On Sat, 2004-09-25 at 15:12, Ken Elliott wrote:
> I don't understand your point. The statement was made that Microsoft
> invented "software-as-a-product", and I have to disagree with that.
> As far as the OEM thing, CP/M was sold to OEMs in 74. There was plenty of
> third party software for HP computers and calculators before that. In 1972,
> MCS sold OEM licenses to ComputerVision, Berber Scientific and McDonnell
> Douglas. But your statement could be considered accurate if by "large
> profit margins" you mean "large volumes of money".
No, I mean "large profit margins." Microsoft was really the first
company to really start its aggressive tactics on OEMs. I'm not
demonizing them, I'm just saying they were the first to do some of the
things they did. It was just smart business AFAIAC.
Of course, they did it with code they didn't develop themselves.
> But I will agree that Microsoft was the first successful _mass_marketer_ of
> pre-packaged software for other companies hardware. But some of that was
> being in the right place at the right time and not screwing it up.
Or just promising what they didn't have.
Just about all of Microsoft's OEM licensed products from 1975+ were
stolen source code. Basic was swiped from Digital. DOS was from
Seattle Computer Products, which itself was a code port of CP/M from
8080 to 8086 -- something IBM settled out of court with Kildal for
$800K.
Which made Gates' 1975 letter kinda hypocritical. It was fine to steal
code from others, as long as no one stole it back after Gates changed
it. That's like telling someone whom you've stolen their book text
from, modified it and sold it 100x over that they can't have it -- even
though it is a derived work (an illegal one at that).
> Gary Kildal messed up Digital Research's shot when IBM came to discuss
> licensing CP/M as the OS for the IBM PC.
I know. He said he didn't do 8086, only 8080.
> So I can't say MS "invented" the concept,
I didn't say they invented it. I said they were the first to pioneer
some of the techniques that resulted in massive profit margins.
> any more that putting wheels on a toaster would be considered inventing
> wheels.
Again, please re-read what I said.
> Sure, but I don't understand what that has to do with the point.
> I suspect this is one of those threads we should let die.
I was merely correcting the assumption of another.
Most people believe they invented that MS software as a product.
They only perfected the OEM channel 30 years ago.
And largely with code stolen from others for the majority of their
history.
Luckily for Gates, he got smart with Apple and IBM in the '80s on-ward.
Prior to then, most of what Microsoft did was illegal and was not
granted in a contract.
-- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@ieee.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Communities don't have rights. Only individuals in the community have rights. ... That idea of community rights is firmly rooted in the 'Communist Manifesto.'" -- Michael Badnarik----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:05:36 EDT