Computer historians through the 1980s traditionally
identified a series of generations of computers, based largely on
the hardware technology that was used to build the electronic circuitry
(vacuum tube, transistor, integrated circuit, and VLSI microchips). The
difficulty from the perspective of the late 1990s is that this approach
progresses from the first to the fourth generation during the span from
1951 to 1969, yet leaves us in the fourth generation for almost 30 years!
An additional decade of hindsight, however, allows
us to place these significant technological breakthroughs in a better balance
with entire evolutionary history of the computer. Hardware research, development,
and innovation has continued at breakneck speed without pause, but the
unforeseen directions in which this has led us play an equally important
role in the unfolding drama of computing.
For example, the ubiquitous position of the computer
in our culture was at best the speculation of science fiction authors,
not taken seriously by most people even as recently as the early 1980s.
Developments such as graphical user interfaces (GUIs), relational databases,
multimedia, and the world-wide-web depend ultimately on hardware technology,
but have usually taken us far beyond the obvious and immediate implications
of the raw machinery.
How has the personal computer emerged as a household
appliance for productivity, entertainment, and communication rivalling
the telephone and television in importance? Who is responsible for creating
a machine that is affordable, useful, practical, resourceful, and easy
to use? What trends can we observe in the recent history of the personal
computer that will give us clues to the ways in which technology will continue
to change our lives in the next few years?
The 1970s
With the invention of the
microprocessor by Intel in 1969-70 and the advent of disk operating systems
(DOSs), a decade of trial and error began. Just as in the quarter century prior
to the Model T Ford, when automobiles were the playthings of inventors, hobbyists,
and the affluent, computers had not entered into the mainstream of culture and
commerce.
While most people have not heard of many of the personal computers developed
during this time (e.g.,
Altair 8800,
IBM 5100,
Alto Office System, are the most notable early models),
some companies did produce commercially successful PCs (Apple - the Apple II,
Atari, Tandy - the
TRS-80, and
Commodore,
for example). Many of the software technologies we now take for granted can also be
traced back to the 70s: graphical user interfaces, object-oriented concepts,
relational databases, spreadsheets, multimedia, the internet, and many others.
In fact, most of these were pioneered within the context of personal computing.
One of the success stories of the 70s was the
Apple II computer.
Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak founded
Apple Computer on April 1st,
1976. In April of 1977, at the First West Coast Computer Fair, they released the
Apple ][, the successor to the original Apple computer. Sales took off, launching
Apple Computer as a commercial success. In 1979, Steve Jobs visited Xerox-PARC in
an agreement stemming from acquisition of Apple stock by Xerox. There he saw first
hand the work that they had been doing on developing the
Alto Computer and related technology.
At about the time that the Apple ][ computer became a major success and Steve Jobs
was visiting Xerox-PARC, developing the seeds of the idea for the Macintosh computer,
IBM developed a renewed interest in developing a personal computer. At the time,
Intel's 8086 was the only viable choice for a 16-bit microprocessor, despite its
huge deficiencies. Not wanting to wait for better alternatives, and aware of
Microsoft's early
software development for the 8086, IBM decided to go ahead with
plans for what was to become the 1981 release of the IBM-PC.
The PC Arms Race
When Steve Jobs returned from his visit to Xerox-PARC in 1979 he knew that the whole
future of personal computing had changed. He started work on the Macintosh, which was
based on the newer (and better engineered than Intel's 8086) Motorola 68000 microprocessor.
It was released in January, 1984, with much
fanfare.
IBM, however, had had three years head
start in developing a marketplace for their PC. Additionally, IBM had created an open
system by licensing their technology to other manufacturers, while Apple retained the
proprietary and exclusive status of Macintosh manufacturer.
Each of these platforms developed a loyal following throughout the 1980s, as new models
and upgrades were released in steady progression. Intel followed the 8086 with a
series of upwards
compatible microprocessors: the 80286 (1982), the 80386 (1985), the 80486 (1989),
the Pentium (1993), the Pentium Pro (1995), and the Pentium II (1997).
