For those who write web pages there is no equal to Bluefish:

https://bluefish.openoffice.nl/index.html

When I say "web pages" I mean standard HTML/CSS and not the
ecmascript bullshit that dominates large portions of the web.

But check this:

"But we need your help! There is nobody looking after the windows installer
and the OXS installer is out of date."

Oh boo hoo hoo. Big fucking deal. Microslop/Apphole does not deserve
such a magnificent tag editor so just let those ports languish. Concentrate
on GNU/Linux only.

In fact, all FOSS programmers should withhold their software from
Microslop/Apphole and deliver GNU/Linux versions only. In this way,
more people will be forced to use GNU/Linux.

I certainly do not make my software available to Microslop/Apphole.

Diego Garcia <dg@chaos.rocks> wrote:

>"But we need your help! There is nobody looking after the windows installer
>and the OXS installer is out of date."
>
>Oh boo hoo hoo. Big fucking deal. Microslop/Apphole does not deserve
>such a magnificent tag editor so just let those ports languish. Concentrate
>on GNU/Linux only.
>
>In fact, all FOSS programmers should withhold their software from
>Microslop/Apphole and deliver GNU/Linux versions only. In this way,
>more people will be forced to use GNU/Linux.
>
>I certainly do not make my software available to Microslop/Apphole.

You don't make software, and you are wrong, M$/Apple platforms are a
major target for development, you are retarded.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-09-18, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

> Diego Garcia <dg@chaos.rocks> wrote:
>
>> "But we need your help! There is nobody looking after the windows installer
>> and the OXS installer is out of date."
>>
>> Oh boo hoo hoo. Big fucking deal. Microslop/Apphole does not deserve
>> such a magnificent tag editor so just let those ports languish. Concentrate
>> on GNU/Linux only.
>>
>> In fact, all FOSS programmers should withhold their software from
>> Microslop/Apphole and deliver GNU/Linux versions only. In this way,
>> more people will be forced to use GNU/Linux.
>>
>> I certainly do not make my software available to Microslop/Apphole.
>
> You don't make software, and you are wrong, M$/Apple platforms are a
> major target for development, you are retarded.

On the other hand, someone who does make software has posted this
manifesto. He does work with Apple products as well as Linux,
but his feelings about M$ are pretty clear:

https://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/xscreensaver-windows.html

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana

On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 20:10:47 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> On 2024-09-18, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Diego Garcia <dg@chaos.rocks> wrote:
> >
> >> "But we need your help! There is nobody looking after the windows installer
> >> and the OXS installer is out of date."
> >>
> >> Oh boo hoo hoo. Big fucking deal. Microslop/Apphole does not deserve
> >> such a magnificent tag editor so just let those ports languish. Concentrate
> >> on GNU/Linux only.
> >>
> >> In fact, all FOSS programmers should withhold their software from
> >> Microslop/Apphole and deliver GNU/Linux versions only. In this way,
> >> more people will be forced to use GNU/Linux.
> >>
> >> I certainly do not make my software available to Microslop/Apphole.
> >
> > You don't make software, and you are wrong, M$/Apple platforms are a
> > major target for development, you are retarded.
>
> On the other hand, someone who does make software has posted this
> manifesto. He does work with Apple products as well as Linux,
> but his feelings about M$ are pretty clear:
>
> https://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/xscreensaver-windows.html
>
He doesn't like my olde browser, that's for sure (403)
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Wed, 9/18/2024 11:44 AM, Diego Garcia wrote:
> For those who write web pages there is no equal to Bluefish:
>
> https://bluefish.openoffice.nl/index.html
>
> When I say "web pages" I mean standard HTML/CSS and not the
> ecmascript bullshit that dominates large portions of the web.
>
> But check this:
>
> "But we need your help! There is nobody looking after the windows installer
> and the OXS installer is out of date."
>
> Oh boo hoo hoo. Big fucking deal. Microslop/Apphole does not deserve
> such a magnificent tag editor so just let those ports languish. Concentrate
> on GNU/Linux only.
>
> In fact, all FOSS programmers should withhold their software from
> Microslop/Apphole and deliver GNU/Linux versions only. In this way,
> more people will be forced to use GNU/Linux.
>
> I certainly do not make my software available to Microslop/Apphole.
>

[Picture]

https://i.postimg.cc/rmcdG3dh/That-Ship-Has-Already-Sailed.gif

*******

It used to be, the battlefield was the applications.

Today, the battlefield is the operating system.

Microsoft has hired Poettering. Why ?

When Microsoft did WSL2 and WSLg, the graphics stack (pretty complicaated
and includes Terminal Services), that went from stuttering to smoother
in only a week or so. The tuneup interval; was extremely fast.
it hints that there is a crack team (not the usual
level of doofus) working on their Linux efforts.

When Microsoft "donates" a fully function NTFS driver to kernel.org,
what is Linus going to do ?

I fired up a Ubuntu 24.04.1 USB stick the other day, was attempting
to use file sharing, when all of a sudden, a dialog appears on the
screen "informing me of the windows permissions on the share". I
was gob-struck. Since when does Linux do stuff like that ? That
crosses the line, and tells me that Canonical is now Microsofts Bitch.
Right after that, I booted my Linux Mint USB stick, and no such dialog
appeared and I was able to access the storage in question, with no
dialogs of that sort appearing. So at least Linux Mint has not fallen for
this trite approach.

By doing that, Ubuntu is now on my "stuck-off" list. Not to be used any more.
That (finally) crossed the line.

That is the beachhead. Embrace and Extend. The rot is now visible
for all to see. And Microsoft has the money, the deep pockets,
that others adopting Linux, did not have. Nothing will really
stand in their way, from a business perspective. They can shovel
coal underneath that, until it's well and truly burned to a crisp.

*******

Now, enjoy your editor and... go back to sleep.

Paul

On 2024-09-19, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

> I fired up a Ubuntu 24.04.1 USB stick the other day, was attempting
> to use file sharing, when all of a sudden, a dialog appears on the
> screen "informing me of the windows permissions on the share". I
> was gob-struck. Since when does Linux do stuff like that ? That
> crosses the line, and tells me that Canonical is now Microsofts Bitch.
> Right after that, I booted my Linux Mint USB stick, and no such dialog
> appeared and I was able to access the storage in question, with no
> dialogs of that sort appearing. So at least Linux Mint has not fallen for
> this trite approach.
>
> By doing that, Ubuntu is now on my "stuck-off" list. Not to be used any more.
> That (finally) crossed the line.
>
> That is the beachhead. Embrace and Extend.

Or, as some put it: "Embrace, extend, extinguish."

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is not a necessary evil.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Microsoft is not necessary.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | -- Ted Nelson, paraphrased (the
/ \ if you read it the right way. | villain back then was IBM)

I'm glad you hung back on how you really feel about his situation. Just
kidding, a very good read.

I haven't used anything Ubuntu in quite a while. First Canonical wanted to
dictate everything about my install. It got old quickly, install *tu,
remove all snap, and flatpak, and hope everything is still functional and
secure.

I'm not a security wizard though everything appeared to work, that doesn't
really mean it does.

In short I second your thoughts! You were just more polite about it...lol

On 9/18/24 19:01, azigni wrote:
> I'm glad you hung back on how you really feel about his situation. Just
> kidding, a very good read.
>
> I haven't used anything Ubuntu in quite a while. First Canonical wanted to
> dictate everything about my install. It got old quickly, install *tu,
> remove all snap, and flatpak, and hope everything is still functional and
> secure.
>
> I'm not a security wizard though everything appeared to work, that doesn't
> really mean it does.
>
> In short I second your thoughts! You were just more polite about it...lol

In the past I tried Ubuntu but I started with Mandriva in 2006
and I found Ubuntu to be more restictive of my investigations. I joined
a LUG about the same time and no one knew anything about Mandriva. They
had all joined the Canonical Bandwagon and convinced new users to use it.
But I had used AmigaOS before GNU/Linux, AmigaOS ran essentially
in root mode all the time. I learned to edit configuration files and
startup-sequences using AmigaOS. I also learned things that would be no
use whatsoever in the Linux x86 world like terminating SCSI chains and
installing DIPs to increase the memory and ROMs to increase the OS's
capabilities.
So as my long passed OL pal Skal Loret recommended Mandriva suited me
and when it went under I went to PCLinuxOS.

bliss

Dell Precision 7730- PCLOS 2024.06- Linux 6.6.51-Plasma 5.27.11
--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On 19/09/2024 01:12, Paul wrote:
> The rot is now visible
> for all to see. And Microsoft has the money, the deep pockets,
> that others adopting Linux, did not have. Nothing will really
> stand in their way, from a business perspective. They can shovel
> coal underneath that, until it's well and truly burned to a crisp.

Like their mobile phone software eh?

