In 1981...

In 1981, IBM released the IBM model 5150 or the "Personal Computer" with the sole-intent from day 1 to create an open standard, embrace third party software, use only off-the-shelf components, and to be fully serviceable by third party repair shops. Going as far as to including fully commented source code for the BIOS in the technical manuals just to aid in peripheral development. Even going as far as to using an inferior Intel 8088 over their own IBM 801 RISC because the Intel was more familiar with more developers (the Intel 8086 was superior to the IBM 801 but was more expensive than the 8088). John Dvorak of InfoWorld by 1982 was already calling it a de-facto standard. By 1983 sales had surpasses the Apple II, by 1984 IBM PC revenue was greater than Apple, Commodore, and HP combined with Forbes estimating 56% of American companies relying on the IBM PC. By the turn of the decade hundreds of IBM PC compatible computer models were on the market

Lads, today we are ever reaching a difficult crossroad in computing. There are still a couple billion PCs out there, but with Smartphones quickly eating the market and the reputation of Intel/AMD hanging by a thread, I fear for the future. It seems as though everyone wants to openly kill open computing standards, Google, Apple, and fuck even Intel themselves have been trying to kill it by slowly over the last couple of decades turning the standard into a more Intel-controlled standard using their own specifications. I don't want to see the PC die lads. I want more companies supporting it like the good old days.

Attached: 503f01703102ff913f52d2489252b1bbd4f0fd22acfe966b45cc8a7132dea744.jpg (480x358, 26.29K)

Other urls found in this thread:

forwardthinking.pcmag.com/chips/286228-why-the-ibm-pc-used-an-intel-8088
ibm.com/diversity
blog.ibm.jobs/2017/07/18/legendary-pride-ibms-lgbt-rainbow-logo/
mailchi.mp/workplacepride/most-lgbt-friendly-organizations-in-the-world-announced?e=66fd35326b
ibm.com/blogs/policy/gherson-texas/
ibm.com/blogs/policy/tag/daca/
youtube.com/watch?v=BhTNR6XZJd0
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

If IBM hadn't used x86 they may have still captured the market if they were to sell and the 801 to 3rd parties.

x86 is pozzed beyond repair unless you're a fab owner that wants to add new instructions to what would essentially be a modern 486 clone. Our best hope now is OpenPOWER.

*sell and license

I just wish Commodore or Atari had made their own open computing standards in response.

Attached: sad guts.PNG (734x752, 494.69K)

What's the point? All the important stuff like peripheral interfaces are still open standards, changing architectures isn't that hard when you can retain compatibility with existing hardware designed for wintel shit. Linux and BSD will run on anything.

industry should have been more based on what Amiga was doing

I'm not so sure about that. IBM used off-the-shelf components to get it done quickly and cheaply, but the BIOS was still proprietary. If that was the goal, it would be open from the start. Fully compatible PC-clones only happened because others managed to clean-room, reverse-engineer the BIOS - and sneaky Microsoft had added a contract clause to keep selling DOS to others.

The only intentionally open computer platform that I know was the MSX.

This world doesn't deserve IBM, have they ever let us down? They even helped Hitler

Still

If somebody ports them. The only reason linux exists on SoCs, is because their producers have no stake in software and Apple/MS are not interested in that part of embedded systems market. If PC market goes their way of 'mostly' compatible - nothing but botnet of the day will be functional - even without any ((trusted platform)) and ((security)) measures.

Attached: 14095953561130.jpg (600x400, 27.37K)

IBM had the source code listing to their BIOS in the original manuals for the 5150 just to aid in peripheral development. You're right, it was still proprietary (technically open software but not free software) but they were just asking for someone to clean room reverse engineer it and start making their own clones. IBM realized their marketing and outstanding reputation in the industry was enough to keep their own hardware alive and judging by sales they were right. It was not until the late 80s to early 90s that clones began overtaking IBM and by that time IBM had basically gotten their moneys worth and began work on POWER

Yeah, pretty sure OP's trollan with that hilariously revisionist account. IBM ferociously defended their monopoly on the PC platform in court from day 1 of cloners, tried their best after losing the Compaq "clean room" case to kill the clone market with PS/2, and after the OS/2 fiasco, gradually spiraled downhill throughout the remainder of the 90s/00s before spinning off the whole PC business to Lenovo.

Also, the initial leading candidate for the PC's CPU wasn't IBM's 801, but the M68k.

The PC turning out the way it did was obviously an accident of history at nearly every turn.

that's completely wrong. IBM never considered the m86k

Apple sent a couple engineers to buy an original IBM PC, they said it was trash, IBM squashed Apple at their own game, and Steve hackJobs admitted he was retarded closing the Apples ecosystem

The PC becoming a success may have been an "accident" but Apple being complete failures at everything but smartphones sure as fuck wasn't.

Attached: 1393283910843.jpg (429x410, 45.78K)

The funny thing is that Commodore and Atari probably would have done exactly that had Motorola not killed off the M86k in favor of working with IBM on POWER. Intel actually had the sense to continue supporting their CISC line while developing novel RISC (The Intel iAPX 432) designs throughout the 80s and eventually incorporating their experience in developing RISC processors back into their CISC lineup. It was certainly a much better approach than what Motorola would do and just kill off their older CISC designs because they were high off of getting to work with IBM on an architecture that would amount to a niche market segment at best

Attached: shoulder_shrug.jpg (4288x2848, 3.78M)

m68k still lives in embedded systems, they just stopped new designs.

The annointed successor was Motorola's 88k RISC, which everyone from Apple/Atari/Commodore/etc to Sun/SGI/HP/etc were lined up behind. PPC only happened because Scully was a retarded weasel that wanted to sell Apple off to IBM, so he used Apple's pull to scuttle the Motorola team and cut a deal with IBM on promises to management of assured market dominance.

The resulting delay between killing 88k and getting PPC off the ground splintered the non-x86 platforms once largely united behind Motorola into a quagmire of competing RISCs right when Intel was at their weakest.


forwardthinking.pcmag.com/chips/286228-why-the-ibm-pc-used-an-intel-8088

That has nothing to do with the 88k being late to the market. Motorola fucked over everyone. I would've sold Apple off to IBM too if I was Scully

IBM learned the hard way being noble gets you shot in the back for the heck of it.

actually it did but it did not want to use the mc68000 since it used a 16-bit data bus that would have been too expensive and the mc68008 was too new and not available in sufficient quantities, in addition to that IBM already had experience in programming x86 CPUs from previous Projects.

bump

It's too late. The computing model based on independent personal computers controlled by their individual users has ran its course. In the present day the internet infrastructure is ubiquitous, stable and performant enough to force a return to the "central mainframe and dumb terminals" model, only on a global scale. At this point we're beyond the Schwarzschild radius of the botnet singularity, no matter which direction we move we will inevitably get closer to total botnet.

bump

Open Standard Mac when

If the rumors are true, then never, as Apple may be moving to their own chip design. God fucking help us all if they do

And yet people are making retro style computers from common old parts (like Z80 and 680x0) and FPGA boards. You can even buy them right now! So just think about how many more such computers there will be if you stupid scenario existed. The botnet shit only works so long as you let it.

Attached: demoralized.jpg (288x325, 26.72K)

ibm.com/diversity
blog.ibm.jobs/2017/07/18/legendary-pride-ibms-lgbt-rainbow-logo/
mailchi.mp/workplacepride/most-lgbt-friendly-organizations-in-the-world-announced?e=66fd35326b
ibm.com/blogs/policy/gherson-texas/
ibm.com/blogs/policy/tag/daca/

No, they thought of PCs as slightly-more-than-dumb terminals for big iron mainframes. They were not considered a standalone product, but an accessory to the actual cash cow product. IBM never expected people to fulfill their entire computing needs on the PC. When that started to happen, IBM got litigious as stated.

Several in Commodore actually tried-- however the truth about the company was that it was controlled by Scabs there to make a quick buck, who fucked the working-management over just out of spite.

youtube.com/watch?v=BhTNR6XZJd0

So... Amateur Radio is a usable alterative to the Internet, your saying?

Hmmm.... I was always aspiring to get hired at IBM post graduation, but now I'm having second thoughts like never before. I don't want to join some fag circus.