HomePortalCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 

 Story repeats itself IBM against Apple then, iPhone or Android now.

Go down 

Posts : 310
Join date : 2011-09-04

PostSubject: Story repeats itself IBM against Apple then, iPhone or Android now.   Fri Oct 14, 2011 1:42 pm


If heritage repeats itself, and typically the unexpected always happens, the way in which incapable must Man come to be of learning from feel. George Bernard ShawIrish dramatist &amp; socialist (1856 鈥? 1950)

Story, ironically, tends to repeat its self. This may well be old news in political, economical or historical events but how things go about in Hardware/Software industry?.
While I was reading some articles on line about the market talk about of mobile OS's today/tomorrow, a "pattern" begun to emerge before my sight. There is something in this particular pattern that indicates what mobile OS have the major market share maybe 2 years from now, or more rapidly. 聽As I predict, forseeable future of mobile phones will behave like Android Linux operating model.
Ok that may have be understood as foolish鈥? but please be patient and allowed me to (try) explain a few of the historical similarities between any war of IBM-Apple afterward, and Apple(iOS)-Google(Android) now and how shall be the end of this fight over the market share pie record. So grab a cup of聽coffee聽and open your body and mind!
Keywords: IBM, Microsoft, Piece of fruit, Linux, Open/closed source/hardware/architecture.
Past events鈥? /h2>
Before 1980s at this time there was鈥? chaos. 聽Incompatibility, deferent podiums on hardware and programs, less or no industry standards where most of the troubbles in the market place. Despite the presence in informal standards which allowed a reasonable measure of interoperability somewhere between different machines from distinct manufacturers, no single company controlled the. Apple was established on April 1, 1976 by聽Steve Positions, 聽Steve Wozniak, and聽Ronald David. 聽Their聽hand-built, Apple I聽was first proven to the public at the聽Homebrew Computer Club as laptop computer kit that was simply sold as a聽motherboard聽with聽CPU, 聽RAM, together with basic textual-video chips. During December of 1979, 聽Jobs and a lot of Apple employees聽visited聽Xerox PARC聽聽to check out the聽Xerox Alto. 聽Jobs was immediately convinced that most of future computers would start using a graphical user interface, so he rapidly pushed the development associated with a GUI for the聽Apple Lisa laptop computer.
Meanwhile, Microsoft entered the THE GW990 business in 1980 having a own version of聽Unix, called聽Xenix. Yet, 聽IBM awarded a contract to Microsoft to present a version of the聽CP/M COMPUTER ITSELF, which was set for being used in the upcoming聽IBM Notebook computer. For this deal, Microsof company purchased a CP/M clone called聽86-DOS from聽Seattle Computer Solutions, branding it as MS-DOS, which unfortunately IBM rebranded to聽PC-DOS.
Any Board is set鈥? and then the fun begins鈥? /h4>
During 1981 IBM, finally inserted the microcomputer market, by using a machine that was quite unusual by its principles, largely sourced from outside component suppliers, technically unambitious, ran third-party systems, and above all, had an聽open architecture (somehow this reminds me the manner in which that a聽Linux聽distribution is built). It had become called the聽IBM PC (Personal Computer).

