Computer Market Phases (Was: Our fine educational system (was: Login on VMS))

From: Don Maslin <donm_at_cts.com>
Date: Wed Sep 27 18:20:32 2000

On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Clint Wolff (VAX collector) wrote:

>
>
>
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Jerome Fine wrote:
>
> >
> > I think that it would be helpful to have a discussion on the different
> > phases of the "computer" market with a view to identifying the
> > characteristics to be expected for the next phase. Based on
> > 40 years of seeing the market charge, I have a bit of perspective,
> > but I am probably so out of touch with the current market that
> > I don't have the needed insight to identify the next phase. So, how
> > about some comments?
> >
> > Phase I - Characterized by very high hardware costs for tube type
> > computers and a total lack of operating systems - up to about 1960?
> > Dominated by IBM
> >
>
> Not really computers IMHO (no flames please). These systems were
> wired up with patch cables to perform specific calculations, then
> rewired for the next. Although the patch cables can be considered
> a form of 'stored program', it's just not the same.

Hmmm! Seems like I remember something about punched card input to tube
type computers in that era. Wouldn't that qualify?

                                                 - don

> > Phase II - Characterized by the first introduction of transistors,
> > many more small companies along with the emergence of Snow
> > White (IBM) and the Seven Dwarfs (Burroughs, DEC, UNIVAC,
> > CDC, Wang, ?, ?). Some operating systems started to emerge -
> > up to about 1975 - Still dominated by IBM
> >
>
> Operating systems weren't available until memory became small
> and cheap enough to give up large portion to a resident I/O
> library which included functions that weren't needed by the
> currently operating program. Anyone have an example?
>
> > Phase III - Characterized by the start of LSI. Hardware costs were
> > still high and operating systems were mostly bundled. Volume was
> > still low in most cases - up to about 1985 - IBM was still the major
> > player, but no longer so dominant
> >
>
> MSDOS wasn't available separate from the hardware until much later.
> I remember running a copied version of DOS on a brand new '286 clone
> I built from parts purchased from Jameco. I searched high and low,
> and couldn't find MSDOS unbundled anywhere. This was about a year or
> so after the '286 was released (early '90s? I don't remember)
>
> > Phase IV - Here I start to become less able to see the market. I know
> > that M$ started to become important along with Intel. In addition,
> > the internet was just starting to become useful and wide spread although
> > nowhere near the 2000 situation. The marketing model was about to
> > shift from low volume/high mark-up to high volume/low mark-up as
> > MS-DOS started to penetrate and the PC stated to become a
> > commodity item. IBM become less important. Can someone else
> > help to define this Phase IV? - up to about 1993???????
> >
>
> Hmmm... I think you've blurred the lines a bit too much here. The PC
> market with MS software became mainstream in the mid to late 80's.
> IIRC, that is when PC's (and to a much lesser extent Macs) became
> standard equipment on people's desktops. The internet was being used
> by universities since the early 80's, and the basic tools were in place
> ftp,mail,archie,gopher,etc. (anybody remember veronica?)
>
> The WWW wasn't 'invented' until the mid-90s. My first exposure
> was NCSA-mosaic in '94, prior to the founding of Netscape by
> the students who wrote mosaic.
>
> > Phase V - The internet starts to become very important. Linux
> > becomes available. How do these two aspect interrelate? What
> > are the dominant features of Phase V? Will Phase V continue
> > for a few more years?
> >
> Linux 'is' because of the internet (but not vice-versa). Very few
> people could afford the costs to copy an operating systems onto
> floppies and nobody had a 9-track tape attached to their PC
> (well almost nobody, I hung around some odd characters).
>
> The wide availablility of the internet made it cheap and easy
> to download.
>
> Also, most people forget Linus T. only wrote the Linux kernel
> (copied portions from Minix IIRC). The remainder is the Free
> Software Foundation clones of the AT&T Unix tools (gcc, etc).
> Linux wouldn't exist without these tools also.
>
> > Phase VI - Here is the key aspect of why I am sending this email!!
> > Is it possible by looking at the past 50 years to identify the key
> > characteristics of Phase VI (which are probably already present)
> > which will take us up to 2010? Notice that I think that the number
> > of years in a given Phase seems to decrease. Is that correct?
> > If possible, the goal of this discussion would be to achieve some
> > sort of overall agreement on the different past phases (not really
> > too important) and some sort of forecast on what the next phase(s)
> > will consist of. If even the probable characteristics of the next
> > phase can be identified, that would seem to be a major achievement.
> >
>
> My stake in the ground:
>
> 1) Very few On-Demand services (music, video, etc). The current
> bandwidth has trouble supporting the limited number of users running
> 'conventional' music and video feeds (everyone gets the same feed).
> It will not be possible to supply everyone with their own selection
> of audio and video feeds. You might have noticed there aren't
> commercials (AT&T?) advertising movies on demand anymore.
>
> 2) Continued net congestion, with the creation of more private
> high speed networks. As network bandwidth increases, more users will
> jump on, reducing the available bandwidth to the current level of
> pain. This is self regulating. As the network gets slower, fewer
> people use it, speeding it up. Companies that can afford it will
> use private high-speed networks for internal communication. This
> is going to be a huge growth area, but will plateau relativly
> quickly since the number of companies that can afford such a service
> is small.
>
> 3) A continued move away from standalone PCs, toward the net-pliance
> system. Based on the failure of DivX, I don't think people will
> rent software, so the appliance needs to be programmable and upgradable,
> so a secure facility for selling software across the internet needs
> to be developed. Perhaps software manufactures should give away
> CD-ROMs with their latest wares in demo mode, and sell the keys to
> unlock varying levels of functionality.
>
> 4) A move back to the glass walled computer room. IT departments
> are beginning to realize the cost of upgrading everyone's desktop
> machines every few years. The current processor speeds are adequate
> to run MS Word, and normal users don't need to upgrade (although
> they want to). With the growth of high speed LANs, most companies
> have moved back to a central RAID disk storage system, and have
> started moving toward the 'compute farm'. Now each user has a local
> (low power) system that is used to read email and write memos.
> Computational problems are submitted to the racks of high power
> machines for crunching. It is a lot easier and cheaper to upgrade
> 20 machines in a rack than 200 machines in peoples offices.
>
> > I suspect that while this topic is probably OT, it is also a rather
> > interesting question and for most list members could be considered
> > vital for the future.
> >
> > Somehow, when I read the comment that Allison made, I started to
> > think about these aspects and I began to wonder just what might
> > be in store. Being stuck (by choice) in RT-11 and the PDP-11
> > does not provide a reasonable viewpoint, but I suspect that the
> > younger members of this list might benefit from a bit of hindsight
> > and the older members could be helped by the younger members
> > in being able to identify future trends. Does this make any sense?
> >
> I am fascinated with older machines are OSs because I can understand
> them. I doubt anyone understands EVERY function in MS Windows or
> the Intel Pentium processor. The older systems are much simpler
> in implementation, and more elegant in design.
>
> > Sincerely yours,
> >
> > Jerome Fine
> >
>
> I'm all for identifying future trends. It's the only way I'm going
> to get rich :) unless I win the lotto...
>
> clint
>
>
>
Received on Wed Sep 27 2000 - 18:20:32 BST