[OT] "Twenty five years of the IBM PC"

This is where it all started:

formatting link
"Computer firm IBM made technological history on 12 August 1981 with the announcement of a personal computer - the IBM 5150. Costing $1,565, the 5150 had just 16K of memory - scarcely more than a couple of modest e-mails worth.

The machine was not the first attempt to popularise computing but it soon came to define the global standard.

It altered the way business was done forever and sparked a revolution in home computing.

"It's hard to imagine what people used to do with computers in those days because by modern standards they really couldn't do anything," said Tom Standage, the Economist magazine's business editor told the World Service's Analysis programme.

"But there were still things you could do with a computer that you couldn't do without it like spreadsheets and word processing."

-Global impact- Everything from automated spreadsheets to desktop publishing and the rise of the internet have since become possible.

The term PC had been in use long before IBM released its machine

- but the success of the 5150 led to the use of the term to mean a machine compatible with IBM's specifications.

The machine was developed by a team of 12 engineers, led by Don Estridge, who was known as the "father of the IBM PC".

Development took under a year and was achieved by building a machine using "off the shelf" parts from a variety of manufacturers.

The machine had an "open architecture" which meant other firms could produce compatible machines. IBM banked on being able to charge a license for using the BIOS - the software which controls the heart of the machine.

But other companies reverse engineered the BIOS and were able to produce clones of the machine without having to pay IBM a penny.

That open architecture sparked an explosion in PC sales and also paved the way for common standards - something business had craved.

Since then the PC has come to dominate the home and the office and led the move to the online era with cheap global communication, e-commerce and for consumers the ability to find the answer to almost any question on the web.

Roger Kay, president of computer consultancy firm Endpoint, said the impact of the PC on all aspects our lives cannot be over-stated.

"I have for example an archive of correspondence from people that I diligently wrote letters to and all of a sudden that just stops," he said.

"I don't think I've got a personal letter for five years."

Moving this revolution forward are the one billion PCs that are now in use around the world.

In many ways, the PC has become in the developed world, an essential tool in our everyday lives.

-End of an era?- But for how much longer?

Ray Ozzie, Microsoft's chief software architect, told the firm's shareholders last month the PC era was coming to an end.

"We're now in a new era, an era in which the internet is at the centre of so much that we do now with our PCs," he told them.

"And it's important to start then from a different vantage point."

With the lion's share of the Microsoft global software empire founded on the success of the PC, Mr Ozzie's statement was a significant admission.

Mr Standage said Microsoft has come to recognise that it will inevitably have to move with the times.

He said: "The problem is that Microsoft has most to lose from the shift towards internet-based software and that means it has the least incentive to do anything about it because it likes the status quo.

"But if it doesn't switch to this new model other people will."

-PC supremacy- The move towards internet based software calls into question the supremacy of the PC itself.

Vying to knock the PC off its pedestal are a new generation of media PCs that hook up to televisions and hand-held computer devices, from phones to pocket PCs.

With all this small mobile technology and the growth of wireless internet, will people on the move bother owning a PC at all?

Reports of the PC's demise may be a little premature. While the market may not be growing anymore, it remains an industry generating some $200bn a year.

In developing countries such as China and Latin America, the PC market is still expanding at double digit growth rates.

But the development of mobile technology may enable the developing world to leapfrog the PC era altogether.

Mr Standage said mobile technology is key to sharing the benefits of the PC age with developing countries.

"I think that adding features to mobile phones is probably a better way to democratise computing," he said."

Reply to
hummingbird
Loading thread data ...

In message , hummingbird writes

Bastards! :) RH

Reply to
Robert Henderson

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:15:47 +0100 'Robert Henderson' posted this onto uk.politics.misc:

You may not have been able to post if that day hadn't happened :-( And I may have been unemployed!

Reply to
hummingbird

Don't be silly. The IBM PC was not the only PC and certainly not the most advanced of its time. Eventually an open architecture would have evolved even if the PC had not been introduced in 1981.

Reply to
Harry the Horse

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 11:43:53 +0100 'Harry the Horse' posted this onto uk.politics.misc:

Maybe, but what we know is what happened, not what might have happened. The view at the time was that IBM's entry into the market legitimised and formalised the market for personal computers in everyday use. Sales of personal computers grew massively after IBM came into the market and it led to the PC standards we know today.

Reply to
hummingbird

Anybody remember the Apricot? Far superior to the IBM PC, but died the death because it wasn't compatible with it (at the hardware level).

Reply to
BrianW

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 12:00:18 GMT 'BrianW' posted this onto uk.politics.misc:

Yes I remember it. It did indeed die.

Reply to
hummingbird

Yup. BIOS compatible but, as you say, not able to use the same interface cards, etc.

Reply to
Harry The Horse

The design and pre-production team of the original Apricot, of which I was a member, argued for it to be compatible but were overuled by the MD. Instead it was made compatible with the Sirius 1 (AKA Victor 9000) designed by the brilliant Chuck Peddle) that was far more technically advanced than the IBM. Was it really a quarter of a century ago!

Peter Crosland

Reply to
Peter Crosland

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 14:42:41 +0100 'Peter Crosland' posted this onto uk.politics.misc:

Well I have to admit IBM's PC was put together from a bag of miscellaneous bits and old teletypes! ;-) Estridge did wonders and lost his life some time later in a slightly suspicious plane crash as the PC slowly gathered market momentum.

Time flies.

Reply to
hummingbird

Maybe. Remember though, the PC explosion only came about because IBM screwed up their chance to license the BIOS. Had they not done that, progress may well have been considerably slower.

Reply to
TimB

On 13 Aug 2006 13:04:52 -0700 'TimB' posted this onto uk.politics.misc:

Really? Can you explain what you mean?

Reply to
hummingbird

In the sense that business trusted them, you mean.

It might have taken a few years longer for Apple/Acorn/ Somebodyelse to become trusted by buisness, but sooner or later they would have.

Because it was open.

There was a big push to open standards in the 80s. Companies realised that they didn't have to be locked in to one supplier who could charge what they liked because of it. Many companies went bust because they didn't embrace open standards.

Sooner or later it would have happened in the business 'micro' market.

tim

Reply to
tim

Just like Philips lost the chance to make trillions by not charging for the use of the patent to cassette tapes you mean.

tim

>
Reply to
tim

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:11:05 +0100 'tim' posted this onto uk.politics.misc:

Sort of - IBM dominated the global market for computers and people took the PC seriously when IBM produced one. Prior to that, PCs' were largely seen as a geeky toy for uni professors etc whilst other users stuck with mainframes. There was precious little commercial s/w available for pre-IBM PCs'.

Also, there were seriously diverging views within IBM as to where to take the PC. Many top brass in the CMC wanted it simply to be an intelligent terminal with limited function (to protect existing m/f revenues), others in Entry Systems Div saw it as a serious desktop computer with huge potential. It also had major compatibility issues with existing mainframe/mid-range h/w - EBCDIC vs ASCII, comms protocols etc.

There was a view in some parts of IBM that Estridge has produced a corporate frankenstein, capable of destroying its makers. It's no wonder his death in a plane crash was seen as suspicious by some.

We don't know that for sure but that's a reasonable speculation. Where we'd be today without IBM's early involvement is unknown but IMV it would be a different place to where we actually are.

And because IBM turned the PC into a respectable product for commercial use.

IBM's PC family 1 series was intended from Day 1 to have an open architecture to expand the market as fast as possible. When IBM began to lose control of the market, it then announced PS/2 with MCA in an attempt to retake control ...but as we know this failed as other companies continued to develop the family 1 AT architecture and that is where we are today.

IBM is in the strange position of having commercialised the Personal Computer 25 years ago but never really made much money out of it. Global PC sales revenues/profits were increasingly offset by lower mainframe revenues/profits and IBM was internally structured to market and manufacture big systems which required very techy people.

HTH.

Probably.

Reply to
hummingbird

You're forgetting about all the CP/M machines that were around at the time.

Reply to
IanAl

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 14:32:37 +0100 'IanAl' posted this onto uk.politics.misc:

Compare the s/w available for pre-IBM PCs with the thousands of s/w packages which became available for the IBM PC later running under DOS. The IBM DOS PC eclipsed and killed off CP/M.

Reply to
hummingbird

We know that, but chances are that some other similar PC architecture, quite probably CP/M would have acheived the dominance the IBM PC did, just later, with the same amount of s/w available. Though IBM 'legitimised' the market, the technology that was becoming available would have meant that eventually the price /performance advantage would have been irresistable in any event, it was an idea waiting to happen. Probably the IBM PC just took 5 years off the time it took for that to happen, that all.

Reply to
Tumbleweed

I'd agree with him, with several different types of PC, progress would have been slower because the overall market in each would have been smaller.But it would have happened and chances are one would eventually have overwhelmed all the others, just like VHS beat Beta and also that Phillips system, V2000 was it? The IBM PC just meant that that consolidation happened almost evernight.

Reply to
Tumbleweed

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 20:41:27 +0100 'Tumbleweed' posted this onto uk.politics.misc:

A nice theory. What we know is what happened, everything else is speculation.

Reply to
hummingbird

BeanSmart website 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.