.  It's always the winners who write the history.
 
> It would be nice, if they mentioned that AppleWorks came from the
> Apple II and outsold Lotus 1-2-3 on IBM PC at one stage - which is
> true!
 
By carefully selecting _which_ truths to tell, you can give a quite
distorted view and tell the truth all the time.   This is what
advertising is all about....
 
Appleworks most likely outsold Lotus at some stage --- didn't
Appleworks predate Lotus ????  However, there were many other stages
and many other software packages -- without mention them you won't
get a reasonably complete picture of software sales.
 
> What does anyone else think?
 
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Swedish Amateur Astronomer's Society (SAAF)
Grev Turegatan 40,  S-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at saaf dot se
WWW:     http://hem.passagen.se/pausch/index.html
         http://home.tiscali.se/~pausch/