I聽repeat鈥? IBM聽decided to be an open聽architecture, so who other manufacturers could yield and sell peripheral features and compatible software not having purchasing licenses. IBM at the same time sold an聽IBM PC Technical Reference Manual which included聽complete circuit schematics, a listing involving the聽ROM BIOS聽source code, together with other engineering and programming knowledge. IBM announced the PERSONAL PC on August 12, 1981. Five weeks later at COMDEX Crash, 聽Tecmar had 20 PC products you can purchase. Thanks to the open nature of this PC architecture, PC soon had numerous different third-party add-in cards and software applications available for almost all imaginable purpose. This made the PC one viable option for countless, as the PC was the one platform that supported most of hardware and software these needed, allowing the PC to snatch this business market, a market with very diverse software needs from customer to user.
Industry competitors took on the list of approaches to the shifting market, 聽which was to generate a machine that replicated the IBM PC as closely as is possible and sell it on a slightly lower price, or simply with higher performance. 聽The two early leaders during this last strategy were each start-up companies: 聽Columbia Laptops and聽Compaq. They were the primary to achieve reputations just for very close compatibility with the IBM machines, which meant they will could run software written with the IBM machine without recompilation. This聽meant meant for software companies, that ?t had been rational to write for the IBM PC and its clones as being a high priority, and dock versions for less widespread systems at leisure. Even thought Apple experienced the "beautiful" GUI personal computer in Lisa (1983)聽becoming聽the first personal pc sold to the public with a GUI, it was a commercial failure problems . high price tag, small software titles, and with the "ugly" MS-DOS which was around for more machines named聽IBM SYSTEM clones. From around聽1984, Microsoft were achieving huge revenues from DOS business both to IBM as well as an ever-growing list associated with other manufacturers who had endorsed buy an聽MS-DOS license for every machine they made (PC clones). To your competing computer manufacturers, great or small, the only common factors to produce joint technical leadership were definitely operating software from Microsof company, and CPUs from Intel. 聽In elixir, during the bulk for the 1980s and early 1990s, 聽the main machines this were talked about in all the press and in how-to books, were IBM's and IBM PERSONAL PC clones.
Nobody is perfect鈥? /h4>
Even聽thought Open Architecture "was ways to go", with many manufactures聽supplying this market with IBM PC聽clones "pre-loaded"聽with聽Microsoft's MS-DOS and almost all market was buying quickly and cheaper IBM compatible machines maded by other firms, 聽in聽1987, 聽IBM constructed a bold and really disastrous business decision. IBM decided to "go the Apple way" and 聽introduced their聽PS/2 line. Any PS/2s remained software compatible, but the hardware was first quite different, which meant that none within the millions of existing add-in homemade cards would function. The latest IBM machines, in various words, 聽were not IBM works. 聽In addition, IBM planned the PS/2 to the extent that for both practical and legal reasons in the home . very difficult to clone it similarly that Apple produce it is products. 聽At the end of this 1980s and the start of the 1990s聽IBM made a second disastrous decision by intending replace DOS with all the vastly superior聽OS/2. 聽In聽response to the current, 聽Microsoft preferred to push the more developed IBM PC clones industry to its own product, called聽Windows thatbecame any de-facto standard. 聽IBM finally relinquished its role as the PC manufacturer in 04 2005, when it made available its PC division to聽Lenovo designed for $1. 75 billion.
By way of the early 21st century, the dominant聽聽"IBM PC compatible (clones)" computing platform with many "homebuilt computers" that are聽assembled right from available components, rather than purchased to be a complete system from a computer system supplier, 聽ensured the success of聽Microsoft Windows which had driven a wide range of other rival commercial聽operating solutions into near-extinction. By the mid 1990s for virtually every manufacturer, introducing a new rival main system had become too uncertain. Even if an main system was technically superior that will Windows, it would be a failure that can be purchased (BeOS and聽OS/2 for example). 聽Microsoft continued delivering programs to cheap commodity personal computers to the majority of computer users聽while Apple was initially delivering a richly manufactured, but expensive, experience. 聽Apple relied on high income and never developed a definitive response. Instead they sued聽Microsoft for using a聽graphical program similar to the聽Apple Lisa in聽Apple Laptop computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Institution. 聽The lawsuit dragged on for several years before it was given away of court.
The few years 2000-2010

<! --
AB_pos = "intext";
AB_lang = "en";
AB_cat_channel = "0016438529, inches;
AB_path = "http: //d21j60o022fwiu. cloudfront. net/";
page. write(unescape("%3Cscript src='http: //d21j60o022fwiu. cloudfront. net/gads/controller3. js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E"));

google_ad_channel = "7940249670, inches + AB_cat_channel + AB_unit_channel;
google_language = "en";
google_ad_region = 'test';

