3 hours ago, Spongejohn said:
What made microsoft a huge fortune was the fact it can work on thousands of hardware configurations since they supply “out of the box” basics support for almost every hardware configurations and basics tools for let you do everying starting from a fresh installation.
well, that I can’t fully agree on what you just said here when it comes to win vs. linux. for instance, network card support in windows was missing from the box until like a few windows ago, and their almost nonexisting diagnostic tools are the only reason, why people loved linux live cds, even if they do not use linux for anything else…
I mean the missing realtek network card support was pretty much the biggest problem for installing windows in IT in the XP era - I worked as IT for a few years for university, so I remember this very vividly. You always needed 3 things: novell client, network driver disk, windows. Office and adobe for the users. Some Linux CD for problems.
(Adobe Pro takes the longest to install, by far)
MS clearly made a lot of money, by getting a deal with IBM, and selling them a rebranded operating system they bought - they actually bought another first, Xenix, a unix derivant, which was later bought by SCO. It’s funny what happened to those. From that deal on, and the success of the IBM “compatible” pc - MS pretty much stayed uncontested market leader.
I think you mean why windows broke OS/2 at launch in the 90s, simply because OS/2 did not come with many drivers, a very usual quote in texts dealing with MS success history - but actually by then, MS basicly outmanouvered IBM more with the fact, they were smarter in making windows a cheap OEM product, preinstalled on most manufacturers. But that was a few years, before Linus posted his linux kernel idea in 91, and that war with OS/2 still went on until win95.
I think its rather the other way around: linux usage in low level diagnostics, tools for formatting and handling disks in the late 90s, and the fact the linux kernel comes with all drivers it supports, made microsoft invest again into providing their online driver database, and making their install tools better.
This went so fast, but dont forget, Linux didn’t really start to publicly be used until around ~95. It kinda totally replaced everything in our minds that happened more than 20 years ago.
3 hours ago, Spongejohn said:
some ek linux addicted
I doubt its written by a single freak, tho. Of course, intel was always there, since there are semiconductors, which they invented. And they are like uber quite serious about their open source drivers, and maintain them themselves.
Just saying, many of the people working on open source kernel projects work for the big companies producing core hardware (chips and controllers). The independent freaks are more in the userbase and contribute more to end-user stuff, while some hardware manufacturers have often not enough money to do open source drivers, ending in being maintained by individuals - but certainly not intel.
However, Torvalds indeed wanted to name linux first “freax”. So there might be some truth there!