35 ms·
Licensing Compaq DOS back to Microsoft was a mistake. It gave Microsoft’s OS incumbency. The PC industry has been suffering from that decision ever since.
by ryao 1y ago
Licensing Compaq DOS back to Microsoft was a mistake. It gave Microsoft’s OS incumbency. The PC industry has been suffering from that decision ever since.
- flomo 1y agoHindsight view. At the time Microsoft was the "open" little guy fighting the big evil monopolist IBM. The MS monopoly wasn't so total, and Linux servers spread everywhere. Extremely unlikely that would have happened had Microchannel dreams come true, as IBM intended to limit PCs to the low-end.
- passwordhelpme 1y agoLinux servers in the 80s?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- canucker2016 1y agoYou would have relegated Dell and Gateway 2000 to second tier-PC clone maker along with all the other PC clone makers, below Compaq, since their OEM version of MS-DOS wouldn't get the Compaq tweaks necessary to be 100% IBM PC compatible (unless Microsoft or these non-Compaq OEMs duplicated Compaq's compatibility work).
- ryao 1y agoThey could have licensed Compaq’s version. By the way, the Gateway 2000 was a machine by Gateway, not a vendor.
- canucker2016 1y agoNo. Gateway 2000 was the actual name of the company at that time. They dropped the 2000 close to the year 2000. I assume it wouldn't look good for a forward-looking tech company to be named for a year in the past. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_2000
- ryao 1y agoWell, that explains why I had thought it was a very popular model. :/