IBM® versus Microsoft®

Updated 2010-01-21

Well, IBM is gone from this arena but now there are several other players. Of note is Google with their oodles of money ;). Apple has taken some share, on the other hand Unix has never seemed to catch on unless you run web sites. I know technically Apple is Unix, etc... but it is not the same as the FREE Unix.  The players change but the game is the same.

Published 1997-09-25

I was around when IBM^® was the only good large system in town. At first, they were great. I supported no other vender. No one was as good as IBM^®. Support was excellent. Alas, all good things have to come to an end. Other vendors got better and cheaper than IBM^®. Then things got nasty. I remember IBM^® stating that if we put any other vendors hardware on the floor they would not support us. There were many, many times IBM^® flexed it’s muscle. After all, why should they support those little guys, they were the only vendor in your shop and early times saw many companies shy away from other vendors. IBM^® eventually lost.

Very early in 1995 IBM^® sold their hype to a company. Said that Windows95 was never going to work. Of course, NT was still a joke(but for some unknown reason people were switching to NT). They had information Microsoft^® couldn’t get Windows95 to multi-task. They said there were numerous stability problems. No Windows3.1 software would work. That’s only a few reasons why Windows95 was delayed. OS/2 was the way to go. Only OS/2 could do everything and do it now. Besides the company already had 1,500+ workstations from IBM^® that required OS/2 for an IBM^® application
previously acquired. Of course the company bought it, after all it is from your trusted vendor. Now the company is trying to figure out how to get out of the mess. IBM^® bet their PC operating system(OS/2) on JAVA, ignored the competition and lost.

With all above and their slowness to adapt, sorry, IBM^® has lost my confidence.

In my opinion IBM^® and Microsoft^® are where they should be in the PC market. Microsoft^® has clearly demonstrated they adjust to the clients, not the other way around. Microsoft^® is not perfect or even close, but compared to IBM^®, they are noticeably better. Microsoft^® PC products are more stable and robust than anything IBM^® offers. Microsoft^® understood Keep It Simple Stupid(KISS) does not mean your client is stupid(just the opposite). IBM^® built for technicians in tech-ease(complex technical junk) that few understand. Yes OS/2 can do things that Windows95 can’t, but so far not one of those things have been important to me. Things that Windows95 does that OS/2 does not(like run new programs) are very important to me! I have no doubt that Microsoft^® will flex it’s muscle at different times and make us all unhappy but someone is always going to be the leader. Eventually Microsoft^®

will get tagged with monopoly and have to split up anyway. For some reason(beyond me) that hasn’t happened yet. Personally I don’t care. I decide on best product, which in the case of numerous software is not Microsoft^®. Microsoft^® has one major drawback, if the top CEO’s died would they recover? On the other hand if these two settle their fight it could work out to both companies advantage, and screw the rest of us at the same time.