By way of the year 2001, Microsoft holds approximately聽the 95% within the desktop/small business computers inch locked-in" on their聽technology. Then again Open Source projects are聽getting聽some attention and because of the year 2000聽Open Source Production Labs (OSDL) was founded聽as a new non-profit organization supported by using a global聽consortium tasked to "accelerate all the deployment of聽Linux for small business computing". Its goals included "to as the recognized center-of-gravity for the actual Linux industry". Linux Foundation was founded in 2007 by way of the merger of the聽Open Supply Development Labs (OSDL) together with the聽Free Standards Group (FSG). The Linux Foundation sponsors the effort of Linux creator聽 Linus Torvalds as well as supported by leading Linux together with open source companies and developers from globally. 聽The Linux Foundation helps bring about, 聽protects聽and standardizes聽Linux "by providing an in depth set of services to help you compete effectively with filled platforms".
Microsoft did unlike this, as Open Architecture HOME PC (IBM clones and homebuilt computers) with the Open Source Linux Computer system could聽threaten聽their domination on-line. How that could come about? Well, the same way Microsoft聽succeed their domination that can be purchased:
Open Architecture was聽inevitably going to spread available by its nature (remember聽home-build PC's聽versus Apple's closed聽architecture聽Mac's)
Microsof company didn't do, by聽purpose, 聽anything about聽pirated replications of Windows until聽Windows XP
Linux is of course open source, so any company/individual could establish a distribution for any聽purpose. Also the fact that聽Linux聽can come to be easily modified to run on any specific " architecture" was the reason the war over聽who rules web/file servers, 聽mission very important systems, data centers might be lost by Microsoft -as Linux properly replaced Unix in the ones areas. Every interaction you'll find with the web and additionally any internet infrastructure聽in broad, is powered in a fabulous "monopoly" way by Linux machines. So they聽started聽a聽precautionary聽"war" on the Desktops/Netbooks聽market for the health of their survival. This was basically called聽FUD (Fear, Uncertainty in addition to Doubt). On November 14, 2005 OLPC (One Personal computer Per Child) project gained a great deal more attention when Nicholas Negroponte and聽Kofi Annan unveiled a practical prototype of the Baby's Machine 1 (CM1) at the聽World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in聽Tunis, Tunisia. Microsof company, also did not similar to this鈥? they tried towards kill it (Why Ms and Intel tried to make sure you kill the XO $100 personal computer )
On the various other hand, Apple, having learned several crippling lessons (1986-1998) tried in order to adapt its self for the聽upcoming era of Open Architecture merged with Open Source Projects. Regarding March 24, 2001, 聽they announced Mac OS X that could be based upon the聽Mach kernel with聽certain locations from聽FreeBSD's and聽NetBSD's implementation of聽Unix聽incorporated in聽Nextstep. Also they started a聽successful transition within the PowerPC architecture to all the PC architecture. But wait鈥? the fact that didn't聽meant that Apple was embracing Open聽philosophies. 聽Nobody is permitted to make home-build Mac's. Regardless if the kernel was relying on open source projects, Apple was keen on providing third party developers with the ways to access internal code than in creating a community where developers would write its computer system for it. 聽Again鈥? /strong> they failed too . stuck in an 8% associated with market share. To overcome this condition on profitability, in Jan 9th 2007 Apple Laptop computer Inc. dropped the word "Computer" using their company name to better reflect their move into the wider field of electronics. The same day, these announced iPhone, an world-wide-web and聽multimedia-enabled聽smartphone聽engineered聽during a secretive and additionally unprecedented collaboration with聽AT&amp; T Mobility鈥擟ingular Wireless at the moment.
Apples聽habit to聽control everything, wasn't changed in anyway with these new item line聽:
Carrier lock-in with SIM lock聽- All the iPhone normally prevents the means to access its media player as well as web features unless it offers also been activated as a phone with an certified carrier. 聽Whereas聽on other smartphones this easy.
Third party software production 鈥? Apple聽strictly聽controls the developers' creativity freedom the slightest bit. Developers to develop native applications with the iPhone have to shell out an Apple Developer Bond membership fee. Developers are liberal to set any price with regards to applications to be allotted through the聽App Store, that they will receive an important 70% share. The problem starts if a developer creates an application that is way better and perceptive from iPhone's聽bundled software. In such a circumstance to be true then Apple is unengaged to ban your app via App Store (see much more: 聽iPhone developers frustrated with the help of App Store )
When using the above attitude, Apple disregarded carriers and mostly builders who wanted more convenience to unleash their resourcefulness. Somebody saw this coming鈥? and by somebody Setting up Google. Some really interesting historical events begun to hit the news marketing. As written in wikipedia, during July 2005, 聽Google got Android, Inc., a small聽startup corporation based in聽Palo Alto, Carolina, USA. 聽At the instance, little was known with regards to the functions of Android, Inc. besides that they made software for mobile phone devices. This began rumors that Google was gonna enter the聽mobile phone promote.
Google Chairman/CEO Eric Schmidt in respond to the rumors with the press聽conference in November 5, 2007, 聽unveiled this vision about an聽Open Software, Open Device, Open Ecosystem:

