[Lancaster] [Fwd: Re: Twitter]

[Martyn Welch]

Richard Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 09:03:19AM +0000, Martyn Welch wrote:
>> Richard Robinson wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 12:46:25AM +0000, Martyn Welch wrote:
>>>> Would we have the internet playing such a large role in the world today 
>>>> without there having been such a dominant player in the computer market? 
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> Until Microsoft (finally) heard the news, providers were coming up with
>>> 3rd-party software. Demon, in this country (I don't know the details of
>>> other countries) had been experiencing exponential growth for years by the
>>> time it was possible to access it with anything Microsoft provided.
>> Really? Because my memory is that operating systems at the time didn't 
>> provide TCP/IP stacks and an after market addition was required.
> 
> That's right. When I first got a connection with Demon, they were providing
> their own home-brewed cli software, since DOS had no support for it. And
> later, I think they had some role in developing Windows-based stuff, running
> over, mostky, Peter Tattam's Trumpet Winsock. Shareware, since, again, there
> was no native support.
> 
> You had to insert a floppy disk, and type 'install' by hand. The horror !
> Tell the youth of today that and ...<etc>
> 
> 
>> It's not that Microsoft provided the TCP/IP stack, it was that it's 
>> dominant position made it financially and technically viable to give 
>> away a TCP/IP stack on a cheap medium that would work on the vast 
>> majority of PCs that people had in there homes.
> 
> And, _eventually_, Microsoft started doing that. Sure. And if the point is
> that no-one else was in a position to have done it, isn't that a bit of a
> circular argument ?
> 

No you've missed my point.

My point is that the large homogeneous installation base in consumers 
homes allowed *others* (i.e. not Microsoft) to distribute a compatible 
TCP/IP stack to a very large market easily - not something that would 
have been possible without the large homogeneous installation base, thus 
in this case, not possible without Microsoft's push to get a Microsoft 
powered PC in every home.

> 
>>> It was the connectivity that was available, people were selling it, lots of
>>> people wanted it.
>> There are probably always enthusiastic early adopters, just like there 
>> were with Sony's Minidisc and Toshiba's HD-DVD. By 1996, I'd agree, lots 
>> of people wanted it, but it had already made it passed the early adopter 
>> stage by then - it probably made it passed that stage before there was a 
>> single consumer ISP in the UK.
>>
>>> The Internet _worked_, years before Microsoft payed it any attention at all.
>>> People wanted it. Microsoft have nothing whatsoever to do with that.
>> Ah, but my point wasn't that Microsoft supported it. My point is that 
>> the largely homogeneous install base that Microsoft had created by 
>> trying to put a Microsoft powered computer on a desk in every home made 
>> it possible to provide the software required as part of a marketing 
>> dump. Floppy disks with the Microsoft compatible software were mass 
>> posted through doors, stuck on many magazines and freely available on 
>> little stands in shops. This would have been *much* harder to achieve 
>> had the home computer market been highly fragmented.
> 
> <straight face>
> It would certainly have been harder for anyone else to distribute floppy
> disks with the Microsoft logo on, yes.
> </straight face>
> 
> I think I can't see why you think this is a point worth making. ISTM that -
> lots of people wanted internet access, the dominant software vendor finally
> stopped telling them it wasn't worth it, etc etc, and figured out a way to
> take money for them in exchange for it. And if enough people ask a pub for a
> pint of beer the landlord will eventually, probably, decide to get some in.
> 

I'm not talking about Microsoft providing the internet connection, it's 
well known they really missed that ball. More about the expansive 
installation base they had amassed (possibly via dodgy means) that 
allowed others to provide the stack, such as the Demon one you used.

> The internet would be _different_, by now, had they sat back and let all
> those lovely customers go to someone else for their TCP/IP support. Less
> buggy, maybe. Less consumer-oriented, possibly, though I suspect not.
> 

Yes - initially they did :-)