4 ms·

I think Pirates of Silicon Valley makes it clear. IBM did not think there was much money in software and they were wrong about it.

Animats 3y ago
Yes. There was a time in the early 1980s when a software-only company seemed unlikely to become big. Two examples I was close to: Interleaf. Interleaf was the first good commercial document processor.[1] Released in 1981. Ran on Sun workstations, quite well. Years ahead of Microsoft Word. The business model was that they would sell you four workstations, a server, and a laser printer for about $60,000. In my days at the aerospace company, we managed, with great difficulty, to get Interleaf to sell us the software alone, since we already had Sun workstations, a laser printer, and a phototypesetter. (Aerospace generates a lot of documents with diagrams.) As a software-only company, they could not have obtained funding, or, probably, generated enough revenue to operate. AutoCAD. The story of AutoCAD is well documented in The Autodesk File.[2] Autodesk was founded in 1982. A software-only company was not fundable back then. Autodesk started off with about $62,000 put in by the founders. (Market cap today, $47 billion.) The term sheets for some VC deals that didn't happen are in there.[3] "The overall flavour of the deal seemed to us totally inappropriate for a company which was, at the time of these negotiations, generating sales equal to the size of the deal every month and generating after-tax profits close to the size of the deal every quarter." Autodesk couldn't get funded on reasonable terms even after becoming wildly profitable. It was an interesting time. There was so much that obviously needed doing and hadn't been done well yet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interleaf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interleaf [2] https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/ https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/ [3] https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/chapter2_32.html https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/chapter2_32.html
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  Wrong. Lotus 1-2-3 was launched at the beginning of 1983. They spent a million dollars on their launch, which told all the VC's that software was going to be a big business. Ashton-Tate was large. Software Publishing (PFS: File) was large. Word Perfect was large.
  - 29athrowaway 3y ago
    Dbase
    - AlbertCory 3y ago
      That's Ashton Tate.
  - Animats 3y ago
    > They spent a million dollars on their launch, which told all the VC's that software was going to be a big business. People didn't think like that back then. They wanted profits. The idea that a company's value can be measured by their burn rate is 21st century. Sevin Rosen Funds, out of Dallas, is forgotten now, but they funded Lotus and some very early software startups.
1-6 3y ago
It has to occur at the same time. A pure software play isn't the best either because there's always... well, FOSS.

Animats 3y ago

Yes. There was a time in the early 1980s when a software-only company seemed unlikely to become big. Two examples I was close to: Interleaf. Interleaf was the first good commercial document processor.[1] Released in 1981. Ran on Sun workstations, quite well. Years ahead of Microsoft Word. The business model was that they would sell you four workstations, a server, and a laser printer for about $60,000. In my days at the aerospace company, we managed, with great difficulty, to get Interleaf to sell us the software alone, since we already had Sun workstations, a laser printer, and a phototypesetter. (Aerospace generates a lot of documents with diagrams.) As a software-only company, they could not have obtained funding, or, probably, generated enough revenue to operate. AutoCAD. The story of AutoCAD is well documented in The Autodesk File.[2] Autodesk was founded in 1982. A software-only company was not fundable back then. Autodesk started off with about $62,000 put in by the founders. (Market cap today, $47 billion.) The term sheets for some VC deals that didn't happen are in there.[3] "The overall flavour of the deal seemed to us totally inappropriate for a company which was, at the time of these negotiations, generating sales equal to the size of the deal every month and generating after-tax profits close to the size of the deal every quarter." Autodesk couldn't get funded on reasonable terms even after becoming wildly profitable. It was an interesting time. There was so much that obviously needed doing and hadn't been done well yet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interleaf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interleaf [2] https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/ https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/ [3] https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/chapter2_32.html https://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/chapter2_32.html

AlbertCory 3y ago
Wrong. Lotus 1-2-3 was launched at the beginning of 1983. They spent a million dollars on their launch, which told all the VC's that software was going to be a big business. Ashton-Tate was large. Software Publishing (PFS: File) was large. Word Perfect was large.
- 29athrowaway 3y ago
  Dbase
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    That's Ashton Tate.
- Animats 3y ago
  > They spent a million dollars on their launch, which told all the VC's that software was going to be a big business. People didn't think like that back then. They wanted profits. The idea that a company's value can be measured by their burn rate is 21st century. Sevin Rosen Funds, out of Dallas, is forgotten now, but they funded Lotus and some very early software startups.

1-6 3y ago

It has to occur at the same time. A pure software play isn't the best either because there's always... well, FOSS.