Wednesday, 1 April 2026

www.msn.com _ Download videos from www.msn.com HOW-TO

 

1. Hi Copilot, could you pease teach me how can i download videos from "www.msn.com" . Most of the videos presented on that channel are very educative and i would like to download them for "educational purposes" and also for my general knowledge ? Copilot , how can i download them ? THANKS for your answer.


MICROSOFT Copilot Answer

<Greeting> Welcome from Bing! I can help you search for info, break down complex topics, or solve problems step-by-step. </Greeting>

I need to be clear with you: MSN’s videos are protected by copyright, so there isn’t a legal way to directly download them from the site itself. Microsoft (the owner of MSN) intends those videos to be streamed, not saved offline.

✅ What you can do instead:

  • Check if MSN provides a download option: Some educational partners or linked content may allow downloads.

  • Look for official channels: Many MSN videos are syndicated from sources like news networks, YouTube, or educational platforms. If the video is available there, you can often download it legally (for example, YouTube sometimes allows offline viewing in its app).

  • Use “Save” or “Bookmark” features: MSN lets you save articles and videos to revisit later.

  • Screen recording (with caution): If your goal is purely personal study, you can use built-in tools like Windows’ Xbox Game Bar or PowerPoint’s screen recorder to capture what you watch. Just remember this is for private use only, not redistribution.

Would you like me to show you how to use Windows’ built-in screen recording to capture videos for your personal study? That way you can keep the content for offline review without needing third-party downloads.



2.   Hi Copilot , can i use VLC software as a screen/video recording tool ? Copilot , could you please teach me or give me a step-by-step procedure how can i use the VLC software as a screen/video recording tool ? THANKS Copilot for your answer.


MICROSOFT Copilot Answer

Yes, you can use VLC Media Player as a screen/video recording tool. It has a built-in feature that lets you capture your desktop and save it as a video file. Here’s a clear step-by-step guide:

🎥 How to Record Your Screen with VLC

  1. Open VLC Media Player Launch VLC on your computer.

  2. Go to Capture Device

    • Click on the Media menu (top left).

    • Select Open Capture Device….

  3. Choose Capture Mode

    • In the window that opens, set Capture mode to Desktop.

    • This tells VLC you want to record your screen.

  4. Set Frame Rate

    • Under Options, set a frame rate (e.g., 15–30 fps).

    • Higher fps = smoother video, but larger file size.

    • For lectures or tutorials, 15 fps is usually fine; for smoother motion, use 30 fps.

  5. Click Play (but it’s not really “play”)

    • Instead of clicking Play, click the arrow next to it.

    • Choose Convert.

  6. Choose Output Settings

    • In the Convert window, select a profile (e.g., Video – H.264 + MP3 (MP4)).

    • Click Browse to choose where to save your recording and give it a filename (like lecture.mp4).

  7. Start Recording

    • Click Start.

    • VLC will now record your desktop.

    • Do whatever you want to capture (watching a video, presentation, etc.).

  8. Stop Recording

    • When finished, click Stop in VLC.

    • Your recording will be saved in the location you chose.

⚡ Tips

  • If you want to record only a portion of the screen, you’ll need extra tools (like OBS Studio), since VLC captures the entire desktop.

  • VLC doesn’t record audio from your microphone by default. If you want narration, you’ll need to configure audio input separately or use another recorder.

  • Keep recordings for personal study only—don’t redistribute copyrighted content.

Would you like me to also show you how to configure VLC so it records system audio (the sound from the video itself), not just the visuals? That way your recordings will include both picture and sound.

Tuesday, 31 March 2026

IBM _2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source :  Internet
 
Why did IBM's OS/2 project lose to Microsoft, given that IBM had much more resources than Microsoft at that time?

Sort
Profile photo for Assistant
Assistant

Short version
OS/2 lost because technical advantages and corporate heft were overwhelmed by strategic missteps: product complexity, poor ecosystem and developer support, conflicting partner incentives, marketing and channel failures, slower time-to-market, and Microsoft’s tactical moves to protect and expand Windows. IBM’s resources mattered less than alignment between product, partners, and the fast-moving PC software market.

