[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: UNsuccessfully M$ products

  Christopher Pall wrote:
  > I think it would be wrong to say that Quick C/C++ or Quick
  > Basic were failures since they reappeared as different products
  > which were succesrul, VC++ and VB.
  In "Microsoft Secrets" they explain, what I remembered, that the Quick *
  disappeared because of Borland *quick* reactions/ability, to immediately
  put on the market better products than Microsoft's. At the time
  Microsoft was not yet well-known for its development tools. In fact
  Borland beat M$ on 2 generations of development tools, based on 2
  different architectures :
  - the Microsoft *, then
  - the Quick *
  So M$ introduced Visual *, based on a visual concept, because Borland is
  better for both the compilers and the environments.
  That's why M$ is now aggressively hiring every possible person from
  Borland ! I've heard that BG himself can't bear the simple name of
  Borland ;-)
  Borland's (at the time) Quattro Pro and Paradox were also often
  considered in PC magazines better than M$'s.
              .~~~.  )) 
    (\__/)  .'     )  ))              Luc-Etienne BRACHOTTE
    /o o  \/     .~                           AIRIAL
   {o_,    \    {                         3, Rue Bellini
     / ,  , )    \                       PUTEAUX (France)
     `~  '-' \    } ))
    _(    (   )_.'        E-mail: Luc-Etienne.Brachotte@art.alcatel.fr