Re:Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers ...
by WalterBright on Monday June 03, 2019 @05:56PM
(#20089312)
> IBMs fall began with the PC,
IBM was enormously successful with the PC, so successful that IBM was assumed throughout the 80's that they would continue to utterly dominate the desktop market. (See the humorous 1984 Apple ad for what people thought of IBM and the PC at the time.) Everyone quaked in their boots when a new PC was imminent.
> which they made an open design explicitly because of anti-trust pressures.
I haven't heard that before in histories of the PC I've read. The way I read it was IBM made it open to cut costs and because they didn't think the PC would be a big market.
Additionally, IBM closed the design of the later PS/2 and fenced it in with patents in order to continue dominating the PC market and fend off clones, which contradicts the idea that such behavior would entice anti-trust action.
IBM was enormously successful with the PC, so successful that IBM was assumed throughout the 80's that they would continue to utterly dominate the desktop market. (See the humorous 1984 Apple ad for what people thought of IBM and the PC at the time.) Everyone quaked in their boots when a new PC was imminent.
> which they made an open design explicitly because of anti-trust pressures.
I haven't heard that before in histories of the PC I've read. The way I read it was IBM made it open to cut costs and because they didn't think the PC would be a big market.
Additionally, IBM closed the design of the later PS/2 and fenced it in with patents in order to continue dominating the PC market and fend off clones, which contradicts the idea that such behavior would entice anti-trust action.
Do you have a reference for your version?