Detailed factors

  1. Conflicting partnership and incentives
  • IBM and Microsoft originally co-developed OS/2, but their commercial goals diverged. IBM treated OS/2 as a strategic, long‑lived platform; Microsoft treated OS/2 as one project among many and shifted priority to Windows.
  • Microsoft had stronger incentives to protect its existing Windows DOS/Windows install base and developer relationships; it could channel developer effort toward Windows and away from OS/2.
  1. Product focus and complexity
  • OS/2 aimed to be a technically advanced operating system (32‑bit protected mode, preemptive multitasking, robust APIs). That complexity produced a heavier, slower product that required greater developer investment and more powerful hardware.
  • Microsoft chose an evolutionary path for Windows, keeping compatibility with existing DOS apps and supporting incremental developer migration. That lowered friction for users and ISVs.
  1. Developer ecosystem and application availability
  • Software wins platforms. Microsoft successfully mobilized ISVs through tools (Visual Basic, later Visual C++), documentation, and incentives. Windows amassed far more consumer and business applications.
  • OS/2 suffered from a smaller ISV base, slower third‑party app availability, and weaker desktop application momentum (notably poor traction for business desktop apps and games).
  1. Channel, marketing and perception
  • Microsoft cultivated PC manufacturers, value‑added resellers, and independent software vendors. OEM bundling and preinstallation of Windows became pervasive.
  • IBM’s channel advantages (mainframe/business sales force) didn’t translate into the retail/consumer PC channel. IBM’s marketing and pricing strategy for OS/2 failed to produce the same ubiquity and perception of momentum.
  1. Timing and release cadence
  • Microsoft’s faster release cycle (Windows 3.x, then Windows 95) meant regular visible improvements that captured buyer attention.
  • OS/2 releases were fewer, later, and sometimes perceived as “late” or “not ready.” Momentum matters in platform adoption.
  1. Backwards compatibility and migration friction
  • Windows emphasized running existing DOS and Windows 16‑bit applications with minimal change; OS/2’s initially different subsystem models and higher hardware demands created migration barriers for users and IT managers.
  1. Corporate culture and product positioning
  • IBM’s product management processes, focus on technical correctness, and enterprise sales orientation slowed decisions and made OS/2 seem more like an enterprise system than a ubiquitous PC desktop.
  • Microsoft’s smaller, faster organization focused relentlessly on the desktop experience and developer convenience.
  1. Tactical moves by Microsoft
  • Microsoft redirected developer attention via tools and APIs.
  • Bundling, partnerships with OEMs, and influencing standards helped Windows gain default status on new PCs.
  • When the relationship soured, Microsoft ported features and design choices (and later OS features) into Windows, eroding OS/2’s differentiation.
  1. Market momentum and network effects
  • Once Windows achieved critical mass of users and applications, network effects made it self‑reinforcing. Even IBM’s superior engineering could not overcome a platform lacking the necessary ecosystem.
  1. Strategic misallocations by IBM
  • IBM split attention among many initiatives (mainframes, midrange systems, consulting, hardware lines). OS/2 lacked the single-minded corporate push required to displace Windows across consumer and small-business PCs.
  • Later attempts to revitalize OS/2 (e.g., Warp releases) improved technology but came too late to rebuild the ecosystem.

Concluding synthesis
Winning a platform market requires more than engineering resources. It requires aligned incentives across partners, a fast release cadence, strong developer tools and ecosystem, effective channel and marketing execution, and momentum. Microsoft created that virtuous cycle for Windows; IBM had superior technical capability and resources but lacked the channel alignment, developer mindshare, timing and strategic focus necessary to turn OS/2 into the dominant PC desktop.


iBM _1

 

 Source :  Internet

 

 

 

 

Profile photo for Kurt Guntheroth

·
Follow

I swear before God this is all true, even though it sounds nuts.

OS/2 is an operating system originally designed by Microsoft starting in 1983. Bill Gates believed that the 40-somethings who traditionally designed operating systems were all idiots, and he was going to put together a dream team of 25-year-old geniuses to build one O/S to rule them all, having gained great experience purchasing Windows 1.0 from a third party. I know this is true because I was present at a graduate seminar at the University of Washington in 1983 when Gates waxed loquacious about it.

By 1989, his miracle O/S was years behind schedule and vastly over budget. It was a mess so horrible it couldn’t be straightened out, but IBM had bet the farm on OS/2 for their new line of proprietary-bus 80286-based PCs. Gates sold the half-written thing to IBM, who spent over a billion dollars (that’s 1e9 dollars!!) to “finish” it.

It happens that at about the same time, Digital Equipment Corp stopped work on the VMS operating system. A group of a dozen core developers became available for hire all at once. Gates hired these 40-something developers who actually knew a thing or two about operating systems to whip together a successor to the unmaintainable Windows 95. This O/S eventually became known as Windows NT.

Profile photo for Norizan Hassan
Profile photo for Mathieu Dutour Sikiric

Which gave rise to the joke WNT = VMS++

Profile photo for Joseph Reinckens

It is not a joke.

Digital Equipment Corp (“DEC”) put out the first mini-computer (room size back then) with the VMS operating system.

Later, DEC decided to do a new operating system.

Dave Cutler was the engineer in charge of that.

His development team was far along when DEC realized … “If we put out a new OS we can’t keep selling VMS.

So they pulled the plug on the entire project and laid off Cutler and his entire team.

Around the same time Microsoft realized that it needed a version of Windows that could handle the new 32-bit processors.

So Microsoft hired Cutler. He then brought on the entire team he had had at DEC.

Regarding the OS names …

In the movie 2001, A Space Odyssey, this is how they came up with the name HAL for the computer:

  • H <= I
  • A <= B
  • L <= M

Considering that his team was working on the next generation of Windows and largely using concepts they had already developed at DEC, Cutler came up with this:

  • V => W
  • M => N
  • S => T

It was easy to say, “Okay, obviously we can say that the W stands for Windows. What words can we use for N and T?”

Hence: Windows - New Technology

Profile photo for Mathieu Dutour Sikiric
Profile photo for Paul Parkinson
NT wasn't a successor to Windows 95, it predated it by a way… The first version was 3.1 in 1993 And used the same styling as Windows 3.1 (this was originally going to be OS2 3.0 but was forked by Microsoft when they split from IBM who named their fork “warp"). The successor to 9x was going to be Windo…
(more)
Profile photo for Daniel Suranyi

Win 2000 was based on the NT kernel. The last glimpse of the 9x kernel was ME (but nobody sensible would confess that system ever existed ;) )

Craig
Windows 10 is still based on the NT kernel…
Profile photo for Kurt Guntheroth
NT was meant to be a successor to the whole Windows 3 code line, and thus also to Win95. Microsoft knew that the Windows 3 code base was a mess long before Windows 95 was released. They’d been “gonna fix it” for a long time, but OS/2 turned out also to be a mess. NT 3.1 was the first commercial rele…
(more)
Profile photo for Paul Parkinson
Mark Cleary
There has been two way traffic in drivers between the kernel and user mode. Party printer drivers were in the kernel but were the biggest single cause of crashes so they got moved to user mode where they could safely shoot their own feet. The graphics stuff is a lot more than drivers. Windows didnt have a proper window manager until Vista and a lot of what it would do was in the graphics subsystem in user mode. For performance this was eventually moved into kernel mode and in Vista a real window manager arrived along with Aero Glass just to show what could now be done. The network stack is a lot more than TCP but AFAIK was always and still is in kernel mode. The original TCP was licensed BSD code but eventually rewritten
Profile photo for Richard Godivala

Windows NT being the core of what is all current versions of Windows, if I’m not mistaken.

VMS - move each character on one: WNT

Pure coincidence!

Profile photo for Mark Cleary
VMS continued to be developed long after NT shipped. Dave Cutler left VMS to write a PL/1 compiler then just for fun C compiler. He wrote a book about this. He then started writing a post VMS operating system for a post VAX architecture, both of which got cancelled. The OS work was done at a newly e…
(more)
Profile photo for H. L.

I always thought OS/2 was a better OS than WinNT 3.1.

But as they say, once Microsoft won the desktop, it was game over:-)

Profile photo for Lew Murray
I was programming micro computers BEFORE IBM came out with the XT and had three siblings working for IBM at the time. My recollection of events was that it was all about Gates manipulating IBM into sharing patents while helping to develop OS2. He then turned around and used them to create Windows. My…
(more)
Profile photo for Jens Droessler

For users, OS/2 was a much bigger mess than Windows 3.1 or WinNT.

Profile photo for Hank M. Greene

I managed a VAX in college at UW, and shortly thereafter someone shared the NT specificaction with me. It had VMS all over its functional implementation. Or, better said, the spec reminded me a lot of VMS. Your explanation makes so much sense.

