Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Bush2000
No wonder. IBM didn't hold a stranglehold on the hardware.

Actually, IBM tried that, but Compaq reverse-engineered it.

168 posted on 03/08/2005 9:38:34 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]


To: antiRepublicrat
Actually, IBM tried that, but Compaq reverse-engineered it.

Did you know that IBM FIRED the management of the Boca Raton Typewriter plant that produced the IBM-PC? They did not clear their project with upper management before releasing it, presenting IBM management with a fait accompli.

The typewriter guys went against several corporate policies with the PC.

First violation, they violated the rule that IBM only sold products totally developed by IBM... the "not invented here" was corporate gold. The Boca Raton crowd bought stuff "off the shelf" up to and including the operating system... which brings us to the:

Second violation, they violated the corporate policy that all software was IBM... especially the operating system. These typewriter guys bought an operating system from a (gasp) third party! Horrors.

Third violation: IBM policy was that Operating Systems were LEASED. The Typewriter guys LICENSED THEM! This did not allow a continuing stream of income to IBM... and upgrades would be available from (horrors) that third party... somebody called Microsoft?

And finally, fourth, the TYPEWRITER DIVISION was competing with the COMPUTER DIVISION, selling a system that didn't cost upwards of $50,000, that didn't require weekly visits from your friendly (white shirt, thin black tie) software engineer, that didn't bring in mega-bucks of lease payments for software, and (horrors) that average joes could program themselves without hiring IBM's hordes of software engineers to do for them!

And the result of this, in the eyes of IBM management, was that these typewriter guys were not "Team players". So they fired them.

And you know, the upper management was right in their criticisms... because the ONLY IBM-PC component that was 100% developed by IBM, and that they could protect was the BIOS... and that got reverse-engineered (a few companies cloned it out-right and were slapped down very rapidly!) by Compaq and all hell was out for noon... and IBM lost control of the market.

187 posted on 03/08/2005 11:45:37 PM PST by Swordmaker (Tagline now open, please ring bell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

To: antiRepublicrat
No wonder. IBM didn't hold a stranglehold on the hardware.

Actually, IBM tried that, but Compaq reverse-engineered it.

WRONG.

That was the bios, not the hardware

216 posted on 03/09/2005 9:33:40 AM PST by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

To: antiRepublicrat
Correction: IBM attempted to go proprietary with the PS/2 and the MicroChannel architecture, but Compaq developed the Extended ISA bus (EISA), which like ISA, was open, and the rest is history.
498 posted on 03/12/2005 3:27:36 AM PST by I_dmc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson