IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

David, I think you're missing my point, which is: IBM has done EXACTLY what Microsoft did. Yet nobody took them to court, nobody complains, and the vast majority of AS/400 users, as evidenced by the responses of this board, simply deny that IBM is guilty of the same thing as Microsoft. Why? I'm not sure. Certainly, in it's heyday the IBM midrange had huge market share. And, some might argue, that IBM pushed its competitors out of business. Yet the anti-Microsoft crowd is so filled with rage toward MS that they simply fail to see the obvious. I know the iSeries is a wonderful machine, but imagine, just imagine, how much BETTER it would have been had IBM needed to compete in the OS world. We'd have a CL that was worth something. We'd have a web development environment that didn't require 2 years of dedicated training in which to be productive. We would have a free format RPG in 1990. We would have seen marketing like IBM was serious about the product. Unfortunately, what we have now is a result of lack of competition on the platform. Lackisadasical marketing and forced WebSphere. And, eventually I believe, an end of the product line as we know it. What a shame. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer. "David Abramowitz" wrote in message news:6b2024c5.32@WebX.WawyahGHajS... > Chuck Ackerman wrote: A PC without an OS is a lump of metal and plastic. IBM chose to include their engine in the AS/400 > > While IBM chooses to include the OS, it is not the choice of PC makers. This is according to several court decisions. > > Recent memory recalls many DOS versions for the PC, and even a few GUIs. If I state that there was coersion and abuse coming from Redmond, it is not my opinion, but rather that of several courts, state governments, and even the governments of several foreign countries. > > At this point there is not much left. A manufacture who chooses an OS other than Windows may be left out in the cold. > > Dave

[David Abramowitz]

IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

Chuck Ackerman wrote: A PC without an OS is a lump of metal and plastic. IBM chose to include their engine in the AS/400 While IBM chooses to include the OS, it is not the choice of PC makers. This is according to several court decisions. Recent memory recalls many DOS versions for the PC, and even a few GUIs. If I state that there was coersion and abuse coming from Redmond, it is not my opinion, but rather that of several courts, state governments, and even the governments of several foreign countries. At this point there is not much left. A manufacture who chooses an OS other than Windows may be left out in the cold. Dave

IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

Bill said: "The 400 bundle is like comparing why you can't purchase a Dodge engine in > your Ford van. The Microsoft bundling is like purchasing your Dodge van > but you are required to purchase the leather package and DVD player." I'm not buying it. Your answer is the same I've heard for more than a decade and it doesn't work now like it didn't work last century. The OS is the engine of a computer. Without an engine the van won't run. Simply because the PC company purchases the engine from another vendor instead of making it itself doesn't change my analogy. It's still the engine. A PC without an OS is a lump of metal and plastic. IBM chose to include their engine in the AS/400, which is exactly what the PC makers do also. Would you buy an AS/400 without an OS? Bill also said: "Interesting interpretion. Since they no longer advertise the ability to > purchase a Microsoft operating system at a substantial discount when a hard > drive is also purchased, do you think there was a backlash because there > wasn't a PC attached? Also, a quick look at Outpost.com shows that the > systems are still available -- at $279." However, last Friday's Fry's ad had a $299 PC with Windows XP thrown in. Which would you buy, the $299 with XP or $279 with Linux? (BTW, the XP machine also had 256mb, 40 gig, NIC, modem, display adapter, KB and mouse. Not a bad price.) chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

Chuck Ackerman wrote: > Robert Dean said: "2) Forced OEMs that wanted to bundle Windows to > bundle Office." > > Of course, until recently, those wishing to purchase an AS/400 or > iSeries was forced to purchase OS/400. A forced bundle that you must > have. But the anti-Microsoft crowd doesn't see that in the same light > as a PC with Windows. The 400 bundle is like comparing why you can't purchase a Dodge engine in your Ford van. The Microsoft bundling is like purchasing your Dodge van but you are required to purchase the leather package and DVD player. > I started to see cheap PCs, under $200, at Fry's in the early fall > and they didn't include anything but FREE software. Linux, > OpenOffice, etc. That stopped about 2 months ago so I can only > presume that they got a ton of backlash from customers that got the > machine home, found out it didn't come with Windows and a Microsoft > package (Office or Works) and promptly returned them. Interesting interpretion. Since they no longer advertise the ability to purchase a Microsoft operating system at a substantial discount when a hard drive is also purchased, do you think there was a backlash because there wasn't a PC attached? Also, a quick look at Outpost.com shows that the systems are still available -- at $279. Bill

[Terry Winchester]

IBM vs. Microsoft in the Midrange

I think it would be the Green Screen of Death (GSOD) ;-)

[frankgw@adelphia.net]

or should I say i5 fans? Check out the December 13, 2004 issue of InfoWorld - http://archive.infoworld.com/reports/50SRpower5.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/...OPcurve_1.html The front cover page even features the POWER5 chip!