Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:15950 comp.sys.ibm.pc:15490 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!husc6!linus!philabs!sbcs!bnlux0!drs From: drs@bnlux0.bnl.gov (David R. Stampf) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: The Lawsuit, Standardization, and Whiny DOS Users... Message-ID: <488@bnlux0.bnl.gov> Date: 10 May 88 16:42:16 GMT References: <8685@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU> <5823@well.UUCP> <10600@steinmetz.ge.com> <5836@well.UUCP> <1252@uokmax.UUCP> <5884@well.UUCP> <5167@cup.portal.com> Reply-To: drs@bnlux0.UUCP (David R. Stampf) Organization: Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, N.Y. Lines: 65 In article <5167@cup.portal.com> Eric_Shockwave-Rider_Larson@cup.portal.com writes: >>IBM offers *licenses* for its PS/2 patents, and several companies such >>as Tandy will be producing PS/2 compatibles using these licenses. >>Try and get a license from Apple to manufacture Mac clones ... >-- >>Harry Henderson (freelance technical editor/writer). > >Rather sneaky of IBM, wouldn't you say? If they didn't offer the >license, there would be a very good chance that the PC market >would fragment around two standards, and IBM would lose control >of PC technology. But with this license, they will be able to maintain >control of the technology, and make a profit on sales of their competitors' >products besides. It's a brilliant move toward closing PC architecture, >and bringing clone vendors to their knees. Am I missing some smiley faces here, or is this the most tortured logic ever seen. Clearly IBM is not going to do anything that will directly hurt themselves, but by licensing the PS/2 Technology, they have created a mainstream computer architecture that will not only provide clone manufacturers with a living, but keep IBM in some pin money for the forseeable future. The fact is, if IBM didn't license the PS/2 stuff, then a number of small third party manufactures of boards and software would never even try to address a fragmented market. I don't believe that 6 years ago that there were companies like Hercules, Lotus, AST etc. not to mention Compac, Leading edge etc. I may not be very fond of IBM, but in the PC market they have spread the wealth around pretty well I think. >First we had open hardware technology. Now we have IBM with a stranglehold >on the hardware design, a shortage of 386 chips, (which, rather interestingly, >IBM owns mask rights to, and has production ramping up). What do think >might be next? Special versions of OS/2 that run only on IBM's? Hardware >technology improving on MCA that they DON'T license? IBM becoming sole >manufacturer of a "fixed" 386, or 486? IBM admits internally that the >non-proprietary design of the original PC's was a big mistake for them, and >are gradually moving toward taking back control. Look around. The Compact is selling like never before. Sun 386/i looks like the best thing going and nobody is cashing in their chips on the clone market. I wonder what you expect IBM to do? Give things away for free? Maybe Apple should license the IWM disk interface chip to the world. Sure they will hold the masks and can change it whenver they wanted. That is far more likely than IBM comming out with a new 386 different from all of the others. IBM has also come out with a proprietary 68000 chip set that was micro-coded to run the 370 instruction set which has apparently slipped off into never never land and a proprietary RISC architecture that has not set the world on fire either. I doubt very much that IBM will now decide to turn their backs on the rest of the micro world again. They may test market new chips and architectures but they won't cripple the 386. > >If the clone vendors were smart, they wouldn't have anything to do with this. What would you have them do? Sell apples? (Thats with a lower case.) >Remember, IBM is the company that said "To us, open architecture means >third party comapnies can write software that will run on our machines". And Apple says the opposite? Cheeez. Apple bigots are worse than reformed smokers. Wake up - the world is large enough for several different kinds of computers (I use IBMs/Suns/Macs/ST/Vax etc) and there is little point in attacking other machines - even if you could find some valid points. < dave