5 ms·

"A Game of Thrones" was published in August 1996[1]. Windows 95 was new an exciting then. OS/2 Warp was new an exciting then. DOS was already old, and I'm assum

"A Game of Thrones" was published in August 1996[1]. Windows 95 was new an exciting then. OS/2 Warp was new an exciting then. DOS was already old, and I'm assuming GRRM used it just because that was what he was used to. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Game_of_Thrones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Game_of_Thrones

dharmab 6y ago
I should have said “written”, then. (GRRM is an infamously slow writer.)
- cbozeman 6y ago
  He's not a writer. That's the distinction with which everyone is being bogged down. George R. R. Martin is a storyteller. There's a difference. Stephen King is a writer. Michael Crichton was a writer. Crichton summed up what it is to be a writer in the most simplistic and eloquent-in-its-brevity language I think I've ever heard: "If you're going to be a writer, then you have to write. You have to wake up every day and sit down and write. Can you imagine if a pilot woke up one morning and said, 'I don't feel like flying the plane today.'"
  - Gene_Parmesan 6y ago
    If we are defining whether someone is a writer or not by the amount of published content they create, then very very few people are actually writers. If you have to have the published output of a Stephen King to be considered a "true writer" then I imagine there would only be a handful around the world. That's surely what your argument is implying, right? That it's whether someone is publishing a lot that defines "writer-ness"? Basically my point is, just because someone is not adding titles to their bibliography every year or so doesn't mean they're not doing the act of writing every day. In fact, there are many references online to the importance Martin places on writing every day. And in fact, he has published things since his last ASOIAF book. To try to say "This man is not a writer because he hasn't released the books I want to read" feels kind of silly to me.
  - dialamac 6y ago
    And I suppose Kubrick wasn’t a director either.
EricE 6y ago
Or maybe he's a writer and not a technology nerd? Maybe a word processor is just a tool and if it's useful and gets the job done, no matter how "outdated" everyone else things it is, why bother to change? I would argue that perhaps he wants to focus on writing and not perpetually learning new tech but lately writing seems to be lower on his priorities. Glad I never got sucked up into the books - as good as they are; it's pretty apparent he really doesn't want to finish them which is a shame.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
spurgu 6y ago
Meh, I was still using DOS (w/ 4DOS) back then because I vastly preferred it (BBS and cli apps in general) over Windows 3.x. My use of GUI didn't really start until Windows 95 and was solidified with Winamp.

dharmab 6y ago

I should have said “written”, then. (GRRM is an infamously slow writer.)

cbozeman 6y ago
He's not a writer. That's the distinction with which everyone is being bogged down. George R. R. Martin is a storyteller. There's a difference. Stephen King is a writer. Michael Crichton was a writer. Crichton summed up what it is to be a writer in the most simplistic and eloquent-in-its-brevity language I think I've ever heard: "If you're going to be a writer, then you have to write. You have to wake up every day and sit down and write. Can you imagine if a pilot woke up one morning and said, 'I don't feel like flying the plane today.'"
- Gene_Parmesan 6y ago
  If we are defining whether someone is a writer or not by the amount of published content they create, then very very few people are actually writers. If you have to have the published output of a Stephen King to be considered a "true writer" then I imagine there would only be a handful around the world. That's surely what your argument is implying, right? That it's whether someone is publishing a lot that defines "writer-ness"? Basically my point is, just because someone is not adding titles to their bibliography every year or so doesn't mean they're not doing the act of writing every day. In fact, there are many references online to the importance Martin places on writing every day. And in fact, he has published things since his last ASOIAF book. To try to say "This man is not a writer because he hasn't released the books I want to read" feels kind of silly to me.
- dialamac 6y ago
  And I suppose Kubrick wasn’t a director either.

EricE 6y ago

Or maybe he's a writer and not a technology nerd? Maybe a word processor is just a tool and if it's useful and gets the job done, no matter how "outdated" everyone else things it is, why bother to change? I would argue that perhaps he wants to focus on writing and not perpetually learning new tech but lately writing seems to be lower on his priorities. Glad I never got sucked up into the books - as good as they are; it's pretty apparent he really doesn't want to finish them which is a shame.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

spurgu 6y ago

Meh, I was still using DOS (w/ 4DOS) back then because I vastly preferred it (BBS and cli apps in general) over Windows 3.x. My use of GUI didn't really start until Windows 95 and was solidified with Winamp.