Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
IBM Hardware

IBM Did Not Invent the Personal Computer 293

theodp writes "As IBM gives itself a self-congratulatory pat on the back as it celebrates its 100th anniversary, Robert X. Cringely wants to set the record straight: 'IBM didn't invent the personal computer', writes Cringely, 'but they don't know that.' Claiming to have done so, he adds, soils the legacy of Ed Roberts and pisses off all real geeks in the process. Throwing Big Blue a bone, Cringely is willing to give IBM credit for 'having helped automate the Third Reich'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IBM Did Not Invent the Personal Computer

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17, 2011 @07:19PM (#36481150)

    I know that not every comparison involving the Nazis is invalid, but does this strike anyone else as being more than a bit reductio ad Hitlerum?

  • by CharlyFoxtrot ( 1607527 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @07:29PM (#36481250)

    Yes, a bit hypocritical to just lay the blame at IBM's feet too. The US has a long history of doing business with criminal regimes from banana republics, to the nazi's, to apartheid South Africa, to regimes like Saudi Arabia today.

  • by tygr6x ( 2279008 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @08:22PM (#36481724)
    Just like Columbus did not actually discover America, IBM did not invent the personal computer. However, just like Columbus for all intents and purposes put America on the map, IBM did deliver the PC to the world in a way that no other did (or could) at the time.
  • by sunderland56 ( 621843 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @08:29PM (#36481768)
    Nobody "invented" the personal computer. Taking an existing product and making it cheaper/faster/smaller/cooler is not "inventing" anything, it is merely developing a better product.

    Apple did not "invent" the smartphone, Toyota did not "invent" the hybrid, and Tivo did not "invent" recording video on hard disks either.
  • by mother_reincarnated ( 1099781 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @09:07PM (#36482026)

    Actually lets totally forget that, m'kay? Sometimes there is no need for shades of grey.

  • Re:Yes, they did (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @09:18PM (#36482082)

    The Apple II was plastic, toylike and very expensive for what you got. (You might as well have bought a TRS-80 and saved yourself a good chunk of change.)

    The IBM PC was also expensive, but had top quality hardware similar to their mainframe terminals, including: a substantial steel chassis and case, a crisp monochrome monitor that you could actually work with all day without going blind, and one of the best keyboards ever made. It was a serious personal computer that PHBs felt comfortable buying for their businesses.

    So the definition depends on your perspective. If based on technicalities, the Apple II, the Altair 8800, the Atari 2600, the Commodore PET, etc. were all "personal computers" because they had microprocessors. If based on what was understood to be a computer in the business word, the IBM PC was one of the first business computers that was small enough and inexpensive enough so that most were bought to be used by one person.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17, 2011 @09:25PM (#36482124)

    "Once the BIOS was opened up"

    Well, yeah. Thanks to Phoenix, the IBM PC compatible market opened up, and all the technical superior microcomputers (lacking clones) were doomed. (I'm aware of the other clones before Phoenix, when each manufacturer did their own reverse-engineering and built their own BIOS -- I assume you're referring to Phoenix's commercially available BIOS, and if not, I think you should be.)

    But does IBM deserve any credit for that? They fought tooth and nail against it. The main reason IBM's box happened to be cloned was their heavy-weight name, not anything they "invented".

  • by Jane Q. Public ( 1010737 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @11:46PM (#36482818)
    You missed the point.

    IBM supplied Germany with machines and intelligence during the war, with full knowledge of Thomas Watson himself. Which at the time, if he were caught, would probably have gotten him charges of treason and aiding and abetting the enemy, at the very least.

    There is strong physical evidence, including memos, invoices, and receipts, indicating that IBM (and I mean the US offices, not just some German branch) actively, during the war, supplied the Nazis with machines that were used to keep track of prisoners at concentration camps, and instruction on how to use them.
  • by NoOneInParticular ( 221808 ) on Saturday June 18, 2011 @08:01AM (#36484454)
    All IBM has to do to corroborate your hypothesis is to open up their archives, and show through written communication that the international leadership was indeed side-stepped by the SA goons. IBM hasn't opened up these archives, unlike most other companies involved with the Nazis, therefore I highly doubt that the head-honchos in New York at the time were innocent.
  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday June 18, 2011 @10:19AM (#36485036)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

Kleeneness is next to Godelness.

Working...