Talk:The Computer Revolution/Timeline

The history could read:

• MS sells first inherently security flawed "os" to the public.
• MS hits corporate milestone of 9,999 outstanding cases of copyright infringement.
• MS is subpoenoed to divulge os source code.
• MS is held liable for ......

This module, in a word, is total fecies. It supports the exceedingly biased and distorted delusion that the computer revolution is something that happened because of business activity and investment. It DID NOT. The computer revolution was due entirely to the government, especially the military, and quasi-governmental organizations (fat monopolies) like Xerox, IBM and Bell Labs.

Microsoft in particular did absolutely nothing that any other company wouldn't have been willing and eager to do at the same time, at a lower cost both monetary and social. I'm referring there to its rapacious business practices such as using NDAs to hide blackmail from government. Microsoft is the mafia of the computer revolution and Bill Gates its Al Capone. 24.200.176.92 08:37, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I think your arguments are just propaganda. Microsoft has brought computers to everyone's house (imagine housewives using HP-UX or something) and, no matter anyone loves it or not, is a part of computer history. No matter that "anyone could do it better". Noone was able to compete with Microsoft so, apart from morality, this company should be mentioned. --Derbeth 08:52, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Apple did that. Learn something other than propaganda and sucking at big corporations' teats, why don't you?

And the reason why "nobody was able to compete with Microsoft" is because they managed to rip off IBM and then proceeded to rip off every other hardware manufacturer under the sun.

And yeah, Microsoft should be mentioned. The form of that mention is what's at stake. The, quite typical, kowtowing to power you've just engaged in is exactly what I find disgusting. 24.200.176.92 09:01, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Apple did what, brought a computer into every home? Apple has done many things, but it has never held and maintained a majority share in the home computer market for any amount of time. Microsoft, whether you love it or hate it (and i get the vague idea that you hate it, for some reason) has made a number of good business moves in it's time, is good to it's investors, and has advanced the entire computer industry, either directly or indirectly. Windows may be an "inferior" OS according to you, but current versions of windows are fully backwards compatable all the way down to version 3.1 (Linux versions arent even all compatable cross-distro), and it has a commanding market share that it uses to provide standards for the entire industry. On top of all that, we can't even write what you want to write, because it isnt NPOV, and therefore would violate policy. sorry. --Whiteknight _TC^E 15:09, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

This is just ridiculous. Yes, Apple would be more of a candidate for "brought computers to the home", because with their Apple and Apple II computers they actually had affordable hardware that people could buy and take home, while at the same time Microsoft was just providing programming languages. But what is really amusing is your skewed world-view. Regurgitating some stuff that you have probably heard about Microsoft sometime from somebody somewhere... name one example where Microsoft broke the law, or some morality standard that all other companies upheld (Apple Inc. in particular, which was based on copying and imitating (even literally stealing (physical stuff) from others) from hour one, which you would know if you knew more about Apple than just propaganda). They were shrewd businessmen, no doubt, but anyone whose company is still around today was. They didn't deceive IBM, they just knew how to get a good deal. And they didn't screw IBM over, IBM messed things up for themselves. Also, they have a long history of doing that, time and time again. But what do I even bother, you're probably also the guy who added the release of the iPad as an entry to a timeline called "The Computer Revolution"... and the mere fact that you put OS in quotation marks up there shows how little you know, or care, about facts. But what never ceases to amuse me is how Apple fanboy's love to pretend being the edgy underground outsiders who stick it to the establishment (i.e. Microsoft), when in fact not only is Apple just as big and just as much part of the establishment, but more importantly their past and current practices give them absolutely no moral highground to look down from. 188.155.201.69 (talk) 19:27, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Colour Coding

We need to find a way to colour code entries based on whether they're hardware, system software or internet related, that way people can keep track of the threads in history and see how they interleave. 24.200.176.92 08:05, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I've coded them. Now I need to create a style sheet. 24.200.176.92 23:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

To Add

• the history of CPU chipmakers; the death of alternatives to x86 (death of SPARC, death of ARM, death of AlphaPC)
• Microsoft's vicious predatory practices and criminal activities
• early history of Mosaic, how it was ripped off from academia

Yeah, about #2: we can write about how microsoft's business dealings got it to where it is today, but the second we start talking about "The evil corporate beast that devors other companies, and destroys hope", we violate NPOV. If this issue gets you too charged up to contribute in a manner in accordance to wikibooks policy, i suggest you spend your time working on another book. --Whiteknight _TC^E 15:11, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Warning

I just wanted to let the authors of this page know that wikibooks has basically entered a phase of clamping down on policy violations, and a number of books are going to be deleted off the site in the near future. This book is not a textbook, and will probably never be anything more then a timeline. It therefore is a policy violation, and will be subject to speedy delete. If there is a suitable place to merge this book, i recommend that it be done quickly. This book very well could land on the chopping block, and soon. --Whiteknight _TC^E 12:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

See Wikibooks:Votes_for_deletion#The_Computer_Revolution:_A_Timeline --Krischik ^T 15:58, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Instead of a time-line, how about someone writes an History of Computers book instead? Maybe talk about early machines used as computers like the ones Pascal invented, etc? The ones used to do calculations. Early computers used in the military. The migration from mechanical to electronic computers. The founding of IBM, etc. Major inventions that revolutionalized computers like the vaccum tube, transistor, microchip, etc. --Orion Blastar 21:54, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Duplication with Wikipedia

Everyone look at w:Category:Computing timelines. I am surprised that Wikipedia has more than I expect from an encyclopedia... --Kernigh 02:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)