9246Re: Interview with Andy Hertzfeld (The Mac 25yrs later)
- Aug 30, 2008Christian Liendo <christian_liendo@...> wrote:
>the job" it really needed to progress. I mean DOS used COPY and CP/M
> While I also agree you also have to remember that while CP/M "did
>historians to argue about.
> You can argue that such things were minor, but I guess thats for
>wrapped up in their open source religion they don't see why many
> I have the same argument with Linux people. Linux people are so
people think Linux is to hard for them and they get Windows/Mac machines.
> Also Dr. Kildall was his own worst enemy and DOS had IBM and which
>These are cheap shots, sorry to say. Easier to say that, than to
explain why. Anyone who cares to, can find information in respond to
these "points". I have a few Web pages about Kildall, at
I think he did pretty well. Better than most of us who read this. As
for IBM and MS-DOS, it's a long story, not part of this thread beyond
my reference to Hertzfeld's reference. Linux's devotees is just an
I got tired of people ignoring, or dismissing, CP/M and Gary Kildall
merely because Kildall did not become the world's richest man like
Bill Gates. It's interesting to see that kind of misplaced envy, even
in a primary developer of the Macintosh like Andy Hertzfeld. But the
issue actually comes from under-informed journalists and publisists,
like the one interviewing Hertzfeld.
Long story short, that situation is why I spent a few years writing up
CP/M on my Web site. The response from Christian, makes my case again.
I did what did, not to promote a "religion" of CP/M, but to nail down
its developmental history before all of its developers die, as did
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>