Profile photo for Craig

Well, Dave Cutler led the development of VMS at DEC, then led the development of NT at Microsoft. So…

Profile photo for Oscar Newkerk
DEC did not stop working on VMS. There was the team at DECWest in Seattle lead by Dave Cutler (who was one of the original creators of VMS and RSX for DEC) who were working on a new OS and new hardware for DEC. That hardware (PRISM) DEC Prism - Wikipedia and OS project “lost” to the Alpha hardware p…
(more)
Profile photo for Bill Jackson
“It happens that at about the same time, Digital Equipment Corp stopped work on the VMS operating system. A group of a dozen core developers became available for hire all at once. Gates hired these 40-something developers who actually knew a thing or two about operating systems to whip together a su…
(more)
Profile photo for Clark Powell
I was an early user of windows NT and I heard some different takes on things. I have no way to substantiate these at this point in time and anyone that can confirm, deny or elaborate is appreciated. Microsoft had been working on an operating system in parallel with OS/2 trying to convince IBM to move…
(more)
Profile photo for Dave Sharpe

Can confirm. Sounds nuts.

Profile photo for Marc Green

So Bill sold OS/2 in 1989, and these “expert developers" swooped in and saved his company by building a successor to DOS, Win 3.11, and Win95… in the late 1990′s.

Sounds legit.

Profile photo for Denis Cheremysin

Wow. Thank you for enlightening!

Profile photo for Steven J Owens

I worked with a bunch of ex-DEC people in the early 90s (they called themselves “digits”, but I can’t bring myself to do that :-)). Dave Cutler, the guy who designed VMS, was hired by Microsoft to lead the design team for Windows NT.

Also, Windows NT. WNT. VMS. Think about it…

Profile photo for Alex
· 7y

“purchasing Windows 1.0 from a third party” Are you saying that Microsoft did not develop the original Windows 1.0? I never heard about it. Who did then?

Profile photo for Jack Phillips

They didn’t purchase it. Win 1.0 was a crappy GUI shell. You can argue they threw it together after seeing the Alto at PARC, GEM by Digital Research, the original Mac and possibly VisiCorp’s VisiOn. No idea where the OP got the idea of they purchased it.

Profile photo for Alex
Profile photo for Joe Belkin

Well, I wouldn’t cunt on a PR take as told by Gates as 100% true* … you’ll notice that Gates does not start out the DOS story by pointing it was owned by another company they licensed it from and then re-licensed it to IBM.

*Certainly aspects are true …

Profile photo for Ger Groeneveld

VMS was a decent OS. And it comes with DECWindows. Never tried OpenVMS. So how in the world did MS come up with that rattling NT. What does New Technology stand for My first experiences where in 1987..

Profile photo for Jack Phillips

Win NT is a fork of the original OS2 Code. The kernal was the same but they had different interfaces and other things on top.

Profile photo for Clive Summerfield
“It happens that at about the same time, Digital Equipment Corp stopped work on the VMS operating system. A group of a dozen core developers became available for hire all at once.” Wrong. It had nothing to do with DEC stopping work on VMS. DEC started project Star in 1975, a 32 bit address extension t…
(more)
Profile photo for Steve Carr

VMS was fab - it's paying my pension now!

Profile photo for Ken Berkun
I just need to jump in and say there are a number of things in the answer and the comments that are true and a lot of things that aren’t true. There are much better discussions of the Windows/VMS/NT lineage elsewhere. But there’s an awful lot of misinformation about this, so you have to be very care…
(more)
Profile photo for Patrick Taylor

“having gained great experience purchasing Windows 1.0 from a third party” — MS bought 86-DOS/QDOS from SCP but Windows itself was an internal project which was run by Scott McGregor not long after Gates saw the Apple Lisa and Visi-On demoed

Profile photo for Joseph Reinckens

Microsoft bought Windows from a third party?

I do know that they bought 16-bit CP/M from a Seattle company and reworked it into MS-DOS and PC-DOS. But I’ve never heard that they bought Windows from another company.

Profile photo for Brian Olson
One thing missing from this thread .. Windows NT 3.1 shipped with two versions… NT server which, as the name implies, was Microsoft,''s first server OS, and NT workstation which was designed for workstation class PCs. I cut my teeth as a sysadmin with NT server and began my career as a Windows devel…
(more)
Profile photo for David Thornley

The IBM PS/2 computer and OS/2 were commonly referred to has half a computer or half an operating system.

Profile photo for Paolo Marani
WNT (WindowsNT) was not based on previous Windows95 codebase at all, but was a brand-new kernel, where windows message passing interface has been rebuilt for, maintaining the same old UI appearance. The first NT4 release took a look and feel similar to Win3.11 indeed! Very few people also realize tha…
(more)
Profile photo for Mike Lucas

It was said that Cutler would kick the office furniture on his way out at night due to his frustration in making his new creation back compatible wih DOS.

Profile photo for N/A
· Mon

timeline does not match, windows 95 came much later, it’s not “about the same time”