"Better DOS than DOS"
"Better Windows than Windows"
Eventually I discovered IBM OS/2 and fell in love with it. First and foremost, I could actually change folder icons ... and window backgrounds ... and cursors ... and various other stuff. I could also run tons of programs at the same time without getting those annoying Out of Memory messages. That was the first time I've heard of multi-threading, memory protection and object oriented interface design. Those were precisely the things that Microsoft tried to implement into Windows 95 years later.
I have followed the life story of OS/2 from fairly slow version 2.0 to much improved 2.1 to absolutely incredible multimedia oriented 3.0 Warp. I never upgraded to version 4.0 for a variety of reasons, primarily because my PC was way to slow for it. Over the years, OS/2 have evolved into a wonderful, polished and stable operating systems with such features as integrated voice navigation and dictation, native Java support and intelligent adaptive help system (if you pray hard enough maybe Windows 2010 will have all that!). If not for bone headed IBM marketing OS/2 Warp could have been the industry standard. It's a fine product nowadays but who cares?
Besides, OS/2 still shares a lot of the same problems that Windows has. Especially in the earlier versions, it had some serious interface flaws. Hardware recognition and support are still very limited. And sadly, finding good applications for OS/2 is becoming increasingly difficult, to the point when IBM owned Lotus doesn't deliver its software for OS/2 for over a year after the Windows version becomes available. To make matters worse, IBM wouldn't even sell you a computer with OS/2 Warp preinstalled, but rather labels all their boxes as Designed for Windows 95/NT. OS/2 is basically dead now. And I am moving on.
So much ink and bandwidth have been wasted on this subject that I dare not to devour much of your time talking about the most overhyped product in computer history (and, arguably, the biggest disappointment of all time). Instead, I will invite you to read an article called Beyond the Hype by Douglas Adams (the author of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy) published in The Guardian on August 25, 1995. Enjoy!
I only have a minor point to add to that. It took IBM no less than 4 major revisions of OS/2 to get it right for the most part. Apple have used the 14 years of experience with Macintosh to improve upon what was already a good thing in 1984 and the current revision of MacOS is version 8.1. UNIX have existed for decades and still people find room for improvement. On the contrary, Windows 95 is basically a new operating system all together (for it is vastly different from Windows 3.1) and any product in version 1.0, especially something as complex as a modern operating system, cannot possibly be even close to perfect. To make the matters worse, Microsoft is known to care more about sales volumes than quality of their software. If you still expect Windows 95 to be as solid and polished as any of the above mentioned operating systems, you might be fooling yourself. Enough said.
Naturally, after years of using a PC and while being a graduate student at the University of Illinois, a school known for its Computer Science program and UNIX orientation, I couldn't help but wonder if I should become a UNIX person (that is a 100% geek) after all. Over the years, I have had access to Silicon Graphics, IBM and HP workstations, dial-up accounts on AIX, Solaris, HP-UX and Digital UNIX. I have done some fairly advanced scientific programming in Fortran and have come to love the vi editor and pine e-mail program. So, I thought I should try installing Linux at home.
I got Slackware 3.1 distribution and a couple of good UNIX books. Then I spent a few sleepless nights repartitioning my hard drive and installing Linux on my PC. With luck and help from some nice (but very arrogant) people from the Linux newsgroups I got it up and running! For the first time ever I had root access privileges, and that was an experience in itself. It made me feel like the King of the World and the Master of the Entire Universe (so, now I understand why system administrators look down on us mere mortals).
I could now change the shell parameters all I wanted and I could give myself a dozen accounts with different access privileges. After I have done enough fooling around, I started wondering what else was Linux good for? I posted on the newsgroups again asking this very question. So, people told me that I could set up a Web server or do some serious software development. The former wasn't such a good idea over a 14.4 Kbps modem and, as for the latter, umm ... why would I take my work home?
Yes, UNIX provides extreme power and has tons of great system utilities but it still lacks even basic productivity applications. The Command Line Interface (CLI) interface is, to put it mildly, antique. I admit, generally there are some advantages to a good CLI, such as flexibility, low hardware requirements and stability. But, Come on People, UNIX was developed at AT&T before I was even born and it still looks almost the same as then. For one thing, the learning curve is 10 times that of the worst Graphical User Interface (GUI). Yes, there were attempts at creating GUI's for UNIX, such as X Windows, but why do you still have to manually configure every single detail before you can use it? That simply misses the whole idea of the point-and-click nature of a GUI.
I have a theory though. UNIX is maintained by people who like to create problems for themselves and then solve them. To them it's like a game. But what's more important, they have convinced the World that they should be paid a lot of money for playing their game. Then they have proceeded to develop a variety of mostly incompatible standards, just to make playing their game more fun. And ever since it became a matter of their job security to maintain the status quo. Just a crazy thought, of course :)
Back to my story. Needless to say I wasn't paid for playing that game and, honestly, I got tired of dealing with hundreds of configuration files. I had Linux just sitting on my PC for about a year, up until the time when I reformatted my hard drive and gave the computer to my parents. At that point, I have concluded that even though I liked UNIX, it would never become my primary computing platform.
