Rest in Peace, Mr. Ritchie

Page 2 of 4  
On 10/16/2011 7:57 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

There was a consent decree in '56,

True, they were found in violation of the Sherman Antitrust act, in court. My guess is that had them on pins and needles when they opened the PC/DT market.

And you know this how? Because the market is controlled by one company doesn't mean 90% of the market wants it, it could (and does) mean that 90% has no choice but to "like" what they get. Same as you can buy any color car you want, as long as it's black.

Funny, but they have already controlled 90% of the DT market for about 25 years. In the computer age that changes minute by minute, that is a hell of a long "temporary". Any company that had monopoly control of 90% of a market for this long is missing competition, particularly if profit margins are significantly high. This is why we are stuck with the worlds worst OS, like it or not.

Well, IBM is a high tech business and it's profit margin is high, usually below 10% or so. Intel averages around 17%. EXXON-Mobil has under 10% and our socialist democrats want to slap a windfall profit tax on them... MS is 30%, Apple 40% and everyone seems to get misty eyed around those two.

--
Jack
Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They were on "pins and needles" in every market. It wasn't because of the CDC, and like, suits, though. The '56 consent decree really handicapped them. It wasn't removed until '00, or there abouts.

People voting with their wallets, AKA market penetration. You couldn't give OS/2 away (sadly) and still can't give Linux away.

Because the "market is controlled by one company" does not mean there is anything wrong. There is no law against being a monopoly. However, M$ is no saint, either. There were many violations of the "anti-trust" laws, but they didn't "get caught". The plain fact is that people do WANT Windows(whatever).

Wrong. We're still using the same microprocessor architecture, too. That won't change until the PC is obsolete, and neither with the junk riding on top of the hardware.

No, it means that people want to buy it. Again, you can't give the "competition" away. That says something.

On the products I worked on, it required >40% (some wanted in excess of 60%) to stay in business. The investment is huge.

There is a big difference in these markets and companies. You can't compare margins directly.
BTW, what do you think the maximum legal margin should be?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/17/2011 4:20 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

It was next to impossible to buy a copy of OS/2. Most every PC was sold with DOS/WIN installed. You could NOT get anything else installed unless you bought from some geek down the street. Retailers did not install OS/2 or anything else, and if they tried, MS would pull their license or remove the fake discount MS gave them. Worse, the retailers rarely had copies of OS/2 to sell, either because IBM didn't provide them copies, or, because again, fear of MS punishing anyone that sold something other than MS OS.
IBM wanted MS to develop a system that they could use for their ATM machines, and DOS/WIN was crap (still is) MS either was too dumb (my guess) or had some other lame reason to not be able to deliver. (I recall it said that MS told IBM it was not possible) IBM then did it themselves in about a year, and it was awesome. IBM killed it's development when it was selling a million copies a month despite their lack of support. My opinion is they never wanted that part of the market because of the "pins and needles" mentioned above. At the time, there was an obvious, and uncomfortable disconnect between IBM OS/2 team and the rest of the company. It became clear IBM had no intention of moving in on MS, why is open for speculation.

Excuse me, but their is a law, and it's called the Sherman anti-trust act. MS was found in violation of it, just as IBM, AT&T were, and others. If a company dominates a market with over 90% control, makes excessive profits (over 30%) and does it with CRAP, you can begin to get suspicious of monopoly problems. If that doesn't float your boat, you can try to find out what Judge Sporkin said after hearing the case brought against MS by the DOJ.

Well, MS DID get caught, that is the plain fact. Saying people do want windows is stupid, 9 out of 10 users could not even name another product let alone want it. My doctor was bitching about their new Obama computer system going down. I asked her if it was windows, she said she didn't know. I said normally only windows crashes routinely. She then said "come to think of it, the windows logo does come up when she reboots." She's a freaking doctor and doesn't even know what she is running, but you can bet she WANTS windows right?

Why would you need 60% profit to stay in business. Most business gets by on less than 10%, particularly large companies like IBM and Exxon whose investment is huge.

I can compare profits directly, why can't you?

I don't think there should be a maximum profit margin. I think profits far above average should raise suspicions of anti-competitive practices. When profits are high, quality low, and potential competitors are bitching up a storm because they can't get in the door, as in MS case, they should be investigated just as in MS was. The judge found MS GUILTY, it's not just me. He found MS so guilty in fact, he sent it back to the DOJ for more than the wrist slap they were seeking. The DOJ appealed their VICTORY. Something victors do every day after winning in court, right? It would be like you suing McDonald's for a $1000, and the judge saying, guilty, but you need to get more redress for the damage done, and you appeal saying nope, only want a $1000... It was around then MS started with large political donations, funny how many ways the public can get screwed by government.
--
Jack
Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wrong.
Also wrong. There were companies that built OS/2 systems, just like there are companies today that will build Linux systems. Few want them. It's no surprise that Dell doesn't go for that infinitesimal market.

*Some* retailers, true. Others specialized in OS/2. No one wanted it. Sad, but true.

It wasn't "pins and needles". It was *NO*MARKET*. The money just wasn't there to justify keeping it. Soon the whole PC business (minus some servers) was sold off. No money in it.

Rent a clue. Sherman doesn't say anything about having a monopoly. It can be used to *restrict* the actions of a monopoly holder, but it doesn't prevent a monopoly, at all.

Stop lying.

...then what happened?

For some warped definition of "caught", perhaps.

Saying that they don't is asinine. Most wouldn't know what to do without it.

That, alone, should tell you something.

Why would you expect a doctor to know, or care?

Ask her if the wants Linux.

Because of the expense of staying in business. It has to be worthwhile to justify the bother.

Perhaps you haven't figured it out yet, but there is a lot more to business than one number.

They why are you acting like there should be?

Why? Again, monopolies are *not* illegal.

...and yet everyone *still* wants the product.

Rantings of a paranoid.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/17/2011 10:45 PM, Jack wrote:

You could NOT get anything else installed unless

You might want to think further back. Initial PC's had no OS installed. Back in the mid 80's PC/DOS not to be confused with MS/DOS was a very common OS that came with many if not most, if they were not IBM PC's. My ATT 6300 came with that software. Also, many comnputers back then only had floppy drives, a 10 meg HD was a $500 option,
IIRC MS/DOS was only coming on IBM and Windows did not start showing up on PC's until hard drives were common and version 3.0 came out.
I do recall buying a different OS back then that was about $25 IIRC.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Define "OS". ROM BASIC was installed on all IBM PCs. If "OS" == Disk, then you're obviously right.

Early PC/DOS *was* MS/DOS. There was a split, later, but up until at least V3, they were identical. The best version was IBM's DOS7.

IBM sold PC/DOS. Some dealers may have sold MS/DOS instead. There were Windows versions before 1.0, but didn't sell well.

Which OS? IIRC, PC/DOS was about $50.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/18/11 10:56 AM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

C/PM-86, DR-DOS, BeOS many have come and gone. There were many shells before early Windows too, Topview, Desqview, GeOS all come to mind.
--
Froz...


The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/18/2011 9:56 AM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

OS that which you entered commands that the computer could understand, yes the one on a disk.

Don't doubt that since both were nearly identical.

Really, I thought that IBM was only coming with the MS version.

I really cannot remember for sure but .... DR DOS may be??? I guessing here. I did not use it past trying it out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DR-DOS
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ROM BASIC qualified that far.

Well, ROM BASIC wasn't on a disk. ;-)

There were a few commands, and later shells that differed. Just enough to differentiate the two. OTOH, there was a pretty big difference between MS/DOS 6.x and PC/DOS 7.x.

PC/DOS was IBM's brand for DOS. After 3x (IIRC) they were rather different things.

Could be, later. Later on, DR-DOS was free and was often shipped with tools.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12:33:32 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
<snip>

You could buy PC-DOS or MS-DOS. PC-DOS came in a gray binder that said "IBM" on the cover, MS-DOS came in a green binder that said "Microsoft" on the cover. The only functional difference was that the one that said "Microsoft" on the cover included a BASIC interpreter that would run on a machine without ROM-BASIC while the one in the IBM version required ROM-BASIC.
IBM never bundled the green binders with their own machines, but you could buy the grey binder version without a machine.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/18/2011 8:34 AM, Leon wrote:

Before IBM bestowed the DT/PC OS market on MS, nothing much was going on in the DT/PC market. It was super small, super expensive with not much reason to exist.

My first computer was around 1983, an IBM PC MS DOS 2.0, dual floppies, and a 10 meg HD. I out grew it the first year or so, didn't know it was the OS until I got into UNIX years later. It really became obvious when OS/2 warp made DOS/WIN look like the dog it was.

I think the first (significant) version of windows that (didn't) work was 3.1. I don't think that changed even a little until XP came out, which works marginally if you don't mind occasional meltdowns and periodic registry explosions. XP still is not a patch on the ass of OS/2 WARP. I never used Win Vista ver 7 so can't comment other than retailers were offering XP and free future upgrades because Vista sucked. Hard to imagine it sucked worse than previous versions of Win, but that was the word I got.

DR DOS was around, but it was no different than MS DOS. I don't think any retailers sold it for fear of MS reprisals. There was an excellent shareware command.com replacement called 4DOS that you could buy via BBS's like mine. It didn't take long for MS to dominate, and stagnate, the PC/DT market.
--
Jack
Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/18/2011 11:03 AM, Jack wrote: > On 10/18/2011 8:34 AM, Leon wrote: >> On 10/17/2011 10:45 PM, Jack wrote: >>> On 10/17/2011 4:20 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >>>> Jack wrote:
> > I think the first (significant) version of windows that (didn't) work > was 3.1.
I had win 3.0 and for me the free 3.1 upgrade was a significant improvement. I never had any thing earlier than 3.0.
I don't think that changed even a little until XP came out, > which works marginally if you don't mind occasional meltdowns and > periodic registry explosions.
GoBack saved my butt on many occasions.
XP still is not a patch on the ass of OS/2 > WARP. I never used Win Vista ver 7 so can't comment other than retailers > were offering XP and free future upgrades because Vista sucked. Hard to > imagine it sucked worse than previous versions of Win, but that was the > word I got.
Every one complains about something. ;) I had the most luck with XP and because it was such a vast improvement over 95 and 98 in being stable many did found it not necessary to change or upgrade. IIRC ME, 2000, and Vista did not have enough persuasion to change many XP users minds. Had Microsoft continued to support XP it might still be very popular. I am using 7 now and it seems as stable as XP but has a lot of short cuts that make using it a bit simpler to use. I don't care for Vista my self but every one that uses it likes it, but...I think every one that I know that uses it did had not used XP extensively. I think since XP it all depends on what you are used to using.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/18/11 2:42 PM, Leon wrote:

in a corporate environment. XP was by far the best and easiest, over its predecessors. Vista was fine, given the right hardware, MS seriously messed up on its minimum hardware requirements, given the right hardware Vista ws fine, but Win7 is a joy to use.
Win8 looks like it is going to be another bucket load of crap though, at least according to the latest developers release. Had it running in a virtual machine, couldn't get rid of it fast enough.
--
Froz...


The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Where's the money in that...err...sense. I meant where's the sense in that? ;)
They need the money. Do you have any idea what a billionaire Buddhist's burial goes for these days?
R
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If you include his favourite ride (GulfstreamG650).. it get very pricy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, October 17, 2011 11:45:59 PM UTC-4, Jack wrote:

I bought several copies at the Electronics Boutique store in the local mall. It was not at all difficult to obtain.

So what? Anybody who wanted something else just had to buy it and install it, same as today.

Electronics Boutique was a retailer. And they were not the only one that had OS/2 on the shelf.

If you think that IBM needed Microsoft to develop an OS for them you're clueless. IBM was shipping 32-bit preemptively multitasking protected virtual operating systems when Bill Gates was still in high school.
Microsoft bailed on OS/2 because Windows was making much more money for them, pure and simple.
And if IBM was selling a million copies a month then it must have been more available than you claim.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/19/2011 10:29 AM, snipped-for-privacy@cox.net wrote:

Egghead also said they sold OS/2 but they never had it on the shelf. I never heard of Electronics Boutique, but I believe you.

Nothing I said should give you that idea. IBM contracted with Gates for the DT/PC OS. They could have written it themselves with no problem. Why they contracted with Gates is pure speculation, but NEVER did I say it was because IBM couldn't do it themselves. My GUESS is IBM didn't think the PC market would do anything, and if it did, they didn't want another anti-trust suit, so they contracted with a dipshit they thought they could control.
IBM wanted Gates to develop OS/2 so they could use it as the OS for ATM machines, which had to be stable, unlike DOS/WIN. When Gates couldn't deliver after years of trying, IBM did it themselves in less than a year, after Gates said it was impossible to do what IBM wanted.
Now, I think between MS, IBM and INTEL, they have a cartel and it will take an act of god to get them to do more than rip everyone off.

Doesn't change the fact they contracted with Gates to provide an OS for their PC. Gates didn't even HAVE one at the time. IBM could have gone to Patterson themselves and bought the OS instead of Gates. I don't know why they didn't, but the most likely story I heard was Gates mother was in with some IBM big cheese.

MS never could get OS/2 to work. IBM took the project off of MS when they failed to deliver. IBM dropped OS/2 when it started to threaten MS corner on the DT/PC OS market. Why they did this is speculative, my feeling is the anti-trust thing, combined with the cozy cartel IBM/MS/INTEL has going for them.

All I know is you could not buy a PC at any retail outlet (other than possibly IBM, not sure about that) with OS/2 installed. None of the retail stores around here sold OS/2, I know that because I had to get my copies directly from IBM. The sales numbers were being reported by OS/2 user groups, I don't know where they got their numbers but I was following them closely because I was keenly interested. IBM did little to no retail marketing of OS/2, and most of the noise about it came from delighted users, and the OS/2 user group. The user group got some, but very little support from IBM. It was obvious to me that IBM was not interested in competing with the company to which they bestowed the DT/PC OS market. IMO, had they wanted to, they could have crushed Gates and MS like a grape.
--
Jack
Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

EB was a chain similar to GameStop (a store in every mall). So similar that GameStop bought the competition.

Actually, the couldn't. It would have cost *far* too much.

For the anticipated 25K units? No, the reason they didn't write it themselves is that it would have cost 100x too much. The PC was a "skunkworks" project, flying under the RADAR of the monster. The whole design team was only a few people.

ATMs were *one* application for OS/2. There were *many* others.

They "have" a cartel? IBM isn't even in that business anymore. BTW, Intel and MS hate each other.

I've never heard that story and I worked for the beast. Any citations?

Baloney. IBM withdrew it when it was clear there was no money to be had. There was no money to be had because they didn't want to spend the $200M needed to market it. IBM was in tough shape in the early '90s, borrowing money to pay dividends.

There were retail outlets, both storefront and Internet, that sold PCs with OS/2 installed. Dell, HP, and Gateway didn't, if that's what you mean.

Wrong.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/19/2011 5:32 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Perhaps you have no clue how much money IBM had/has. They had cocktail party's that cost more than Gates bought DOS for.

And the reason they contracted with Gates, who didn't have or own an OS instead of someone already established was because what the hell, PC's were skunkwork, right.

I know, I ran my BBS under it. IBM took over the design because they needed it for their ATM business.

Sure they do.

Millions worked for the beast, and didn't even know who the CEO was let alone who his friends were. Any how, this was fairly common knowledge during the OS wars in the BBS world. Since you worked for the beast, I assume you can explain why IBM contracted with a looser like Gates when they were developing and marketing and servicing complex multitasking systems and equipment when Gates was jerking off in the boys room. Why didn't IBM just go to Patterson and buy DOS off of him, or off Digital Research that already had a working system or anyone other than a college dropout that had no product to sell?

Yep.
Baloney, $200 million was nothing compared to the potential returns, and IBM had the money if they wanted to go that way. They spent more money just on R&D than Microsoft grossed in those days. They could have trashed MS with ease, had they wanted too. They had the product (OS/2) they had the money, they had all they needed, but, they didn't want to go that way. My guess is anti-trust fears, but since you worked for the beast, I'm sure you know the real deal.

What I mean is no large retailers sold PC's with anything other than windows on it. The geek down the street selling 20 PC's a year didn't matter much, and they mostly sold DOS/WIN for a variety of reasons, all related to the MS monopoly when OS/2 Warp was out.

--
Jack
Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have a little clue. I worked for them for >32 years. You certainly don't understand IBM or business, for that matter.

The Boca PC folks couldn't do it and they certainly didn't have the cash to pay the OS developers to do it (they asked the question and were laughed out of town). So, yes, pretty much.

No, they needed it for *many* businesses and *many* customers. ATMs were a small one.

You got your words swapped; "They sure do!"

Of course you don't. More cred down the drain.

Any more fairy tales?

They didn't have the contacts. That was tough.

I know IBM was under water at the time. They had *massive* layoffs in the early-mid '90s and were "two weeks from missing payroll". IBM, under Akers, had borrowed money to pay dividends for a decade. The cards almost crashed.
Your "guesses" are just that; pathetic guesses.

I detect goalposts in motion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.