10 Biggest Computer Flops of all time

[pixelpixel]

Ok. The list is things that never went anywhere. If you go by you theory of comparing old technology with new technology, then we could add a billion more things to the list...

ME came from 98! So yes ME did go some where! ;)

[Ferret]

Windows ME, now that was a force 10 disaster zone !

[Pilsbury]

It's worth noting that Apple 'failures' like the Newton and Lisa were actually quite ahead of their time.

The Lisa cost $10000 at the time because it had 1MB of RAM and two floppy drives when most machines of it's era had less than 128KB and possibly no storage devices - at a time when memory cost a lot of money. The much lower cost Apple Macintosh had a single drive and 128KB.

[gazebee_]

Even tho back then a lot of drivers just didnt exist for Windows 2000...

For me Windows ME worked better than Windows 98 i guess it just depends on your hardware.

But once i upgraded from ME to XP after a week i wonderd how i ever used ME... XP just didnt not crash ;)

agreed. I cant believe how i got through using ME day to day back then...

[Kreuger]

I never ran ME but I had just as many problems with XP as I had heard about ME.

[Inplode]

I never ran ME but I had just as many problems with XP as I had heard about ME.

LIES ! no a chance in hell that is true lol XP for me has been rock soild !

[Koolslacker]

I remember using Windows ME. I had to clean install every 4 months. Win ME deserve to be on that list.

[Quillz]

LIES ! no a chance in hell that is true lol XP for me has been rock soild !

Because WinXP has worked fine for you automatically means that it works fine for the millions of other users around the world, right?

[Kreuger]

LIES ! no a chance in hell that is true lol XP for me has been rock soild !

Um prove it?

Because WinXP has worked fine for you automatically means that it works fine for the millions of other users around the world, right?

Exactly. I said it was what happened for me, not you or a majority of anybody else. Just in my experience. And guess what, 98SE was most stable for me.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

Because WinXP has worked fine for you automatically means that it works fine for the millions of other users around the world, right?

But XP works. Yeah, your configuration can be messed up, or you could have bad drivers/hardware. Or malware, viruses, or plenty of other things that can ruin your day. But if taken care of, at least XP is very robust and reliable.

Windows ME was not. At least not in my experience. It had bugs that should have been fixed. It frequently just didn't work. Networking was a particular mess. Impressively, I consider it to be one of the few non-deterministic OSes I've ever worked with (pretty much every Mac OS before OS X fits that billing too).

[TruckWEB]

So this has become a WinME war....

Lets talk about OTHERS big flop and let WinME die.

[Xab]

Apparantly for the author of this piece, properly learning when to use "to" vs. "too" was a flop.

[Bawx]

Add Real Player to the list. What a disgrace to computers.

[Nashy]

Um prove it?

Exactly. I said it was what happened for me, not you or a majority of anybody else. Just in my experience. And guess what, 98SE was most stable for me.

I personally think 98SE was/is one of the most stable OS's getting around.

[mujjuman]

I personally think 98SE was/is one of the most stable OS's getting around.

i feel that Win98SE and WinXP Pro are among the most stable OSes

however, you can make both extremely unstable pretty easily. on the other hand, with some work (safe surfing, smart installing, etc) you can use them and have an extremely stable system.

most of us Neowiners (im going to guess 60%) are smarter computer users, and will prevent most bad things to our comps. the other 40% are not "smart" computer users and they constantly mess their computers up, and come here (and other places) for help.

Disclaimer: just the way i see it, not bashing anyone, and not saying that im an uber l33t comp user with no problems.

[Pilsbury]

NeXT computer

This seemed like a great idea at the time. Steve Jobs resigned from Apple back in 1985 to start a new company called NeXT. The NeXT computer would be the most affordable UNIX super computer of its time. Running a Motorola 33-MHz 68030 processor, enclosed in a black case, there was no doubt this was the hottest and most powerful computer of its time. However at $6,000 a piece, and with no software that would run on the machine, it was really a $6,000 brick. Roughly 50,000 were ever produced. The company had spent over $250 million producing them. Although a huge disaster, this was also the computer that Tim Berners-Lee would later use to create the World Wide Web, and Steve Jobs would use as the core principals behind the new OS X.

A company set up with an investment of $125 million and sold for $377.5 million and 1.5 million shares of Apple is hardly what I would call a flop.

Without NeXT, there would be no OSX, no WWW, no iTMS and no Doom as we know them.

It may not have been a big seller, but, the technology and the company were hardly a flop.

[mujjuman]

^ i agree with the comment above. but we have to keep in mind that these "flops" were actually "milestones" that sort of paved the way for future computers

[flapjackman176]

wow.. look at that.. a strong showing from steve job's and apple. :rofl: