4 ms·

Historically, wasn't this the case? Companies like IBM, DEC, etc. built highly-proprietary systems that weren't compatible with each other, and were able to se

Historically, wasn't this the case? Companies like IBM, DEC, etc. built highly-proprietary systems that weren't compatible with each other, and were able to set high prices because of it. Only later, in the late 20th century, did computers become more compatible, as open standards for hardware interconnects, communication protocols, and file storage formats were adopted. And the rise of FOSS in the 1990s also did a great deal for this.

ddevault 6y ago
Good point, this isn't an entirely new trend.
kjs3 6y ago
Yup...this reads like a low-fidelity rant than a substantive observation. Historically, proprietary/walled-garden operating systems were the norm. Trying to get, say, an IBM VM/CMS environment to talk to a DEC VAX/VMS system involved the deepest of dark incantations, and usually some expensive third-party software and hardware (show of hands...anyone else try and implement an APPN to DECNet gateway? Not recommended.). There has never been a time where vendors didn't try and 'innovate' in ways that tried to lock out competitors, or at least made them less convenient. Right or wrong, it's not an insight that it's still a business model.
megameter 6y ago
The obvious counterpart is vendor DRM/copy-protection, which has been around since forever(see: the NES lockout chips, every fancy disk-sector protection method used on the 8-bit micros). The attempt is always to make the computer used for something less than it is literally capable of. Extension of these limits into the context of an apparently generalized operating system is just a way of elaborating on the idea.
ThrowawayR2 6y ago
> "Only later, in the late 20th century, did computers become more compatible, as open standards for hardware interconnects, communication protocols, and file storage formats were adopted. And the rise of FOSS in the 1990s also did a great deal for this." The rise of the Wintel duopoly in the '80s and '90s did that; FOSS operating systems didn't have enough market share for OEMs to take notice until the early to mid-2000s. (Arguably, FOSS operating systems still haven't had an effect on the fundamentals. There is no open standard by an independent standards body for the architecture of an x86 PC/server. It's governed by Microsoft's HLK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Hardware_Lab_Kit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Hardware_Lab_Kit )

ddevault 6y ago

Good point, this isn't an entirely new trend.

kjs3 6y ago

Yup...this reads like a low-fidelity rant than a substantive observation. Historically, proprietary/walled-garden operating systems were the norm. Trying to get, say, an IBM VM/CMS environment to talk to a DEC VAX/VMS system involved the deepest of dark incantations, and usually some expensive third-party software and hardware (show of hands...anyone else try and implement an APPN to DECNet gateway? Not recommended.). There has never been a time where vendors didn't try and 'innovate' in ways that tried to lock out competitors, or at least made them less convenient. Right or wrong, it's not an insight that it's still a business model.

megameter 6y ago

The obvious counterpart is vendor DRM/copy-protection, which has been around since forever(see: the NES lockout chips, every fancy disk-sector protection method used on the 8-bit micros). The attempt is always to make the computer used for something less than it is literally capable of. Extension of these limits into the context of an apparently generalized operating system is just a way of elaborating on the idea.

ThrowawayR2 6y ago

> "Only later, in the late 20th century, did computers become more compatible, as open standards for hardware interconnects, communication protocols, and file storage formats were adopted. And the rise of FOSS in the 1990s also did a great deal for this." The rise of the Wintel duopoly in the '80s and '90s did that; FOSS operating systems didn't have enough market share for OEMs to take notice until the early to mid-2000s. (Arguably, FOSS operating systems still haven't had an effect on the fundamentals. There is no open standard by an independent standards body for the architecture of an x86 PC/server. It's governed by Microsoft's HLK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Hardware_Lab_Kit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Hardware_Lab_Kit )