Is it all too late? Will our descendants, in another 2,000 years, be sitting round celebrating Gatesmas - the day on which they pay honour (and a not insubstantial annual licence fee) to the appear-ance on earth of the BoyGod, all those years ago? Will they, in turn, genuflect westwards on St Intel's Day and pay homage (plus a good deal of money) for the annual hardware upgrade to the source of the power behind the BoyGod's golden throne?
Will PC Week or, as it will then be known due to technological developments, PC Nanosecond, stand accused of being in thrall to the BoyGod, never daring to commit a heresy?
For all I know the answers to most of these may well be yes but, by then, who will know enough of history to care? For the answer to that first question - is it too late? - may also be yes. Colin Walls (Letters, 10 December) begs us not to let PC Week become just another Microsoft house journal, and Lord Editor Hill (he who must be obeyed) replied succinctly and clearly, "OK, we won't".
Good for him, but his assertion that this paper rarely writes of anything other than Microsoft products is worthy of consideration - and it does beg that question: is it all too late anyway?
Now I am sure many readers will instantly raise the Mandy Rice-Davies defence of "he would say that, wouldn't he", when I suggest PC Week's journalists try their utmost to look at the PC industry with considerable objectivity. But think about what they see?
It is a fact of life, whether we like it or not, that the PC world is now essentially a Microsoft/Intel double act. These two own the desktop and, with the developments they have planned for 64-bit computing over the next couple of years, the pair are going to do their level best to own the mid-range and high-end server markets too.
Why has this happened? Is it the result of persuasive PC journalists?
Sorry, but the reason lies in your own hands - you keep buying the stuff.
As Brian Clegg pointed out on the same page, he was a long time user of Betamax and Amiga, Both, in their way, are much better products than the ones that succeeded - but they did not succeed, for all that.
The Apple Macintosh always was, and still is, far superior to the Microsoft/Intel PC, so why did you not rush out and buy them by the squillion? OS/2 Warp is, if many experts are to be believed, a far superior operating system to Windows 95 (and, like the Macintosh operating system, was available earlier). So, why is it highly likely that, despite IBM's most vociferous protestations, the thing will be dead and gone by the turn of the millennium?
We have all heard reports of Intel accused of using strong-arm tactics on PC makers, forcing them to buy Intel-only chip sets, while Microsoft is planning to force PC makers to set up the next release of Windows so machines have a Microsoft welcome screen every time they are turned on.
Who knows, in the next few years they may even starting charging the likes of Compaq and Dell a fee so these companies can still have their names on the front of the boxes they produce.
But why should you care? The things work and you have better things to do than worry about the duo-deity you have created.
If you want to have a rebellion, maybe you should form the JavAnarchy movement around all things Java. (I would guess you have about two years to do it.)
Otherwise, have a merry Gatesmas and a happy St Intel's Day.
Instapaper to 'go dark' in Europe until it can work out GDPR compliance
James Robbins of ArrowXL says that AI is no longer 'tomorrow's technology'
Staff told to beware of "unusual sounds" after an employee reported mystery symptoms
Sophisticated malware comprises code previously used to attack Ukraine