3 ms·
This is why I lament the fading of the 'PC era'. For me the PC embodies standards, compatibility and interoperability. Buy your PC from one company, and if thei
by SimonPStevens 13y ago
This is why I lament the fading of the 'PC era'. For me the PC embodies standards, compatibility and interoperability. Buy your PC from one company, and if their memory upgrade price was too high, buy your memory from another. (And your graphics card from another, and your hard drive from another...).
It's my hope that eventually similar standards will evolve for tablets (and laptops, and perhaps phones) that allow a consumer to easily modify or custom build a compatible device.
Unfortunately, I don't have high expectations that this will actually happen. The market just doesn't seem to be applying the right pressure to have any companies interested in doing such a thing.
(Out of interest, can anyone with more knowledge comment on how this standardization came about for PC's. I presume there was a time when computers from different companies weren't compatible. What brought about the "IBM compatible" machine, and why did IBM not sue the pants off every company releasing such a product?)
- LukeShu 13y agoThe reason the "IBM compatible" machine took of is because for the most part, the IBM PC was made using off-the shelf, generic components; the only proprietary part was the BIOS. Compaq invested a TON of R&D into reverse engineering the BIOS, writing a spec for it, then having another team, who had no idea how it worked, re-implement it. Because it was a totally independent implementation based on described behavior, there was nothing IBM could do; there was no copyright infringement. As for why everyone stayed compatible with each other... I have no idea.
- sliverstorm 13y agoAs for why everyone stayed compatible with each other Because markets have momentum. When a hundred thousand people have IBM compatible PCs, making your part IBM compatible opens the door to an already-established customer base. In simple terms, why does nearly every accessory interface via USB these days? Because just about everyone has a USB-compatible computer.
- MichaelGG 13y agoWeren't OSes a factor in that? Especially in the Windows era - having one common platform where everything must work killed any chance of someone trying to do their own thing. Or do you mean like OEMs creating complete computers that wouldn't take processors or expansion cards or peripherals from anyone but the OEM (via some sort of authorization system?)? From my memory of building back in those days, that'd have been a bad move. You'd get a rep for being incompatible and people would have less incentive to buy your system.
- thoughtsimple 13y agoEarly in the PC revolution there were several companies making "almost" compatible PCs. For example the DEC Rainbow was one of these. Even IBM tried to go it alone with their incompatible PS/2 and Microchannel bus. These companies tried to make sure that PC/DOS software would run but that they owned the hardware market exclusively. They all failed--they were all rejected by the customers. Shortly thereafter the market was inundated with white box PCs. This change reduced the margins on PCs to such an extent that it remade the PC market again. The rise of Dell was part of this process. The only way to beat the local white box supplier was to have superior supply chain logistics which is what Dell brought to the market. By this time, the requirement for compatible hardware was so ingrained there wasn't even a discussion if it was possible to go off on your own--unless your name was Apple.
- sliverstorm 13y agoPerhaps the most critical problem: user serviceability is pretty much directly at-odds with compactness, form factor, lightweight...