Motorola likewise
released the 68020 (1984), the 68030 (1987), the 68040 (1990), the
PowerPC
601 (1993), and the PowerPC 620 (1995).
The trend in these CPUs in the 80s was for each chip in a series to be faster, contain
more transistors, and to include more machine language instructions than its predecessor.
The addition of new machine language instructions involved designing circuitry that
would be hardwired into the CPU's Arithmetic/Logic Unit (ALU). The computers built
during this time were said to have a CISC architecture. CISC is an acronym that stands
for Complex Instruction
Set Computer, a reference
to this trend (instruction set is another term for machine language).
By the late 80's chip designers had realized that this trend could not continue forever.
There was a limit to how much complexity could be crammed into a CPU. Additionally, it
was observed that many of the more complex instructions in the newer models were hardly
ever being used. By way of analogy, how often do you use the + key on your calculator
as opposed to the yx key? Which function is simpler? In fact, CISC machines
typically obey an 80/20 rule. 80% of the time 20% of the available instructions
are used. The other 80% of the instructions are only used the remaining 20% of the
time. And as might be expected, it is the simplest instructions that are being used
most of the time. In other words, all that complexity is wasted.
To address this issue, an alternative CPU architecture was proposed called RISC
(Reduced Instruction
Set Computer). RISC machines
have a much smaller machine language, consisting of the core instructions that are
utilized regularly. The more complex tasks that on a CISC machine would have been
hard-wired into the circuitry of the CPU are now performed in software, by algorithms
in the form of program code. RISC machines tend to be more efficient, easier to
engineer (and thus often better engineered), and capable of being more versatile.
So after the 1990 release of the 68040, Motorola and Apple decided to abandon the CISC
architecture and develop a RISC chip for the next generation of computing: the PowerPC
(actually IBM was in on it too, but more about that later). Intel also intended to migrate
to a RISC design, but elected to make the transition more gradually. The Pentium chip was
a hybrid design, meant to provide an upgrade path to a RISC chip sometime in the future.
In this respect the Macintosh was once again leading technology.
The Computer Industry
According to Terry Keene, an international computer industry consultant, IBM's release
of their IBM-PC in 1981 marked the birth of the computer industry. While on the surface
this may seem to be a strange claim, given that the first computers were built in the
1940's, it's truth has to do with the word industry. As he explains it, there are four
prerequisites that must be established in order to build an industry:
Demand
Standards
An Open System
A Commodity Market
Let's try to understand this better by way of analogy. As a generalization, prior to the
Model T Ford there were a number of automobile manufacturers, each using a wide variety
of technologies, each building cars to different specification, and each selling relatively
few cars at high prices. What did Ford do to revolutionize the automobile marketplace?
You might remember that it had something to do with the assembly line. More specifically,
he took the existing idea turned it on its head. He realized that rather than having the
people move from car to car repeating the same task at each station, it would be more
efficient and less costly to have the cars move and the people remain in one place.
This simple idea allowed him to suddenly make cars at a fraction of the cost for
other car companies. He also simplified operations by not providing any options on
the Model T (you could have a Model T in any color you wanted as long as that color
was black).
By streamlining operations, Ford was able to make one of the first affordable
automobiles. This created the demand that was necessary for his product to be
made in high volume. High volume lowers the manufacturing cost. Both of these factors
together allow the manufacturer to sell at a low profit margin. All of these create a
commodity market. So what was the impact of the Model T? Ford quickly began to
outsell other car companies and in a short amount of time threatened to monopolize the
market and put the competition out of business.
