It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
TheCowSaysMoo: still fighting over which license is the best? Vegastrike & wesnoth still the pinnacle of gaming on linux?
We're not talking about licenses now, correct me if I'm wrong.
Xonotic, War§ow, Tremulous, Oilrush, Amnesia, Darwinia, tons of other great indie games. Or maybe you're speaking about so-called "AAA titles"? I don't really care about most of them, and those few which draw my attention are easily played with Wine.
Post edited June 22, 2011 by beresk_let
avatar
lukaszthegreat: buhahahaaha! me? fanboy? of Msoft?

you really don't get it. Windows, OSX, Linux, whatever. reread OPs post. What if we run dos! DOS.
avatar
hedwards: Upon rereading it, I think you're right that I misread it. The internet provides way too little in the way of context if you miss a portion of post or get the reference wrong.

Although, most of what you posted was in my opinion wrong. But, as that requires time machine games, it's hard to say how things would have gone.

There have been web browsers without need for a windowing system. And with the advent of higher resolution displays, there's no reason why we couldn't be watching youtube and the web from DOS, other than the fact that they moved to Windows rather than updating DOS to either 32 or 64 bits.

And few people used incompatible versions of DOS for any sort of serious work, usually that was a vendor supplied boot disk as it didn't need to be completely compatible, just in the areas that count.
i had never question the fact that a dos system (upgraded of course) could run youtube or crysis 2 or anything else.

the problem is popularity. most of things we are used to comes from the fact that computers are everywhere in everybody's hands. youtube is what it is because it is darn easy to use. there are millions upon millions of users from every part of the world probably including antartica, somalia and north korea...
reading news on net seconds after they happened is because there are people who read them. there is market for those news.

Gaming imo would still be a niche, a nerd hobby. PC gaming of course as I assume console would be as easy to use as they are now...

and not only gaming... people would most likely have professional programs to edit pictures, make movies, draw stuff on computers. yet i don't believe a common person would be able to learn how to use them without actually spending hours on studying. so something so simple like amv would not be possible for simple fan of anime.

it is all maybes, probably imnotsure things.

I am quite certain that internet would be much more primitive and smaller than it is today, that computers would not be as common as they are now nor they would be as fun or useful to use for most of us without a single easy to use operating system which united the market.

Of course if Msoft would not develop win probably someone else would. maybe they would do better job, maybe worse. I don't find win bad nor i find them perfect. I'm certain the system could be better but I would bet my left back testicle that it is easier for everyone to criticize than actually create an operating system being used by 90% of computers in the world.
avatar
lukaszthegreat: 90% of computers in the world.
Just a little annoying remark: personal computers. I mean desktops and laptops (also netbooks).
I know he's really not supposed to have said this, but "640K ought to be enough for anybody." So many great games were made with that limitation too... but I'm glad they finally went past it. Thank you DOS4GW & Windows!
Very interesting read here guys and gals.
avatar
lukaszthegreat: without windows ability to write essays would be hindered by your technical aptitude.
Right...

Because Molière, Oscar Wilde, and Mark Twain were a bunch of hacks.

:-)
so how exactly how would making a computer harder to use for people improve the world?
avatar
CaptainGyro: so how exactly how would making a computer harder to use for people improve the world?
It would return power to the geeks.
Post edited June 23, 2011 by Egotomb
avatar
CaptainGyro: so how exactly how would making a computer harder to use for people improve the world?
avatar
Egotomb: It would return the power to the geeks.
You need to be disabused of the notion that geeks ever really had all that much power... :-)
avatar
CaptainGyro: so how exactly how would making a computer harder to use for people improve the world?
avatar
Egotomb: It would return power to the geeks.
you do realize that computers are a means to an end? not an end in itself?
avatar
Poulscath: It surprises me (though it shouldn't) that so many people don't realise that GUIs existed years before DOS did.
Sir, wtf are you saying :-P

It's true, the first Windows versions were just shit. BUT.... my new shiny Windows 7 is really a good OS thus far, the first Windows version I've ever experienced that runs BETTER on the same hardware used to run the previous one! So no, I never wished this bullshit you are talking about :-P
A point-n-click GUI just makes everything so much easier & more powerful, it seems it would've just been a matter of time before someone popularized it (and even still, Windows was NOT an original idea by MicroSoft).

That's not to say everything is easier in a Windows interface, but that's mostly the fault of poor programming. Point-n-click is still easier than remembering command lines.

btw, my first O/S was TRS-dos, so I do speak from experience.
Post edited June 23, 2011 by ChaunceyK
avatar
Poulscath: It surprises me (though it shouldn't) that so many people don't realise that GUIs existed years before DOS did.
avatar
KingofGnG: Sir, wtf are you saying :-P
I am saying that DOS came out in 1981 but GUIs existed in the 1970s (1968 if you include Engelbarts NLS system). The Xerox Alto had a fully functioning, modern style GUI in 1976, a full 5 years before DOS saw the light of day.
avatar
KingofGnG: It's true, the first Windows versions were just shit. BUT.... my new shiny Windows 7 is really a good OS thus far, the first Windows version I've ever experienced that runs BETTER on the same hardware used to run the previous one! So no, I never wished this bullshit you are talking about :-P
I have no idea what "bullshit" you're referring to since I didn't wish anything here. I simply pointed out that GUIs are older than DOS is and much older than many people realise.

1963 - First GUI application (Ivan Sutherlands Sketchpad)
1968 - Douglas Engelbarts Augment system (google "Mother of all Demos")
1973 - First GUI based personal computer (Xerox Alto)
1976 - First modern overlapping window GUI (Smalltalk-76)
1981 - MSDOS
avatar
Poulscath: 1973 - First GUI based personal computer (Xerox Alto)
You consider the Xerox Alto a personal computer?!! :O
avatar
Poulscath: 1973 - First GUI based personal computer (Xerox Alto)
avatar
Snickersnack: You consider the Xerox Alto a personal computer?!! :O
I just googled it (along with the other GUIs listed, just for self-education), and apparently history considers the Xerox Alto a personal computer.