Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcc6!ir462
From: ir462@sdcc6.UUCP (ir462)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: IBM vs. Mac debate
Message-ID: <2515@sdcc6.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 8-Apr-86 22:39:06 EST
Article-I.D.: sdcc6.2515
Posted: Tue Apr  8 22:39:06 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 10-Apr-86 08:07:19 EST
Organization: U.C. San Diego, Academic Computer Center
Lines: 40
Keywords: IBM

The various postings about the relative value of IBMs and Macs have
aroused me to post my own undying words on the topic.

The folks who say that IBM provides better support and upgrade paths are
right, sort of.  When you are a $60 billion company whose mere entry
into a market (e.g. personal computers) can legitimate that market for
the entire Fortune 1000 community, its pretty easy to plan on providing
support.  I think the example of the PCjr makes clear the possibility
that a complete sales failure by the PC might have led to IBM dropping
the line.  However, probably the only way that the PC could have bombed
would have been if it had been horrible (as opposed to its actual
mediocrity) or if the concept of personal computing was as flawed as the
concept of home computing (in which case Apple would be out of business
too).

I don't think that it was likely that any of the small PC companies
could establish themselves with a reputation for service even close to
that of IBM.  The highly competitive PC market did not generate the kind
of capital necessary or, in its early days, attract the kind of users who were
interested in footing the bill for service.  In many ways, Apple is
providing support and upgrade paths for discontinued machines,
particularly the Lisa/XL.  If you allow IBM the PCjr, I think Apple is
allowed the ///.  Also, IBM's reputation for good service has been built
over about 50 years of manufacturing business equipment and about 30
years for computers specifically.  I believe that in 30 years Apple will
also have a strong track record.  I am particularly impressed by their
commitment to supporting the programming interface.

In summary, while I think the Mac superior to the PC and at least the
equal of the AT, I can understand why a business user would prefer the
IBM.  The fact that his preference may be more cultural than because of
actual machine superiority is irritating.  The fact that IBM may occupy
its dominant market position because of monopolistic practices 20 years
ago is more irritating.  The fact that IBM dominates the PC market
primarily because of its reputation is even more irritating.  Enough
said.

Ethan Munson
UCSD CS undergradute
sdcsvax!sdcc6!ir462