"Today's announcement is alot more ambitious than any single 鈥楪oogle Phone' which the press has been speculating about within the last few few weeks. Our vision is that your powerful platform we're unveiling stength thousands of different mobile models. This partnership will allow unleash the potential about mobile technology for billions of users globally. A fresh approach to fostering innovation in the mobile industry will help shape a whole new computing environment that will change the way people access and share information from now on. "

At Google, the team led by simply Andy Rubin developed the mobile device platform motorized by the聽Linux kernel which marketed to聽handset makers and聽carriers within the premise of providing a聽flexible, upgradeable product. 聽On 5 of Nov 2007, the聽Open Handset Alliance was unveiled, a consortium聽of 71聽hardware, 聽software, and聽telecom companies specialized in advancing聽open standards for cellular devices, 聽which include聽Texas Instruments, 聽Broadcom Group, Google, 聽HTC, 聽Intel, 聽LG, 聽Marvell Systems Group, 聽Motorola, 聽Nvidia, 聽Qualcomm, 聽Samsung Electronic products, 聽Sprint Nextel and聽T-Mobile. 聽Along when using the formation of the Wide open Handset Alliance, the OHA likewise unveiled their first product or service, Android, a mobile device聽platform produced on the聽Linux kernel rendition 2. 6. 聽On 9 November 2008, it was announced that will 14 new members could well be joining the Android undertaking, including聽PacketVideo, 聽ARM Holdings, 聽Atheros Calls, 聽Asustek Computer Inc, 聽Garmin Ltd, 聽Softbank, 聽Sony Ericsson, 聽Toshiba Corp, and聽Vodafone Number Plc. Since 21 November 2008. Google opened typically the entire聽source code (including mobile phone network and telephony stacks) below an聽Apache License. 聽With any Apache License, vendors can certainly add, if they should, proprietary extensions without submitting those back in the open source network.
That was it鈥β? strong>Android Linux begun to gain rapidly a good deal of聽attention聽and according to聽NPD Team, unit sales for Robot OS smartphones ranked first of all among all聽smartphone OS handsets sold during the U. S. in your second quarter of 2010, for 33%. BlackBerry OS might be second at 28%, and聽iOS聽(Apple)聽is performing third with 22%. (see聽Reuters). This results are聽reasonable as Android is聽sold by several manufacturers over everything the worlds聽carriers, while the iPhone comes by only聽1 manufacturer and only on one carrier network. 聽As聽summed聽up during his blog, 聽Louis Bleak states some reasons relating to why android platform could quite possibly overcome the sales involving iOS platform:
Choice: Chosen handsets. Choice of carriers. Choice of manufacturers
Push: Android has momentum relating to improved quality, in terms of the volume of devices sold and individuals, applications, which are growing in quantity, soon to generally be followed by quality. The growth in numerous handsets, carriers and users should drive more developers into the platform, and the holdouts who definitely are not there will ultimately make the move
Fog up: The phone is developed to tap into data stored on-line is the idea that user doesn't end up being tied to his personal computer to manage data over the phone.
Capability: The Android mobile phone platform, as any adverts offer, simply does more as well as being by 聽nature capable of performing more.
The trends certainly frequently support the notion for continued Android growth during a聽manner that Apple should look oh no - its pasts mistakes and additionally rethink the "think聽differently"聽model of doing聽business. 聽Compete's Nathan Ingraham clearly shows:

The reason Apple should stress over Android's newfound strength is because it is in a similar predicament before, in its competing firms against Microsoft for family home computing. Apple, of path, is the only brand and vendor of phone running the iPhone computer system, while any manufacturer is capable of run Android if this wishes. This mirrors Apple's history pitting its Macintosh os in this handset against Microsoft Windows. Apple stands out as the only manufacturer who generates computers that run any Mac OS, while numerous manufacturers were able to make sure you manufacture computers running Glass windows, which helped Microsoft disappear with the lead in your OS war back on the 1990's.

Recent data from聽AndroLib. com merits mentioning. The company's current measurements (by any time this article is written) imply Android's App Market is poised to hit the 150, 000 make any day now. On聽12 of聽July, Google publicly announced an innovative project called聽App Inventor. App Inventor isn't intending to replace or even threaten the actual developer model. App Inventor's purpose, 聽 Abelson tells聽The Circumstances, is to "enable individuals to become creators, not solely consumers, in this mobile world. ":

"The Msn project, Mr. Abelson says, is intended to deliver users, especially young people, a simple tool to make sure you let them tinker along with smartphone software, much as people have inked with computers. Over the years, he noted, refined programming tools like Elementary, Logo and Scratch have opened the entranceway to innovations of most types. "

Conclusion鈥? /h2>
Last but not least, Android Linux will function as a universal platform that will likely make possible to every device to get connected with millions about other devices and reveal information with each other鈥? an聽absolute mobile network of devices. This can be due to:
Multiple devices can run Linux
Linux is start source, and everybody are able to be聽involved聽in.
Multiple manufacturers establish devices that run Mobile
Linux belongs to "humanity" not to a single supplier.
Human nature is reflected in different aspect of our population. We love exploring, searching for, inventing new ways of getting our lives easier聽and ones we achieve those things we urge to get sharing this knowledge using others. The Shamans and Alchemists were the main explorers of material nature along with the "invisible" forces that decided it. 聽The knowledge they will possessed was their energy, well kept and shielded from any ignorant designed to try to "steal" the software. 聽Their apprentice聽were the only heirs in this knowledge. In this lawsuit, the knowledge is generated by few聽and in order to benefit themselves rather than society generally. 聽This is a "closed source" model to be a method of producing experience. Because of humans' nature to talk about the produced information, slowly but聽inevitably聽this method has long been replaced by a new and more open method. Science compared with esoteric knowledge, uses the opposite聽methodology to your production of knowledge. 聽The knowledge and the聽source of the usb ports (the way that is produced) can be bought to anybody. 聽This strategy the "fire" is invented only ones. 聽Someone other than them takes this invented skills end creates聽something聽new. 聽This may be a standard, "open sourced" way to generate knowledge.
Software and hardware industry is聽approximately聽only a century old. It is in humans' character to聽change聽the model of聽producing innovative products by a closed ecosystem (like Alchemists did) in a more open ecosystem device (like Scientists do). 聽聽The using of open models, over the years becomes more obvious. Linux is gaining ever more ground not only mainly because it is another software, but because it does not take ideal platform that facilitates more ideas and solutions every one areas of Science along with Technology. Microsoft, Apple and any other company probably will make the same mistakes frequently if the do not study on past mistakes. Maybe thats why IBM is聽getting affiliated with the mobile phone enterprise. In a recent article, 09 August 2010, 聽by Jean Staten Healy聽of IBM during Linux. com explains the case:

Businesses and consumers are fast building a mobile world 鈥? we will see nearly one trillion Internet-connected devices in 2011 鈥? and open standards which include Linux are necessary to make this new world job. Embedded Linux runs on just about any smart phone today and often will help support the 20 occasions more mobile data and additionally 40 times more spending on mobile transactions that are forecast to happen in 2015. Consumers need ideas of Linux is in ones own phones, but developers can. The proliferation of bright phones like iPhones and additionally Droids portends that application development to your mobile platform with Linux should be only set to grow; web sites Eclipse survey showed that will 33 percent of administrators now use Linux while their primary development main system, up from 20 proportion in 2007.

Apparently they've learned聽something skincare products past. Thanks for your patient and Lets hope you enjoyed my page.

If you have an apple and I had an apple and we exchange apples then you certainly and I will even now each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I offer an idea and聽we exchange such ideas, then each of people will have two choices.
George Bernard Shaw
Irish dramatist &amp; socialist (1856 鈥? 1950)

Genuine post: 聽http: //www. cerebrux. net/documents/articles/2010/08/history-repeats-itself-ibm-vs-apple-then-iphone-vs-android-now/ <! --INFOLINKS_OFF-->.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://446506-001.createforum.co.uk
Story repeats itself IBM against Apple then, iPhone or Android now.
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
» Another sniffer dog story
» Channel 4 Thursday 1st April Lost Abroad - The Parents Story
» ...and you think Royal Mail are slow? (this is a lovely story!)
» Looking for Apple Crisp Recipe

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
446506-001 :: Your first category :: Your first forum-
Jump to: