3 ms·

That was not really a crisis, that was a shake out. The article really focuses on the Texas instrument computer. They basically bungled it, everybody knew that

That was not really a crisis, that was a shake out. The article really focuses on the Texas instrument computer. They basically bungled it, everybody knew that software was key for having a popular computer, and yet they do not take steps to make sure there was lots of software available for it... indeed, they discouraged it.

tzs 8y ago
Amazingly, years later IBM made the same mistake with OS/2, but more so. Some well known computer columnist, I think it was Jerry Pournelle in his BYTE column, wrote of attending a trade show when Windows 3 was still king where IBM was showing OS/2 Warp and Microsoft was showing Windows 95. OS/2 was out at the point, but Windows 95 was still in beta. He went to the IBM booth, told them he was interested in programming for OS/2 Warp, and asked what he had to do. They gave him a bunch of forms to fill out to apply for the developer program. The forms asked for details of his business and analysis of why he thinks it will make money with OS/2. If they were satisfied with this, they would allow him to buy the SDK. Then he went to the Microsoft booth and asked the same question about Windows 95. They handed him the SDK right there, no charge and no strings attached. That was when, he said in his column, he knew Windows 95 would be the successor to Windows 3, and OS/2 Warp would be at best a niche OS. I said IBM made the same mistake as TI, but more so. The more so is because IBM also neglected promoting OS/2 to consumers, and they neglected hardware support, so even if it had all the software that you cared about, it was hard to discover that OS/2 was an option, and if you did it could be a nightmare getting it to work with readily available hardware. By 1996, Linux was easier to get working than OS/2 with most hardware sold at the major retail computer stores (CompUSA, Computer City).
- Renaud 8y ago
  Developers, developers, developers! [1] That has always been Microsoft's strength: their ability to bring developers to their ecosystem. It doesn't matter if your OS is the best, most modern and revolutionary: it means nothing if you can't do anything with it. The same mistake almost bit the iPhone when it was launched.[2] [1]:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhh_GeBPOhs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhh_GeBPOhs [2]:https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/10/the-revolution-steve-jobs-resisted-apples-app-store-marks-10-years-of-third-party-innovation https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/10/the-revolution-st...
- bluedino 8y ago
  And then he went to the NeXT booth and he started writing his app right then and there

tzs 8y ago

Amazingly, years later IBM made the same mistake with OS/2, but more so. Some well known computer columnist, I think it was Jerry Pournelle in his BYTE column, wrote of attending a trade show when Windows 3 was still king where IBM was showing OS/2 Warp and Microsoft was showing Windows 95. OS/2 was out at the point, but Windows 95 was still in beta. He went to the IBM booth, told them he was interested in programming for OS/2 Warp, and asked what he had to do. They gave him a bunch of forms to fill out to apply for the developer program. The forms asked for details of his business and analysis of why he thinks it will make money with OS/2. If they were satisfied with this, they would allow him to buy the SDK. Then he went to the Microsoft booth and asked the same question about Windows 95. They handed him the SDK right there, no charge and no strings attached. That was when, he said in his column, he knew Windows 95 would be the successor to Windows 3, and OS/2 Warp would be at best a niche OS. I said IBM made the same mistake as TI, but more so. The more so is because IBM also neglected promoting OS/2 to consumers, and they neglected hardware support, so even if it had all the software that you cared about, it was hard to discover that OS/2 was an option, and if you did it could be a nightmare getting it to work with readily available hardware. By 1996, Linux was easier to get working than OS/2 with most hardware sold at the major retail computer stores (CompUSA, Computer City).

Renaud 8y ago
Developers, developers, developers! [1] That has always been Microsoft's strength: their ability to bring developers to their ecosystem. It doesn't matter if your OS is the best, most modern and revolutionary: it means nothing if you can't do anything with it. The same mistake almost bit the iPhone when it was launched.[2] [1]:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhh_GeBPOhs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhh_GeBPOhs [2]:https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/10/the-revolution-steve-jobs-resisted-apples-app-store-marks-10-years-of-third-party-innovation https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/10/the-revolution-st...
bluedino 8y ago
And then he went to the NeXT booth and he started writing his app right then and there