"Brian Cirulnick" <techrat@...> wrote:
> As for the CP/M versus DOS debate, I doubt anyone here actually *likes*
> Bill Gates... But, to quote someone else, the reason Microsoft is
> successful and other characters/companies in the history of computers
> have failed is because those guys made more mistakes than Microsoft did.
> Building a better mousetrap doesn't really mean the world will beat a
> path to your door. Didn't anyone here ever see the movie "Tucker"?
> Brian C.
I understand your point about relative mistakes. Can you understand a
point about relative "failure"? Gary Kildall's company was started on
a kitchen table with his wife in 1975. In 1990 it was sold to Novell
for $150 MILLION dollars - that's $250M in today's dollars. Explain to
me how that is a "failure"? Only to those who measure success in the
billions of dollars.
But that point aside, CP/M *mattered* in its time and place. That time
was not just a few years on the IMSAI, Kaypro, Osborne; but as part of
a line of products. It and products of the era, set the stage where
IBM - and Microsoft - "succeeded". History is like that. I think that
makes history worth studying, worth preserving.