What IS The Free Market

[EdwardBaiamonte]

IBM created Microsoft and choose Intel, to create the PC market, to avoid being split up into parts like Ma Bell.

thats too insane to bother with. $10,000 says its not remotely true!

You'd loose your money.

It's a pretty cool story.

Read some of it here:

IBM and Microsoft Antitrust then and now - CNET News

tell what is says? I used to work for IBM

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

IBM created Microsoft and choose Intel, to create the PC market, to avoid being split up into parts like Ma Bell.

thats too insane to bother with. $10,000 says its not remotely true!

You'd loose your money.

It's a pretty cool story.

Read some of it here:

IBM and Microsoft Antitrust then and now - CNET News

The Rise of DOS How Microsoft Got the IBM PC OS Contract

History of IBM - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

However, IBM soon lost this early lead in both PC hardware and software, thanks in part to its unprecedented (for IBM) decision to contract PC components to outside companies like Microsoft and Intel. Up to this point in its history, IBM relied on a vertically integrated strategy, building most key components of its systems itself, including processors, operating systems, peripherals, databases and the like. In an attempt to speed time to market for the PC, IBM chose not to build a proprietary operating system and microprocessor. Instead it sourced these vital components from Microsoft and Intel respectively. Ironically, in a decade which marked the end of IBM's monopoly, it was this fateful decision by IBM that passed the sources of its monopolistic power (operating system and processor architecture) to Microsoft and Intel, paving the way for rise of PC compatibles and the creation of hundreds of billions of dollars of market value outside of IBM.

1) IBM outsourced becuase it had no expertise in mass production
2) it was slow in PC's for same reasaon MicroSoft was slow in tablets, search, games , word processing, music, cell phones, etc etc. It was not their business,just as computers were not GE's business even though they invented electricity.
3) your silly article did not say IBM did it avoid anti trust but rather becuase they were a stogy monopoly broken up and nearly bankrupted by Republican capitalism while liberal monopoly govt was very very slowly preparing to act.

 

[RKMBrown]

Go to walmart and try to buy a computer with linux preinstalled instead of Microsoft windows.

thats because no one has wanted Linux badly enough!! and now no one wants a PC anyway. The world is going mobile and Microsoft missed it like they missed the internet, search, games tablets, cell phones etc etc

Miss? I suppose, more like their stuff sucked so bad no one wanted their versions. The same would apply to the desktop if they had not been allowed to have said monopoly on PC preloads.

If you had to buy and install windows after buying your PC Microsoft would be the name of a now bankrupt company.

 

[RKMBrown]

IBM created Microsoft and choose Intel, to create the PC market, to avoid being split up into parts like Ma Bell.

thats too insane to bother with. $10,000 says its not remotely true!

You'd loose your money.

It's a pretty cool story.

Read some of it here:

IBM and Microsoft Antitrust then and now - CNET News

tell what is says? I used to work for IBM

So did I. I worked here:

More specifically, I worked on DOS, Windows, NT, OS/2, ...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I suppose, more like their stuff sucked so bad no one wanted their versions.

so what????? the free market is great that way. Microsoft was first with the best in PC's and were not first with the best in cell phones and tablets.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The same would apply to the desktop if they had not been allowed to have said monopoly on PC preloads.

they were not allowed by some "god". it happened between free people. If Apple or linux or netscape foxfire or dozens of other would be competitors had been any good they would have been able to compete.

 

[RKMBrown]

IBM created Microsoft and choose Intel, to create the PC market, to avoid being split up into parts like Ma Bell.

thats too insane to bother with. $10,000 says its not remotely true!

You'd loose your money.

It's a pretty cool story.

Read some of it here:

IBM and Microsoft Antitrust then and now - CNET News

The Rise of DOS How Microsoft Got the IBM PC OS Contract

History of IBM - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

However, IBM soon lost this early lead in both PC hardware and software, thanks in part to its unprecedented (for IBM) decision to contract PC components to outside companies like Microsoft and Intel. Up to this point in its history, IBM relied on a vertically integrated strategy, building most key components of its systems itself, including processors, operating systems, peripherals, databases and the like. In an attempt to speed time to market for the PC, IBM chose not to build a proprietary operating system and microprocessor. Instead it sourced these vital components from Microsoft and Intel respectively. Ironically, in a decade which marked the end of IBM's monopoly, it was this fateful decision by IBM that passed the sources of its monopolistic power (operating system and processor architecture) to Microsoft and Intel, paving the way for rise of PC compatibles and the creation of hundreds of billions of dollars of market value outside of IBM.

1) IBM outsourced becuase it had no expertise in mass production
2) it was slow in PC's for same reasaon MicroSoft was slow in tablets, search, games , word processing, music, cell phones, etc etc. It was not their business,just as computers were not GE's business even though they invented electricity.
3) your silly article did not say IBM did it avoid anti trust but rather becuase they were a stogy monopoly broken up and nearly bankrupted by Republican capitalism while liberal monopoly govt was very very slowly preparing to act.

