Technically Speaking

Rex Dixon – Professional BlogCaster

Why Not?

Posted by rexdixon on December 15, 2006

Well this “Why no one asked Bill hard questions” has been on my mind for a minute, and it’s quite obvious. When you are invited to sit in the same room as the man that basically changed the PC world with his software licensing idea, you listen. Allot of people have forgotten how the computer world was prior to Microsoft’s dominance. Put it this way, there was none. If you wanted to be in computers, you better learn mainframes, COBOL, Assembly, pick, binary coding, etc… etc… serious up people – before Bill the computer world really took some serious engineering minds. Before you jump on that statement, please read, and I’m not saying that people today are stupid!

If you are invited to a Q&A like this, you ask appropriate questions of the man. Just like when Ross Levinsohn took time out of his day to grant Rex Dixon the interview, I kept it nice and to the point. Did you all enjoy that interview? I would say you did from the stats I saw on it.

In other words, you don’t go to a big shindig dressed in a suit jacket and open toed sandals. Yes, Technically Speaking, I’m going to beat that one to death. It’s a great example of where new meets old and old becomes new again while keeping your intergrity of being new. Do you get what I’m saying?


2 Responses to “Why Not?”

  1. Anders Jackson said


    I was there when it happend working at a University, and MS DOS was just a no good program loader on bad hardware. It was even less than CP/M, witch wasn’t any good either. But what do you expect with that hardware? Just a 8-bit 8085 or z80 with up to 64 kbyte memory, at most. MS DOS runned on a 16 bit machine with more memory than you hade seen on a CP/M machine. Well, there was a few 8-bit machine with memory protection and more memory (OS/9 on a M6809 anyone). But there was no big success for those.

    And MS Windos of that time was just some graphic stuff on top of MS DOS that looked like shit, worked like that and was crap compared to the inovative (that time) Apple computer.
    Macintosh was much better, much more inovative software, better OS and had a realy revolutionary OS and Desktop metaphore that even (relative) untrained new users could use (Rip of from Xerox Parc research center, but anyway).

    No, Bill Gates had a good strong supporter in IBM, which didn’t found any future with that powerless computer. So they didn’t protected it as they used to do with all other hardware. That’s why IBM PC compatible computer buissiness came to be created.

    But I guess you youngsters doesn’t have any history to build on. No perspectiv to history. With that, then Bill Gates could be seen as a great innovative software developer. For us which actually was there, he is only a god suite building monopoly companies. Which isn’t that bad, but has nothing to do with innovative technologies.

    Just proves that is no good to be to early, you should be a copy cat starting second and learning from original innovators.

  2. Matthews C. Kriner said

    great advice and sharing,I will buy one this nice jeans for me .thanks

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: