|
Re: (OT) The giant steps down before the crash
de hummingbird 06/17/2006 01:24
On 16 Jun 2006 23:58:12 +0200 'John Jay Smith'
posted this onto alt.comp.freeware:
>ah... the forces in power always want to be in control.
There are revenue streams and profits to protect doncha know!
>They stopped Tesla too...
His life story here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla
Quite a man but also described as a mad scientist apparently, although
that might have been spread by opponents with vested interests.
>If we had used discoveries Tesla had made 100 years ago we would
>have limitless free wireless power and instantaneous transmission of
>limitless amounts of information.
>
>You read the above correctly. All this was and is possible.
It has always been thus, especially in the world of high technology
inventions methinks.
>Want more info? post and we will talk.....
>
>
>"hummingbird" <OPRBMDQMZNLV@spammotel.com> wrote in message
>news:3bb592hfljhc4u52agt9bc1unk739h0e22@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 05:54:32 -0500 'Caesar Romano'
>> posted this onto alt.comp.freeware:
>>
>>>On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:59:34 +0100, hummingbird
>>><OPRBMDQMZNLV@spammotel.com> wrote Re Re: (OT) The giant steps down
>>>before the crash:
>>>
>>>>On 16 Jun 2006 02:58:56 +0200 'John Jay Smith'
>>>>posted this onto alt.comp.freeware:
>>>>
>>>>>I have stated before what I think the future will be for Microsoft with
>>>>>vista and office 2007 ....
>>>>>They are badly designed abominations... and it seems that Gates is
>>>>>getting
>>>>>out of the boat before it sinks...
>>>>>
>>>>>http://news.com.com/Gates+stepping+down+from+full-time+Microsoft+role/2100-1014_3-6084396.html?tag=nl.e498
>>>>
>>>>hhmm. I wonder if there's data available to show that the downfall
>>>>of a software company begins when its products become bloatware?
>>>
>>>Addressing the downfall of a software (and hardware) company, read two
>>>books:
>>>
>>>Hard Drive : Bill Gates and the Making of the Microsoft Empire
>>>(Paperback)
>>>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0887306292/qid=1150452707/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/002-6270183-6177655?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>Big Blues : The Unmaking of IBM (Hardcover)
>>>by Paul Carroll
>>>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0517591979/qid=1150452783/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/002-6270183-6177655?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
>>>
>>>Two excellent and very books that tell the story from two perspectives
>>>of the rise of MS and the fall of IBM (although IBM is certainly not
>>>gone by any stretch).
>>>
>>>What's really interesting is how MS was drawn into the OS business
>>>almost against their will by happenstance. (The quy (??Kendrick??) who
>>>owned CPM didn't want to sign the onerous IBM non-disclosure
>>>agreement. IBM went to MS, MS says "..no, we only do BASIC here.." and
>>>sends IBM back to the CPM guy who still won't sign the non-disclosure
>>>agreement. So IBM goes back to MS and brow-beats them into doing an
>>>OS.
>>>
>>>Now here's where Gates is brilliant: Instead of wanting exhorbant
>>>royalties on the new OS, which is what IBM expected MS to try to rip
>>>IBM off on, Gates wants very minimal royalties BUT wants the
>>>non-IBM-hardware (i.e. the "PC-compatible" market) rights to whatever
>>>OS is developed. IBM is thrilled by this because at the time there
>>>*was NO PC-compatible market* and IBM never thought there would be
>>>one.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Having spent my career working for IBM, for some time in Entry Systems
>> Product Management in Europe HQ, I know something about the rise of
>> Microsoft. In those days the major problem we had was with MS-DOS,
>> sloppily written and with many bugs and limitations.
>> Gates was never highly thought of inside IBM, often described as an
>> untrustworthy cowboy and clearly struggled to step up to the role of
>> dealing with the prof IBM Corporation. Tensions grew from very early
>> days and continued when Gates developed Windows. The rest is history.
>>
>> There are many variations of the debates which went on between
>> IBM and Gates in the early days, few of them very accurate.
>> I knew some of those in Boca Raton who were personally involved.
>>
>> IBM's biggest single problem with the intro of the PC was that too
>> many of those in control at corp level only ever wanted it to be an
>> intelligent terminal with v/limited computing capacity, to protect the
>> huge revenues of existing product lines and in fairness, few knew much
>> about the technological developments which would occur allowing PC
>> performace to rise. IBM's open architecture PC family 1 series was
>> intended to create and expand the global PC market under IBM control.
>> PC/2 was intended to regain control after it had been lost and MCA
>> was all about that, despite it being marketed as something different.
>>
>> Again, the rest is history.