> I don't understand the point you are trying to make. I mean, the PC killed the mainframe ... and build and operate their own computers? Because in the early

> I don't understand the point you are trying to make. I mean, the PC killed the mainframe ... and build and operate their own computers? Because in the early 80s and late 70s, IBM, Honeywell, CDC, Unisys, Burroughs, nobody focused on the right things. That's why it's a counterfactual. Virtual machine first started on VM by IBM and then on VM/ESA. The parallel multi core processor was also a mainframe innovation. If in a different world where they ran it like a brutal startup instead of a post ww2 government contractor relying on legislation to secure profits, the past 40 years could have played out differently. Just like CP/M could have been on the IBM PC if Digital Research returned the phone calls faster or we could all be running Xerox desktops today if they had dealt with Parc differently or we'd all be in a post nuclear apocalypse if the people in charge of launching them didn't defy orders. Please stop assuming I'm profoundly incompetent, this is counterproductive