D&D vs Windows

[loseth]

Seems about right, and Classic/BECMI/RC is a Mac.

EDIT: Doh! Beaten to it--but it's definitely BECMI that's the Mac. Easier to use and designed with non-geeks in mind.

 

[Agamon]

Unix/Linix is WoD. Unix users think they're better than Windows users, but really they're way geekier.

While oD&D is DOS, Basic/Expert/yaddayadda, RC, C&C is the evolution of Apple/Mac. Somewhat less powerful and popular, but much more user-friendly.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Unix/Linix is WoD.

Nah, WoD is BeOS. Or Maybe OS/2.

 

[Sammael]

If 4E is Vista, WotC is in trouble.

I know of exactly ONE IT professional IRL who made the switch to Vista. And I know A LOT of IT professionals. Many of them even got it for free* as a part of their MSDN subscription or through their company licensing program.

*As in, they didn't pay extra for it.

 

[Felnar]

4e is Vista?
does this mean i'll need to spend $200 upgrading my dice before i can play it?

 

[jdrakeh]

2ed Players' Option = Windows Me?

God yes. Both sucked some fierce eggs.

 

[Keldryn]

You forgot Windows 3.1.

oD&D = DOS, a basic, very workable framework on which the system would be built for many years, without the familiar user interface
AD&D = Windows 3.1, an inspired (by Mac ) attempt at a substantially improved user interface, widely adopted, extremely buggy
AD&D 2e = Windows 95, clarified, easier to use, and just as buggy
AD&D 2.5 (player's option) = Windows 98, but the analogy doesn't work because 98 was a much more stable system than 95
D&D 3e = Windows NT, what serious users had been using for years (in the form of other, more refined RPGs) but which wasn't previously integrated with the home system; more stable; not completely compatible with other versions
D&D 3.5 = Windows ME, upgrading and patching NT into the main system; compatibility with prior versions of the home system was starting to fail
Star Wars Saga = Windows XP, substantially more attractive, stable and easy to use, quite different in appearance.

We can only hope 4e works better than Vista.

Windows ME was another iteration of the 95/98 code base. Windows 2000 was originally planned as the integration of the NT codebase with the consumer OS but that ended up being mostly scrapped and XP was where it happened. XP was mostly Windows 2000 with a new GUI and enhanced backwards compatibility; Windows 2000 is NT 5.0, and XP is NT 5.1. Vista gets the 6.0 designation.

Main problem with Vista is that older computers don't handle it very well, and hardware manufacturers do a lousy job of updating drivers for non-current hardware. The exact same problems we're seeing with Vista now happened with Windows XP back in 2001, and the way people talk about XP is pretty much identical to the way people talked about Windows 98 or 2000 (whichever they had) at the time.

 

[Plane Sailing]

oD&D = DOS

AD&D1E = Windows 95

AD&D2E = Windows 98

D&D3E = Windows XP

D&D4E = Windows Vista

Apt analogy?

Not even close! You kids today, what do you know about operating systems?

DOS 3.3
DOS 4.0 (not significant)
DOS 5.0 (significant)
Windows 2.03 (first real commercial Windows
Windows 386 (supported the 386 chip)
Windows 3.0 (started to get popular)
Windows 3.1 (bugs ironed out, started to get very popular)
Windows for Workgroups 3.11 (networked windows)

Then you get Win 95->Win 98->Win ME and then it dead-ends there, plus
NT 3.1 ->NT3.5 -> NT4 -> Win 2000 -> Win XP -> WinXPsp2 -> Vista

On the D&D side, you're missing early editions there too.

OD&D (white box)
OD&D (white box + supplements (Greyhawk/Blackmoor/Eldritch wizardry etc)
Basic D&D
AD&D1e etc

So no, I don't think it is a good analogy

Cheers

 

[Zoatebix]

Plane Sailing wins the thread.

 

[Numion]

oD&D = DOS

"4 character classes ought to be enough for anybody."