Remember that up until this time cars were built according to different technologies
and specifications. Several of the competing car companies decided to band together,
adopt standards for automobile manufacture (in many cases simply following
Ford's specifications), and hope that by making cars that were built from common
interchangeable components that they would be able to survive. This consortium,
known as General Motors, succeeded in breaking the monopoly Ford threatened to
establish and became one of what we know of today as the "big three." By establishing
technology standards that were accessible to all manufacturers, an open system
was created in which any company had the ability to make a compatible product.
So we can see that demand for a product is dependent on affordability; standards
involve common specifications that allow products to be made out of off-the-shelf,
interchangeable components; an open system allows competing companies to manufacture
compatible products, opening the door for a free-market economy which can result in
low prices; and a commodity market exists when volume is high, manufacturing cost
is low, and the profit margin is low.
The advantage that IBM had over Apple and other small companies in 1981 was its size
and existing infrastructure. IBM's large sales force was able to step in and successfully
market the IBM-PC to their existing clients: business, government, and industry. The
real key to their success, however, was their desire to establish their computer as
a standard. They accomplished this by licensing their technology, the architecture
of the PC, to other manufacturers. These companies then began to release the "PC
clones." A free market (open system) was created, in which IBM had to compete with
the clone makers.
Open Systems
An open system is a market dynamic. It is established when a technology standard is
available to competing manufacturers, allowing them to build compatible products. An
open system allows free market forces to operate, and in the absence of other negative
forces will dominate the marketplace. Open systems are so powerful that inferior
technologies can win against a superior technology if the superior technology is
constrained within a closed system.
For example, consider the video-tape industry. In the early 80's two companies
invented video-tape formats for home consumers. Sony developed the BetaMax tape
and player/recorder, while JVC invented the VHS format. All experts agree that
BetaMax was superior in quality. Sony took the position that since they had invested
their resources in research and development of the BetaMax, that it was only fair for
them to be the exclusive manufacturer of the BetaMax player. They refused to license
the rights to build BetaMax boxes to other electronics companies. JVC, on the other hand,
was more than willing to let other companies build VHS VCRs. So what happened? With
dozens of VHS manufacturers, VHS machines occupied more shelf space in stores than
the Sony BetaMax. Competition between VHS manufacturers forced prices down, while
the BetaMax remained relatively expensive. Eventually, the inferior product had
dominated the market.
The irony of it all is that Sony was so convinced that its superior format would win
that they stubbornly refused to manufacture any VHS machines for years. They finally
realized how much money their stubbornness was costing them and recanted. In a
humorous admission they produced a batch of sweatshirts like the one pictured here:
Sony and VHS
We'll Never Say Never Again
Monopoly
Another example of this type of phenomenon is the battle between Apple computer and
IBM. The Macintosh was superior to the IBM-PC in almost every way. The CPU was better,
the operating system was better, the user interface was better, etc., etc., etc. Unlike
IBM, however, Apple took a similar position to that of Sony. Apple placed a high value
on research, development, and quality. They felt that these efforts alone would provide
a winning formula. So in refusing to license their technology to clone-makers, Apple
tacitly allowed the IBM-Intel-Microsoft PC to become the industry standard. By 1993,
the results were clear. The chart below represents the total number of computers of
each type being used world-wide.
While PC-compatibles accounted for over 85% of the market, Apple only represented a
little more than 8.5%. So who is the obvious winner? You might be tempted to say IBM.
What you don't know yet is that of the 150 million PCs in use only 15% (a little more
than 22 million, or 13% of the total market) were actually made and sold bt IBM. The
rest were clones. So now who won? Well, what are the two things common to almost
everyone of those 150 million computers? The CPU was made by Intel and the operating
system by Microsoft!
IBM lost control of the situation and inadvertently allowed WIntel (a term referring to
computers with Intel processors and a Windows operating system) to become a virtual
monopoly. Part of the reason for this may be that although IBM created an open system
with respect to the hardware technology, Microsoft's operating system has remained a
closed system. So we see that Apple's identification of IBM as the enemy, as Orwell's big
brother, was short-sighted: Microsoft has become the Ford of the computer industry.
Consortiums
We have seen how General Motors was formed in response to Ford's domination of the
market. By the late 80's, computer companies, most notably IBM, were wondering if a
similar consortium of hardware and software manufacturers could succeed in toppling
Bill Gates' empire. Recognizing the potential of the RISC architecture for personal
computing, IBM began work on what they hoped would be the next generation of the
PC. They understood that if they could bring Apple on board as allies, that their
chances of success would be much higher. Unfortunately, Apple had a long history
of mistrust and animosity towards IBM: they weren't interested. However, IBM needed
a CPU manufacturer in the consortium and with Intel being heavily dependent on Microsoft
they presented their plans to Motorola. Not only was Motorola interested, but as the
manufacturere of the Macintosh CPU they were able to influence Apple into reconsidering
IBM's offer.
Thus was born the PowerPC consortium. The PowerPC was a fully RISC based machine. It was
also capable of running a variety of operating system platforms: MacOS, DOS/Windows, and
Unix. It's RISC architecture made it especially suited to running software compiled for
other CPUs in emulation mode. In 1993 Apple and IBM each came out with a PC based on the
PowerPC chip. Apple's was a next generation Macintosh running the MacOS, while IBM's was
released with Windows as the default OS. The goal of the consortium was to create an open
system not just with respect to the hardware, but also with respect to software; to provide
users access to the entire base of existing applications.
The PowerPC consortium was widely hailed as the last, best hope in the prevention of a
long-lasting Microsoft empire. In 1993 the industry was excited at the PowerPC's prospects.
The dream, however, was ill-fated. Apple Computer, a crucial player in ensuring the success
of the PowerPC, lost its focus on the goal, embroiled in internal political and power struggles.
With a high turnover amongst its executives, and a legacy of poor business management, Apple
dropped the ball. At the very same time that they should have been blitzing the media with
advertising, Microsoft announced the imminent release of a new state-of-the-art operating
system for WIntel machines: Windows 95. After eleven years of trying, Microsoft had produced
an operating system on a par with the MacOS. Three years later the PowerPC is a minor player
in the industry and Microsoft's position has been strengthened rather than weakened.
Browser Wars
The latest chapter in this story is still in progress. In April, 1994, when the world-wide-web
was still largely unheard of, Jim Clark and Marc Andreessen founded a company to provide web
server and browsing software to the general public.
Netscape Communications Corporation quickly
set the standard for web-browsing software with Netscape Navigator (click
here for a
brief history of the company). They made the browser available for download over the internet,
and in June, 1995, also released it for retail sales. By late 1995 when they announced version
2.0 of the browser, they had captured most of the browser market.
Up until this point in time Microsoft had ignored the
potential of the internet for personal computing. Netscape's success, however, motivated them
to enter the browser market, spending the last half of 1995 playing catch-up. With their vast
resources Microsoft was able to release version 2.0 of the Internet Explorer web browser by the
end of the year. In 1996 the
"browser wars" heated up with each company releasing version 3.0 in August. The products at
this point were strikingly similar
(largely due to their conformance with the standard web page language HTML 3.2). The main
difference was that the Microsoft browser was being given away free with every copy of the Windows
operating system that was sold. This effectively undercut Netscape's marketshare.
Netscape eventually responded to the threat of Internet Explorer by announcing that not only would
Netscape Navigator be a free product, but that its source code would be made available to the
public as well. This was a strategic move on Netscape's part, indicating an alliance with the
Open Source movement in the software industry (a phenomenon
that Microsoft is openly hostile to). Microsoft escalated the battle with their announcement that
version 4.0 of IE would be integrated into the Windows 98 operating system. At this point the U.S.
Justice Department became interested in the possible anti-trust implications of Microsoft's actions.
It remains to be seen how this will end. For a timeline of when web browsers have been released
click here.
