Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

retrocomputing.stackexchange.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 84 posts

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#31

Post by mmooss »

CanopyCoder wrote: post #2

The likelihood of any legal restriction was probably close to zero - it’s only from today’s era of hyper-regulation that we might even imagine something like that. Most likely it was a deliberate technical limitation. After all, dialog windows themselves were already overlapped. I remember well what a headache it was to program and render graphical elements on those old machines (PC AT 80286 with 256 KB of RAM).

> it’s only from today’s era of hyper-regulation that we might even imagine something like that.

How is regulation involved? The OP's idea was that Microsoft feared being sued by other companies over IP. If there is some increase in lawsuits between companies, I'd like to see evidence.

Also, my understanding is that there was a lot more regulation in the 1970s and extending into the 1980s, though it was probably declining by then.

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#32

Post by dylan604 »

jsolson wrote: post #27
zabzonk wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they weren't promoting an OS, they were promoting a user experience - A GUI that competed with the Mac. There were OS improvements too, but I have forgot what. The real improvements came with Win2K - one of the best versions of Windows ever.

I don't remember if Plug-n-Play shipped with the original Windows 95 (it's certainly there in the final OSR), but that was a pretty big shift from the manual IRQ and port mapping days of DOS/Windows 3.1.

back then, it was still plug-n-pray. it didn't work as well as it was intended when it was first available

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#33

Post by undeveloper »

CanopyCoder wrote: post #2

The likelihood of any legal restriction was probably close to zero - it’s only from today’s era of hyper-regulation that we might even imagine something like that. Most likely it was a deliberate technical limitation. After all, dialog windows themselves were already overlapped. I remember well what a headache it was to program and render graphical elements on those old machines (PC AT 80286 with 256 KB of RAM).

i would not describe "today's era" as "hyper-regulation". we're actively removing regulation day over day

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#34

Post by WillAdams »

ndiddy wrote: post #29
plorkyeran wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That lawsuit happened in response to Window 2.0, and the fact that they adopted overlapping windows in 2.0 strongly suggests that Microsoft did not think that the change would lead to legal action and was taken by surprise.

Apple threatened to sue Microsoft when Windows 1.0 came out in 1985, but Gates responded by threatening to stop developing software for the Macintosh, pull the Macintosh software Microsoft had already developed from shelves, and refuse to renew Apple's license for Applesoft Basic for the Apple II. Sculley backed down and signed an agreement with Microsoft granting them the right to create derivative works of the Maci…

Not just that, he also got MacBasic killed:

https://www.folklore.org/MacBasic.html

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#35

Post by whobre »

blkhawk wrote: post #21
CanopyCoder wrote: post #2

The likelihood of any legal restriction was probably close to zero - it’s only from today’s era of hyper-regulation that we might even imagine something like that. Most likely it was a deliberate technical limitation. After all, dialog windows themselves were already overlapped. I remember well what a headache it was to program and render graphical elements on those old machines (PC AT 80286 with 256 KB of RAM).

Actually it was very much a legal thing. For example i can point to GEM that had to have its windows glued down because of this. See GEM 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(desktop_environment)#/med... vs GEM2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(desktop_environment)#/med... Apple sued Digital Research and later Microsoft when they enabled overlapping windows for windows 2.0. Also lol a 286 with 256kb of ram - that is…

They didn't even sue DRI, just threatened to sue: https://nemanjatrifunovic.substack.com/p/history-of-the-gem-...

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#36

Post by jonhohle »

zabzonk wrote: post #24
dylan604 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it wasn't really until Windows 95 that the whole thing came together. I remember the launch parties for 95. I remember thinking to myself how strange it was to go to all of that expense to promote an OS.

they weren't promoting an OS, they were promoting a user experience - A GUI that competed with the Mac. There were OS improvements too, but I have forgot what. The real improvements came with Win2K - one of the best versions of Windows ever.

Win2K was my favorite as well. The transparency was tasteful. Everything worked and for the most part didn’t crash. Many (most?) games worked. It ran great on a PIII 600mhz. Everything good about NT4 was better and most of the consumer friendly stuff starting to take shape. The disc was even gorgeous. Peak MS design and engineering.

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#37

Post by andsoitis »

dboreham wrote: post #25

The reality distortion field at full strength. Neither Apple nor Xerox "invented" overlapping windows.

> Neither Apple nor Xerox "invented" overlapping windows.

Apple Lisa and Macintosh are widely credited with the first practical, commercial implementation of overlapping windows in a Graphical User Interface.

Although Xerox PARC developed early prototypes, Apple engineer Bill Atkinson is credited with creating the code that made functional, rapid-rendering overlapping windows possible.

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#38

Post by userbinator »

undeveloper wrote: post #33
CanopyCoder wrote: post #2

The likelihood of any legal restriction was probably close to zero - it’s only from today’s era of hyper-regulation that we might even imagine something like that. Most likely it was a deliberate technical limitation. After all, dialog windows themselves were already overlapped. I remember well what a headache it was to program and render graphical elements on those old machines (PC AT 80286 with 256 KB of RAM).

i would not describe "today's era" as "hyper-regulation". we're actively removing regulation day over day

And replacing it with even more regulations.

Re: Was Windows 1.0's lack of overlapping windows a legal or a technical matter?

#40

Post by SoftTalker »

WalterBright wrote: post #39

There was a major debate at the time on whether windows should be overlapping or non-overlapping. I was in the latter camp!

I switched to a tiling window manager years ago and never looked back, but had the luxury of much larger high-resolution screens. Would be hard to imagine it working well at 640x480 pixels. Even overlapping windows weren't great on such small screens, most people just maximized whatever they were working on.
Post reply on HN