Then a miracle happened. I got a chance to use a totally different kind of machine. It was an 8 year old Macintosh IIfx that I "inherited" when I started my research assistantship work at the University of Illinois. While it was painfully slow at times, it was such a pleasure to use that it forever changed the way I look at personal computing. And, as the story goes, after two weeks I was ready to swear that as long as Apple is alive I will use their products and their products only.
Now get this, the machine mentioned above survived from the time when 286-based computers were still commonplace and it still runs most of the modern software. No wonder Apple isn't doing that well these days - their computers seem to last 3 times longer than Intel-based PC's, and few people feel the need to upgrade them every couple of years, like IBM-compatibles.
In addition to that, Apple consistently has the highest overall reliability and best rated support of any major personal computer manufacturer (even PC Magazine will tell you so!). What that means is that they not only don't get much money from hardware repairs, but their support costs are the highest in the industry. Once again - it's a wonder a company like Apple, who just happens to care about their customers, is still in business!
"Apples" to Oranges ...
(In their own words)
Let's look at a Windows user's wish list. Michael Miller, the editor-in-chief of PC Magazine while writing about the Windows 98 beta wishes that it would do the following - "I'd like to take all of my Windows settings (such as icon positions, backgrounds, and screen-saver settings) and back them up on a floppy disk in a simple manner. Then I want to install that disk on a new machine and apply my settings. It would be even better if this also worked for my applications". Well, Microsoft is not planning on granting his wish so he can just dream on... But, believe it or not, that's exactly what I did when I got my new PowerPC. On a Mac there is a file called Finder preferences that contains exactly the information he is looking for. Similarly, every application has its own Preferences file which can be easily copied to another machine.
But things are not that bad for Windows devotees. This is how Windows Sources magazine describes a Windows 98 feature that Mac users have been taking for granted since the beginning of time - "[Desktop Update] gives you a more accurate file-copy progress bar, which finally shows the progress of the entire group of files you're copying, not just of each one". Windows users, rejoice!
Then there is that "new" development that my roommate is all excited about called Universal Serial Bus (USB). He likes the idea that he would be able to get a monitor that has a variety of multimedia inputs and outputs and he wouldn't have to reach all those ports on the back of the tower case under his desk. So, I showed him my 5 year old Apple monitor that has two keyboard/mouse inputs, a microphone input and a speaker output. Hey, maybe in another 5 years PC's will have a power button on the keyboard!
Here is another curious comment from PC Computing magazine'sHall of Shame - "Almost everyone's made the mistake of pushing the Reset button instead of the floppy-eject button. Sure, you should've been looking, but we'd rather blame the idiot who came up with this fatal design flaw." Well, not on a Mac. For one thing, there is no eject button to start with because the floppy ejects automatically. Neither do you need to use those archaic letter associations like A: or C: for your drives. Finally, Macintosh knows whether there is a disk in the drive and never gives you a Disk not found message.
This quote from CNET's editor Sue Plumley sums up how a lot of people feel about Windows 95 - "Some days, it's hard to remember why we use PCs. Some days, it seems the major design goal of Windows 95 is to drive us crazy." That's why CNET kindly wrote a Making Windows 95 work online guide. Unfortunately, they could not fix what Microsoft broke. For instance, when answering a popular question - "Is there a way to cancel a command?" CNET experts just wished - "If only there were. Unlike the Macintosh operating system, Windows 95 provides no keyboard shortcuts to stop a program from opening after you have double-clicked the icon, no matter how long it takes to launch." Oh, well...
Just when I though that I've collected enough evidence on Windows 95, I happened to read the March '98 issue of PC World. This is what a magazine that is traditionally a Microsoft-friendly publication had to say on the subject - "Despite the rosy promises (and many service releases, bug fixes, and updates), many "features" in Windows 95 still leave us gritting our teeth and reaching for a bottle of aspirin (or scotch). These aren't necessarily catastrophes that will wipe out your data, just everyday glitches that annoy and irritate - enough to make you want to stick pins in your Bill Gates doll." They readily provide a list of those "everyday glitches" and, not surprisingly, it is anything but short. Below are a few notable items from their colossal list of Windows 95 greatest failures:
I would like to express my deepest thanks to Alex Warshavsky, Nancy Fosdick and Chelsea Oller for their helpful suggestions. I am also grateful to Igor Matlin, Mateus Andrade and Mark Stein whose insightful Microsoft advocacy inspired me to put my own thoughts in perspective and write this article.
* Disclaimer: I speak from my own experience, however incomplete and biased.
Back to
Absolutely Wonderful Universe
Copyright © 1998 KSI
Background © by Glen
Sanford - used with permission