Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site terak.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!noao!terak!doug
From: doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee)
Newsgroups: net.works
Subject: Re: IBM and the future
Message-ID: <438@terak.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Mar-85 11:49:00 EST
Article-I.D.: terak.438
Posted: Mon Mar 11 11:49:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 17-Mar-85 01:53:37 EST
References: <792@topaz.ARPA> <836@ames.UUCP> <426@terak.UUCP> <1098@watdcsu.UUCP>
Organization: Terak Corporation, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Lines: 43

ME> IBM in the supercomputer market?  Not very likely.  IBM's strength is
ME> in Business with a capital "B".  They've failed pretty miserably in
ME> past attempts to expand into other markets.  About 15 years ago they
ME> made a super number-cruncher called the 360/91.  They sold 4 of 'em.
> 
> yes, but no-one else sold any either and IBM wasn't seriously in there
> to sell more.

Au contraire, this was the time that CDC made its fortune selling
Seymour Cray's 6400, 6600, and 7600 systems.  IBM's supercomputers were
designed in direct response to CDC's attempting to steal the scientific
marketplace that IBM had "owned" since the original 704.  CDC won, IBM
lost.  IBM tucked its tail 'twixt its legs and abandoned the scientific
market entirely.

> because it is [IBM], more than anyone else, who control the direction
> and rate of progress of the microcomputer market.

This is true only of "business" microcomputers.  IBM does not, for
instance, control the CAD market.  Nor does it control the "home
computer" market.  Nor the engineering workstation market.  If IBM did
control the entire microcomputer market, Motorola and National might as
well scrap their microprocessor designs.  (And I might as well go work
for IBM  :-)

> if raw CPU power was all there was to IBM's, a lot of
> other people would have a dominant position in the mainframe market.
> business processing is dominated by i/o and that's where micro's just
> haven't caught up yet.

On this we agree.  It was indeed IBM's peripherals that brought it to
prominence, and (to a large extent) keep IBM in the forefront of
business EDP.

> all this talk about powerful microcomputers replacing mainframes is
> just talk until i/o devices of the speed and capacity of current
> mainframe peripherals is available at prices that the average consumer
> can afford.

Average consumer?  We were talking about "replacing mainframes", and the
average consumer doesn't have one to replace.  :-)
-- 
Doug Pardee -- Terak Corp. -- !{hao,ihnp4,decvax}!noao!terak!doug