--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

On Thu, 9/19/2024 7:07 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 19/09/2024 01:12, Paul wrote:
>> The rot is now visible
>> for all to see. And Microsoft has the money, the deep pockets,
>> that others adopting Linux, did not have. Nothing will really
>> stand in their way, from a business perspective. They can shovel
>> coal underneath that, until it's well and truly burned to a crisp.
>
> Like their mobile phone software eh?
>

They don't have to be good at anything.

They always seem to end up with a pile of money.

There are all sorts of theories as to how Linux
is "impervious to assault". I'm not so sure.
It will depend on the community to save it.

Paul

On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 08:53:37 -0400, Paul wrote:

> There are all sorts of theories as to how Linux is "impervious to
> assault". I'm not so sure.

Microsoft started out trying “extinguish” (remember “Linux is a cancer”?),
and failed miserably. Now it is forced to try to make Windows more
compatible with Linux.

> They always seem to end up with a pile of money.

Windows isn’t quite as profitable as it once was. Exhibit A: declining
quality of updates, with further patches often needed to fix bugs in prior
patches. Exhibit B: trying to move to an adware/rentware model, to squeeze
more revenue out of it.

Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an
operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows
existence as it is known today.

OS2 had a good run for example. It is still alive and well in some
proprietary industrial equipment because it is impervious to hacks as no
one remembers it.

clinker <azigni@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an
>operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows
>existence as it is known today.
>
>OS2 had a good run for example. It is still alive and well in some
>proprietary industrial equipment because it is impervious to hacks as no
>one remembers it.

Windows and Linux each have ongoing markets for themselves, as does
Apple, sure something else can crop up but it's reinventing the wheel
at some point, what Linux shows in how it got its name is that one
person can make a kernel if he has the window of opportunity -
Torvalds may have thought of it more as a personal project with the
new hardware, at first, but it turned into the real thing. Really a
genius guy.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Thu, 9/19/2024 8:23 PM, clinker wrote:
> Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows existence as it is known today.
>
> OS2 had a good run for example. It is still alive and well in some proprietary industrial equipment because it is impervious to hacks as no one remembers it.

Writing OSes isn't much of a barrier.

Convincing people to use them, and selling the
OS to the populace, is a lot harder.

A round figure for an OS, is about $150,000,000 will
get you an OS. A file manager. And a calculator :-)
What more do you need, really. The calculator has
to have tiny characters for the keys, and gobs of
white space. See ? I can even write the requirement
spec for you.

Paul

On 19/09/2024 13:53, Paul wrote:
> On Thu, 9/19/2024 7:07 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 19/09/2024 01:12, Paul wrote:
>>> The rot is now visible
>>> for all to see. And Microsoft has the money, the deep pockets,
>>> that others adopting Linux, did not have. Nothing will really
>>> stand in their way, from a business perspective. They can shovel
>>> coal underneath that, until it's well and truly burned to a crisp.
>>
>> Like their mobile phone software eh?
>>
>
> They don't have to be good at anything.
>
> They always seem to end up with a pile of money.
>
> There are all sorts of theories as to how Linux
> is "impervious to assault". I'm not so sure.
> It will depend on the community to save it.
>
The community is largely funded by corporations who themselves decided
they would rather pay to have a 'free' Linux, than pay to have Unix or
Microsoft licences on every product. IBM et all pay millions into Linux
development

The IBM PC set the standard - it was published and everyone copied it.
Result was an industry standard architecture.

If Linux had existed we would never have had DOS

People don't want to pay for operating systems any more. The *only*
place Microsoft hangs on is the desktop, and desktop sales are now more
or less commercial. Not many average dudes buy a desktop when they can
have a fondleslab or a big fuck off 'rob me' mobile phone...

Only hardcore gamers

Nothing of any real significance has come out of Microsoft for ages.

It is really a cash cow now. It will dwindle and get sold off. Gates has
his billions.

> Paul
>

--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

On 20/09/2024 01:23, clinker wrote:
> Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an
> operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows
> existence as it is known today.
>
most things are *possible*

> OS2 had a good run for example. It is still alive and well in some
> proprietary industrial equipment because it is impervious to hacks as no
> one remembers it.

DOS is still used in a lot of industrial kit ...When all you want is to
load a single tasked application that talks to custom hardware...

There is evidence that Linux itself is getting bloated, and in need of
the same 'back to basics' approach that Linus dud 30 years ago.

There is certainly space for something like FreeRTOS to make headway in
the embedded space.

