Re: Computing Editorial (please read)

[Charles Richmond <richmond@ev1.net>]

"White Flame (aka David Holz)" wrote:
> 
> "wildstar128" <wildstar128@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> v2rdrjn5rmc007@corp.supernews.com">news:v2rdrjn5rmc007@corp.supernews.com...
> > M$ role wasn't fundamental in innovation or technology but in marketing.
> 
> IBM was the one who dumped x86 machines everywhere, therefore got their
> architecture to be the most popular in the education and business markets.
> M$ happened to be the OS that ran on it, so they cashed in on IBM's success.
> 
M$ rode the coat tails of IBM's PC success. The name "IBM"
legitimized the use of microcomputers in the business world
and for other "serious" uses.

MSDOS was a cash cow for M$. Gates had the foresight to get 
IBM to agree to  let M$ sell MSDOS to other companies 
independently. This only became profitable when a "clean" 
BIOS was written and PC clones could be produced.

So you could say that IBM was like the space shuttle's main
fuel tank. IBM boosted M$ into orbit...but IBM itself was
jettisoned after the fuel burned out.

-- 
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
|     Charles and Francis Richmond     <richmond@plano.net>   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+