Mary Kay
> On Aug 14, 2023, at 6:43 PM, Wayne Bickerdike <wayn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > IBM never showed enough interest or vision in microcomputer futures. > > I quit IBM in 1979 to work with some former colleagues on microcomputer > software development. My IBM manager would have walked me if I had been > joining a competitor. This was the rule of the day. He said to me, "I don't > ever see IBM getting into that market, you can work out your notice period" > , (4 weeks). > > At that time, there was no IBM PC, IBM was DP or OP (Data processing or > Office products). I worked for OP in software implementation for internal > systems. DP always assumed the senior position when bidding for sales. We > had the Series/1, System 34/38, Photocopiers, Selectric etc. Not hard to > see why IBM had no futurist identifying the "personal computer". It was > monolithic thinking. That's the SNA mindset, one big hub with dumb > terminals. It worked well but missed a lot of potential for small business > and artisans. > > So we as a small business took on the challenge. We had CP/M, MP/M, Apple > Basic, NorthStar Horizon, Cromemco, early MicroFocus COBOL and 8080 > Assembler to master. Long nights reading Dr Dobbs journal for hints. It was > challenging and we found it hard to make money. There was no venture > capital, all the money was still in box shifting. One big customer saw our > Catering stock control system and said, "Is it 3270 compatible?". LOL. > > After a few years of trying, we went back to mainframe consulting and that > served me well for another forty years. > > Somebody once said, "It's the vision thing". That and luck and timing. > >> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 5:15 AM Grant Taylor < >> 0000023065957af1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: >> >>> On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote: >>> I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree. I agree >>> that IBM didn't think the PC software was worth developing. And if >>> they had held onto MS-DOS and approached its development in the same >>> way that Microsoft did, sure, they'd probably be worth bazillions. >> >> My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to >> start with. >> >> DOS was /Microsoft's/. >> >> Or are you suggesting that IBM should have purchased exclusive rights to >> use / distribute / etc DOS from Microsoft? >> >> >> >> Grant. . . . >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> > > > -- > Wayne V. Bickerdike > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