But the thing is, again from my perspective, as a user, not a developer
of operating systems, is that what you want - and IBM, Red Hat etc
understand this - is a reliable secure bug free platform on which to
write applications that is easily ported to whatever hardware is available.

And in that context 30 years of development beats a new kid on the block
every day.
The reason we don't like Windows is because it costs money at every
turn, and is there to screw the last red cent out of its users. A new
windows would flop. Indeed the old windows is flopping.

It shows all the characteristics of a cash cow company - everything is
monetized.

Linux is like C. It has its issues, but everyone understands them
everyone can program in it and it works well enough. And it doesn't need
licenses to be paid to use it.

And sometimes its easier to fix bugs in it than to rewrite it in Rust etc.

--
For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the
very definition of slavery.

Jonathan Swift

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>If Linux had existed we would never have had DOS

Linux on an 8088 and 64k of RAM? 8)

I guess the 68000 was also an option...

--
"In practice, though, Linux users are just as controlled by the distro
makers and FOSS app developers as commercial users are by Microsoft
and closed-source app developers." - DumFSck, lying shamelessly

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> clinker wrote:
>> Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an
>> operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows
>> existence as it is known today.
>
> most things are *possible*
>
>> OS2 had a good run for example. It is still alive and well in some
>> proprietary industrial equipment because it is impervious to hacks as no
>> one remembers it.

We also had Amigas and Atari ST's, before it become impractical to
compete with the Wintel juggernaut on the desktop.

If Micro$oft could push all of those (at least somewhat) established
platforms out of the market, what chance does a newcomer have?

>But the thing is, again from my perspective, as a user, not a developer
>of operating systems, is that what you want - and IBM, Red Hat etc
>understand this - is a reliable secure bug free platform on which to
>write applications that is easily ported to whatever hardware is available.
>
>And in that context 30 years of development beats a new kid on the block
>every day.

It's almost impossible to come from behind, in these markets.

--
"The middle 32 characters look very random - but it looks like you
stop at the letter 'f'. * why stop at letter f?" - "DFS", putting
his ignorance on display

On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 18:23:36 -0600, clinker wrote:

> Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an
> operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows
> existence as it is known today.
>

We just need to remove the "Linux" from GNU/Linux.

GNU was/is a project to develop a completely free (as in freedom
and not beer) Unix, and it has succeeded admirably except for a viable
OS. Hence GNU selected Linux as its OS.

But GNU has an OS; it's called "Hurd." It works but it cannot
yet compete with the functionality of Linux. Even Dr. Richard
Stallman, the main protagonist of GNU, admits that the architecture
of Hurd was something of a mistake.

Hurd is still alive, if not kicking, however:

https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/

I would love to see Hurd revitalized and to assume the role of
the GNU kernel, replacing Linux.

Then, with GNU as the steward, Unix would be totally free (as in freedom
and not beer).

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

Lester Thorpe wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 18:23:36 -0600, clinker wrote:
>
>> Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an
>> operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows
>> existence as it is known today.
>
> We just need to remove the "Linux" from GNU/Linux.
>
> GNU was/is a project to develop a completely free (as in freedom
> and not beer) Unix, and it has succeeded admirably except for a viable
> OS. Hence GNU selected Linux as its OS.

Not "OS"... it's "kernel".

> But GNU has an OS; it's called "Hurd." It works but it cannot
> yet compete with the functionality of Linux. Even Dr. Richard
> Stallman, the main protagonist of GNU, admits that the architecture
> of Hurd was something of a mistake.
>
> Hurd is still alive, if not kicking, however:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
>
> I would love to see Hurd revitalized and to assume the role of
> the GNU kernel, replacing Linux.
>
> Then, with GNU as the steward, Unix would be totally free (as in freedom
> and not beer).

The Hurd mentality :-)

--
My analyst told me that I was right out of my head,
But I said, "Dear Doctor, I think that it is you instead.
Because I have got a thing that is unique and new,
To prove it I'll have the last laugh on you.
'Cause instead of one head -- I've got two.
And you know two heads are better than one.

On 9/20/24 04:59, chrisv wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> If Linux had existed we would never have had DOS
>
> Linux on an 8088 and 64k of RAM? 8)
>
> I guess the 68000 was also an option...
>
No but the 68020 with the memory management systen chip added might
work. But those were not cheap when in productions. That is why
the $5.00 68000 chip was chosen by Amiga/Commodore and why the memory
management from TriPOS was discarded. I dunno why Mac went
the same route.