1) Nonsense. We mass produced components.
2) PCs were not their business? HUH?
3) I provided more than one link.
When I say I know what went on... let me be more specific. I know the major players personally. I was "there" as the decisions were being made. I participated in the discussions, listened to the arguments, and discussed them for years after the fact.

IBM literally held Microsoft's hand for years on years. IBM did most of the work, and let Microsoft be part owner of the OS, they did this because of the anti-trust suits.

FYI Bill's mom was a friend of Aker's wife. Do You Really Know Bill Gates The Myth of Entrepreneur as Risk-Taker The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss

And that's the real reason IBM picked Microsoft... lol true story.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

1) Nonsense. We mass produced components.

We???IBM made small numbers of large computers, included software free , and gave free service.

PC's were the exact opposite. IBM knew they had no expertise in mass production consumer products. Notice they had no consumer typewriters even though they dominated business. You don't seem to understand business

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

2) PCs were not their business? HUH?

IBM was not in the PC business until late and then they failed badly and almost went bankrupt

 

[RKMBrown]

The same would apply to the desktop if they had not been allowed to have said monopoly on PC preloads.

they were not allowed by some "god". it happened between free people. If Apple or linux or netscape foxfire or dozens of other would be competitors had been any good they would have been able to compete.

Sure it was between free people, most monopolies are between free people.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

IBM literally held Microsoft's hand for years on years. IBM did most of the work, and let Microsoft be part owner of the OS, they did this because of the anti-trust suits.

FYI Bill's mom was a friend of Aker's wife. Do You Really Know Bill Gates The Myth of Entrepreneur as Risk-Taker The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss

And that's the real reason IBM picked Microsoft.

 

[RKMBrown]

1) Nonsense. We mass produced components.

We???IBM made small numbers of large computers, included software free , and gave free service.

PC's were the exact opposite. IBM knew they had no expertise in mass production consumer products. Notice they had no consumer typewriters even though they dominated business. You don't seem to understand business

Nonsense. My understanding of business FAR EXCEEDS yours.

I note that you moved the goal post from "components" which is what I said, to consumer products. ROFL IBM had no consumer typewriters? ROFL are you on drugs?

IBM had expertise in mass production. What they did not have is a desire to sell high volume low profit products to grand mothers. That is not their business model. IBM let microsoft have that customer set. IBM went after the professional and corporate PC sales.

 

[RKMBrown]

2) PCs were not their business? HUH?

IBM was not in the PC business until late and then they failed badly and almost went bankrupt

ROFL dude put down whatever it is you are drinking.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

IBM literally held Microsoft's hand for years on years. IBM did most of the work, and let Microsoft be part owner of the OS, they did this because of the anti-trust suits.

FYI Bill's mom was a friend of Aker's wife. Do You Really Know Bill Gates The Myth of Entrepreneur as Risk-Taker The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss

And that's the real reason IBM picked Microsoft.

I think it safe to say they needed each other at first, both afraid to do it alone, and then Microsoft walked away with the OS and IBM almost died while trying to compete with its own poorly received OS. THen they left PC's knowing it was not their business,

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

ROFL IBM had no consumer typewriters? ROFL are you on drugs?
.

what were they??

 

[RKMBrown]

IBM literally held Microsoft's hand for years on years. IBM did most of the work, and let Microsoft be part owner of the OS, they did this because of the anti-trust suits.

FYI Bill's mom was a friend of Aker's wife. Do You Really Know Bill Gates The Myth of Entrepreneur as Risk-Taker The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss

And that's the real reason IBM picked Microsoft.

I think it safe to say they needed each other at first, both afraid to do it alone, and then Microsoft walked away with the OS and IBM almost died while trying to compete with its own poorly received OS. THen they left PC's knowing it was not their business,

Needed each other? Bill and Paul had a basic compiler that anyone decent programmer could write in a week. IBM did not need them for anything other than cover from the anti-trust suits.

Microsoft did not "walk" away they bought their way out in the divorce.

IBM did not almost "die." I have no idea where that comes from. IBM had a massive profit margin back then. Tons of money.

IBM dropped the OS because they came up with a new strategy... "virtual machines" on clients and servers see Java. If virtual machines became common place IBM would no longer need to own their own PC business to have a cross platform strategy. Yes, the only reason IBM wanted to be on the PC in the first place was to have a services model for the stuff that goes on the client computers that works with the back end servers, where the profit is.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

IBM had expertise in mass production. What they did not have is a desire to sell high volume low profit products to grand mothers.

how would they have expertise in mass production if they had no desire to sell high volume????

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Needed each other? Bill and Paul had a basic compiler that anyone decent programmer could write in a week.

IBM went begging for DOS because they had no OS!!

 

[RKMBrown]

ROFL IBM had no consumer typewriters? ROFL are you on drugs?
.

what were they??

Your kidding right?

IBM100 - The Selectric Typewriter

 

[RKMBrown]

Needed each other? Bill and Paul had a basic compiler that anyone decent programmer could write in a week.

IBM went begging for DOS because they had no OS!!

Nonsense. I'm guessing you are not a systems engineer.