The memory for these old 16/32 bit chips was not very inexpensive
either.
I spent hundreds of dollars on memory expansions and on
accelerator cards finally with the 68060 at 50 MegaHertz and
about 32 Megabytes of ram. Still no real memory management
and it had problems with running a text editor and a Web Browser.
The great thing was that it had Aminet where shareware and
freeware could be downloaded along with the latest patches.

Linux is good but still Thunderbird cannot do the
tricks that Yet Another Mailer did nor the Usenet access
programs. Of course it was invented before .html was a
standard and we only had to deal wth BBSes and ansi
codes.
bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On 9/20/24 05:07, chrisv wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> clinker wrote:
>>> Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an
>>> operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows
>>> existence as it is known today.
>>
>> most things are *possible*
>>
>>> OS2 had a good run for example. It is still alive and well in some
>>> proprietary industrial equipment because it is impervious to hacks as no
>>> one remembers it.
>
> We also had Amigas and Atari ST's, before it become impractical to
> compete with the Wintel juggernaut on the desktop.
>
> If Micro$oft could push all of those (at least somewhat) established
> platforms out of the market, what chance does a newcomer have?
>
>> But the thing is, again from my perspective, as a user, not a developer
>> of operating systems, is that what you want - and IBM, Red Hat etc
>> understand this - is a reliable secure bug free platform on which to
>> write applications that is easily ported to whatever hardware is available.
>>
>> And in that context 30 years of development beats a new kid on the block
>> every day.
>
> It's almost impossible to come from behind, in these markets.
>
People are still trying and reading Distowatch on a frequent basis I
find this:
> 2024-09-10 OS Release: Redox OS 0.9.0

> Redox OS is a UNIX-like, general-purpose, microkernel-based operating system written in Rust. The project's latest release, version 0.9.0, introduces COSMIC desktop applications, a custom web server, improved performance and stability, and the Nano text editor has been ported

Good luck to them. I am too tired to
start over with a new OS at this point in my
life but young people will try it and maybe it is
as big a winner as Linux in another 20 or 30
years..
bliss - who hopes that she does not suffer that long.

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On 20/09/2024 12:59, chrisv wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> If Linux had existed we would never have had DOS
>
> Linux on an 8088 and 64k of RAM? 8)
>
> I guess the 68000 was also an option...
>

The original Unix ran on less that 128K RAM
Original PC was up to 256 K RAM IIRC

You couldn't run MSDOS on 16K RAM!

A basic text only Linux would run OK on 128K

--
“A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader,
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say,
“We did this ourselves.”

― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

On 20/09/2024 at 15:57, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Lester Thorpe wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 18:23:36 -0600, clinker wrote:
>>
>>> Not to derail this thread, which is a good one, but it is possible an
>>> operating system will be developed that threaten both Linux and Windows
>>> existence as it is known today.
>>
>> We just need to remove the "Linux" from GNU/Linux.
>>
>> GNU was/is a project to develop a completely free (as in freedom
>> and not beer) Unix, and it has succeeded admirably except for a viable
>> OS. Hence GNU selected Linux as its OS.
>
> Not "OS"... it's "kernel".
>
>> But GNU has an OS; it's called "Hurd." It works but it cannot
>> yet compete with the functionality of Linux. Even Dr. Richard
>> Stallman, the main protagonist of GNU, admits that the architecture
>> of Hurd was something of a mistake.
>>
>> Hurd is still alive, if not kicking, however:
>>
>> https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
>>
>> I would love to see Hurd revitalized and to assume the role of
>> the GNU kernel, replacing Linux.
>>
>> Then, with GNU as the steward, Unix would be totally free (as in freedom
>> and not beer).
>
> The Hurd mentality :-)
>

Perhaps it could be rewritten in Rust, as an alternative to a new Linux
kernel written in Rust as opposed to writing bits of the current kernel
in Rust.

--
Chris Elvidge, England
I WILL STOP PHONING IT IN

On 2024-09-20, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> clinker wrote:
>>
>>> OS2 had a good run for example. It is still alive and well in some
>>> proprietary industrial equipment because it is impervious to hacks as no
>>> one remembers it.
>
> We also had Amigas and Atari ST's, before it become impractical to
> compete with the Wintel juggernaut on the desktop.
>
> If Micro$oft could push all of those (at least somewhat) established
> platforms out of the market, what chance does a newcomer have?

The Amiga would have fared much better if Commodore's board wasn't
so busy running the company into the ground while siphoning off
bigger salaries than IBM's bigwigs were getting.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | first society that wouldn't save
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost-
/ \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut