A Different Computer Industry TL..
- Thread starter danielb1
- Start date
Had an idea for another mini-mini-POD within this timeline:
What if Hironobu Sakaguchi's Final Fantasy really was a FINAL fantasy?
I'm also hoping that Sega manages to survive in the console market for this timeline. Perhaps not too many mistakes on their part in ATL.
The idea of sourcing out computer production to India would certainly raise some VERY interesting possiblities...
What if Hironobu Sakaguchi's Final Fantasy really was a FINAL fantasy?
I'm also hoping that Sega manages to survive in the console market for this timeline. Perhaps not too many mistakes on their part in ATL.
The idea of sourcing out computer production to India would certainly raise some VERY interesting possiblities...
That and also no SquareEnix because the first FF was a gamble on Square's survival..
Finally an update...
1991:
- Commodore starts working on a low-cost replacement for the Commodore 64, known as the Commodore 65. (OTL this system was developed, but never produced in number). They also begin the long process of upgrading their Amiga product line, starting with the 500+ and 3000.
- IBM releases PC-DOS 4.2 for its 8086 and 80286-based computers. Ironically, Microsoft's decision to stop MS-DOS development with 4.1 was short-sighted; most home computers sold in 1991 still did not use an 80386 or 80486 and PC-DOS actually gained market share from Microsoft until the last 80286-based systems left the market in 1993.
-IBM and Microsoft jointly release the 2.0 series version of OS/2. Highly successful among mid-and-high-end computers, the system is often criticized for slow performance on anything but top-end hardware.
-the success of the 88000-based NeXTcube and NeXTstation among ultra-high-end users has inspired a growing consensus that RISC processors were the wave of the future. The NeXTcube, available since 1988, has roughly the same performence as professional workstations but cost a lot less. Unlike OTL, the NeXT systems included a hard drive (albeit a smallish one, only 120 mB for a base model in 1988), rather than the larger but very slow magneto-optical drive. When BusinessLand stopped selling Compaq PCs in 1989, they picked up NeXT machines, which did not meet highly optimistic expectations but sold fairly well nonetheless, especially for CAD/CAM, graphical design, and, most importantly, the first World Wide Web server. (in the 1988-1993 period, about 250,000 NeXTs are sold, or about 5x their OTL rate).
-Sanyo drops out of the US market.
-A young man named Linus Torvalds begins development of his own operating system, Linux.
-IBM introduces the PS/1 Series of home computers.
1992:
- Commodore releases several new systems. The 65 is released (and Commodore withdraws the 64 from the North American market simultaneously); its sales in North America are fairly poor but it proves to be quite popular in 'emerging' markets - Eastern Europe, South America, and especially India prove to be sales facilities. Of the 10 million 65s sold from 1992 to 2000, over 6 million are sold in India (being built at a Commodore facility in India, they do not have the same tariff restrictions as most computers do, and India's growing middle class clamors for computers). The 65 is actually used for business in some areas, the built-in floppy drive and more advanced BASIC make it somewhat more suitable than the 64 for these tasks (although in Western nations, businesses prefer PC-compatibles, which are much better for advanced roles).
-Likewise, Commodore releases the Amiga 1200, which slots between the 500+ and 2000. They decide against developing a low-end 500+ replacement (which in OTL became the 600, which turned out to be a fiasco), deciding that the 500+ could sell for another year or two until it could be retired in favor of the 1200. They also start developing a second games system, this time based on the 1200 and with a CD-ROM drive: the Amiga 32CD.
-Kaypro stops producing 'portable-brick' computers, concentrating entirely on the new and growing laptop and notebook markets. They release the first notebooks based on Intel's new 386SL and 486SL processors, although Toshiba, IBM, and Apple are hot on their heels.
-AST's assets are purchased by Acer.
- Microsoft and IBM begin to fracture on the fate of OS/2 and its financial and intellectual property.
--------------------------------------------------------
As of 1992 and the Tenth edition of 'The Computer Book', the various computer brands
IBM-compatible
IBM - PS/2 Series, PS/1 Series, Thinkpad.
Apple - Performa series, Quadra series, PowerBook series
Compaq - Deskpro series, Presario series, Portable series
Epson - QX-250 series, QX-300 series
Radio Shack - 2000 series, 3000 series, 4000 series
TeleVideo
Victor
Morrow
Hewlett-Packard
Kaypro - Kaypro/p series
Hyundai - PC-500, PC-2000 (80286-based)
Packard Bell
Acer
Dell - Dimension series
Gateway 2000
NEC
Hitachi
Motorola 680x0 series:
Atari - ST series, Falcon
Commodore Amiga - 500+, 1200, 2000, 3000
RISC-based
Acorn Archemides
NeXTstation
Other:
Apple - IIgs (WDG 65816) - educational market only
Commodore - 64 (MOS 6510) - being phased out, 65 (MOS 4510)
1991:
- Commodore starts working on a low-cost replacement for the Commodore 64, known as the Commodore 65. (OTL this system was developed, but never produced in number). They also begin the long process of upgrading their Amiga product line, starting with the 500+ and 3000.
- IBM releases PC-DOS 4.2 for its 8086 and 80286-based computers. Ironically, Microsoft's decision to stop MS-DOS development with 4.1 was short-sighted; most home computers sold in 1991 still did not use an 80386 or 80486 and PC-DOS actually gained market share from Microsoft until the last 80286-based systems left the market in 1993.
-IBM and Microsoft jointly release the 2.0 series version of OS/2. Highly successful among mid-and-high-end computers, the system is often criticized for slow performance on anything but top-end hardware.
-the success of the 88000-based NeXTcube and NeXTstation among ultra-high-end users has inspired a growing consensus that RISC processors were the wave of the future. The NeXTcube, available since 1988, has roughly the same performence as professional workstations but cost a lot less. Unlike OTL, the NeXT systems included a hard drive (albeit a smallish one, only 120 mB for a base model in 1988), rather than the larger but very slow magneto-optical drive. When BusinessLand stopped selling Compaq PCs in 1989, they picked up NeXT machines, which did not meet highly optimistic expectations but sold fairly well nonetheless, especially for CAD/CAM, graphical design, and, most importantly, the first World Wide Web server. (in the 1988-1993 period, about 250,000 NeXTs are sold, or about 5x their OTL rate).
-Sanyo drops out of the US market.
-A young man named Linus Torvalds begins development of his own operating system, Linux.
-IBM introduces the PS/1 Series of home computers.
1992:
- Commodore releases several new systems. The 65 is released (and Commodore withdraws the 64 from the North American market simultaneously); its sales in North America are fairly poor but it proves to be quite popular in 'emerging' markets - Eastern Europe, South America, and especially India prove to be sales facilities. Of the 10 million 65s sold from 1992 to 2000, over 6 million are sold in India (being built at a Commodore facility in India, they do not have the same tariff restrictions as most computers do, and India's growing middle class clamors for computers). The 65 is actually used for business in some areas, the built-in floppy drive and more advanced BASIC make it somewhat more suitable than the 64 for these tasks (although in Western nations, businesses prefer PC-compatibles, which are much better for advanced roles).
-Likewise, Commodore releases the Amiga 1200, which slots between the 500+ and 2000. They decide against developing a low-end 500+ replacement (which in OTL became the 600, which turned out to be a fiasco), deciding that the 500+ could sell for another year or two until it could be retired in favor of the 1200. They also start developing a second games system, this time based on the 1200 and with a CD-ROM drive: the Amiga 32CD.
-Kaypro stops producing 'portable-brick' computers, concentrating entirely on the new and growing laptop and notebook markets. They release the first notebooks based on Intel's new 386SL and 486SL processors, although Toshiba, IBM, and Apple are hot on their heels.
-AST's assets are purchased by Acer.
- Microsoft and IBM begin to fracture on the fate of OS/2 and its financial and intellectual property.
--------------------------------------------------------
As of 1992 and the Tenth edition of 'The Computer Book', the various computer brands
IBM-compatible
IBM - PS/2 Series, PS/1 Series, Thinkpad.
Apple - Performa series, Quadra series, PowerBook series
Compaq - Deskpro series, Presario series, Portable series
Epson - QX-250 series, QX-300 series
Radio Shack - 2000 series, 3000 series, 4000 series
TeleVideo
Victor
Morrow
Hewlett-Packard
Kaypro - Kaypro/p series
Hyundai - PC-500, PC-2000 (80286-based)
Packard Bell
Acer
Dell - Dimension series
Gateway 2000
NEC
Hitachi
Motorola 680x0 series:
Atari - ST series, Falcon
Commodore Amiga - 500+, 1200, 2000, 3000
RISC-based
Acorn Archemides
NeXTstation
Other:
Apple - IIgs (WDG 65816) - educational market only
Commodore - 64 (MOS 6510) - being phased out, 65 (MOS 4510)
Microsoft in this timeline made a fairly stupid, or at least overly optimistic decision, tying their fortunes almost entirely to OS/2 and neglecting MS-DOS development. Now, in the longer term this was successful (especially once Microsoft wrested control of the OS/2 and OS/3 series from IBM) but in the early 1990s this was not such a brilliant move (if you think about it).
The problem is that OS/2, being something of a heavy-duty system in the early 1990s (not quite as bad as Windows NT OTL but close). It could not run on 8086 or 80286 based computers, which until 1993 or so were still quite commonly sold as new machines on the home market (Hyundai still sold a 286-based machine, the PC-2000, in 1994). The 1.0 series of OS/2 had 80286-based versions, but it was crippled (in part by the very nature of the 80286 processor). For one thing, non-386 versions of OS/2 could not multitask MS-DOS applications, and running an MS-DOS application at all was tricky (which defeated the purpose of having the system be used as an MS-DOS replacement on lower-end machines). Also, OS/2 was slow on computers with little memory, the 2.0 series especially required a good deal of RAM to operate well.
The result was that OS/2 sold quite well on top-of-the-line machines, but was hardly available for cheap computers until well into the 1990s. IBMs PS/1 series used PC-DOS, at least when the PS/1s were 286-based. Meanwhile, MS-DOS languished, with the last update being 4.1 in 1990.
This had several consequences. One was that low-end non-PC-based computers had better success than OTL in the home market - especially Commodore Amigas. Another was that MS-DOS lost ground to PC-DOS; this wasn't as bad as one may fear as MS-DOS's other fearsome competitor OTL, DR-DOS, exists only as part of ClarisOS (the system used by Apple's PC-compatibles and some other systems). ClarisOS, unlike OS/2, does run on 286-based computers, however Claris's tight relationship with Apple (making it more expensive to bundle with non-Apple computers) and it had similar issues related to slowness on a basic system. This does lead to Apple doing slightly better than OTL sales-wise.
Microsoft making this big of a goof is one reason it isn't as dominant as OTL - in this TL, Gates misjudged the speed with which people would abandon the 'bitty boxes' in favor of more substantial machines that could be used to run advanced features like preemptive multitasking, point-and-click computing, and so on. Perhaps that's one of TTL Microsoft's perpetual traits - being ever interested in adding new features and technologies, even moreso than OTL, leading to feature-rich and snazzy-looking but bloated and somewhat unreliable software. Microsoft's next planned forays are in networking and in multimedia.
Some other things:
1. GeoWorks released a new version of GEOS for the Commodore 65 in 1992. The system could multitask, albeit barely, with as little as the standard 128k of RAM. GEOS in this timeline never was ported to IBM PCs, because Microsoft ironically cornered the market early for a basic GUI with the DOS Shell (which PC-DOS replicated). At the moment, the only serious GUI available for 8086/80286-based PCs aside from that is DESQView; GEM was never ported over either (as Claris owns DR).
Anyway, GEOS is instead the premier GUI for the remaining MOS 6502-based systems out there; Commodore 64, 128, and 65 (and the failed SX-64 and Plus/4), the last of the 8-bit Ataris (the 65XE and 130XE, which left the market in 1989) and the Apple IIe and IIgs in the educational market. The system is quite effective; it can run in as little as 64k of RAM; the new multi-tasking version can function in only 128k. GEOS would later be ported to various other computers built in Eastern Europe, Russia, and China.
2. Microsoft and IBM are planning out a networked version of OS/2 2.0, the OS/2 3.0 series, and eventually OS/3. However, things aren't so rosy between them right now...
The problem is that OS/2, being something of a heavy-duty system in the early 1990s (not quite as bad as Windows NT OTL but close). It could not run on 8086 or 80286 based computers, which until 1993 or so were still quite commonly sold as new machines on the home market (Hyundai still sold a 286-based machine, the PC-2000, in 1994). The 1.0 series of OS/2 had 80286-based versions, but it was crippled (in part by the very nature of the 80286 processor). For one thing, non-386 versions of OS/2 could not multitask MS-DOS applications, and running an MS-DOS application at all was tricky (which defeated the purpose of having the system be used as an MS-DOS replacement on lower-end machines). Also, OS/2 was slow on computers with little memory, the 2.0 series especially required a good deal of RAM to operate well.
The result was that OS/2 sold quite well on top-of-the-line machines, but was hardly available for cheap computers until well into the 1990s. IBMs PS/1 series used PC-DOS, at least when the PS/1s were 286-based. Meanwhile, MS-DOS languished, with the last update being 4.1 in 1990.
This had several consequences. One was that low-end non-PC-based computers had better success than OTL in the home market - especially Commodore Amigas. Another was that MS-DOS lost ground to PC-DOS; this wasn't as bad as one may fear as MS-DOS's other fearsome competitor OTL, DR-DOS, exists only as part of ClarisOS (the system used by Apple's PC-compatibles and some other systems). ClarisOS, unlike OS/2, does run on 286-based computers, however Claris's tight relationship with Apple (making it more expensive to bundle with non-Apple computers) and it had similar issues related to slowness on a basic system. This does lead to Apple doing slightly better than OTL sales-wise.
Microsoft making this big of a goof is one reason it isn't as dominant as OTL - in this TL, Gates misjudged the speed with which people would abandon the 'bitty boxes' in favor of more substantial machines that could be used to run advanced features like preemptive multitasking, point-and-click computing, and so on. Perhaps that's one of TTL Microsoft's perpetual traits - being ever interested in adding new features and technologies, even moreso than OTL, leading to feature-rich and snazzy-looking but bloated and somewhat unreliable software. Microsoft's next planned forays are in networking and in multimedia.
Some other things:
1. GeoWorks released a new version of GEOS for the Commodore 65 in 1992. The system could multitask, albeit barely, with as little as the standard 128k of RAM. GEOS in this timeline never was ported to IBM PCs, because Microsoft ironically cornered the market early for a basic GUI with the DOS Shell (which PC-DOS replicated). At the moment, the only serious GUI available for 8086/80286-based PCs aside from that is DESQView; GEM was never ported over either (as Claris owns DR).
Anyway, GEOS is instead the premier GUI for the remaining MOS 6502-based systems out there; Commodore 64, 128, and 65 (and the failed SX-64 and Plus/4), the last of the 8-bit Ataris (the 65XE and 130XE, which left the market in 1989) and the Apple IIe and IIgs in the educational market. The system is quite effective; it can run in as little as 64k of RAM; the new multi-tasking version can function in only 128k. GEOS would later be ported to various other computers built in Eastern Europe, Russia, and China.
2. Microsoft and IBM are planning out a networked version of OS/2 2.0, the OS/2 3.0 series, and eventually OS/3. However, things aren't so rosy between them right now...
Your view of linux is somewhat warped by popular opinion. Linus torvalds has never developed his own operating system, in this TL or in any other. Linus torvalds developed the Linux Kernel which when licenced under the GPL was taken up by people using the GNU operating system which was being developed by Richard Stallman and others since 1984 when _they_ fought the ever more closed world begging apparently with a buggy printer that richard couldn't fix because he didn't have the source code.
In more recent years the entire system of GNU with the linux kernel has become known as Linux even though it technically isn't. mostly the Free Software and Open Software worlds are a big pile of tools and applications written and released under copyleft licences (mostly GPL) Each "Linux" Distribution collects the best software out there for the people they wish to service and release it. with only a few % of the code being linux, a bit more % of the code being gnu and lots more of the code being random assortments of sourceforge tools I wouldn't exactly write out the Free Software movement as simply 'Linux Torvalds writing his own Operating System' (lets not get into BSD right now)
In more recent years the entire system of GNU with the linux kernel has become known as Linux even though it technically isn't. mostly the Free Software and Open Software worlds are a big pile of tools and applications written and released under copyleft licences (mostly GPL) Each "Linux" Distribution collects the best software out there for the people they wish to service and release it. with only a few % of the code being linux, a bit more % of the code being gnu and lots more of the code being random assortments of sourceforge tools I wouldn't exactly write out the Free Software movement as simply 'Linux Torvalds writing his own Operating System' (lets not get into BSD right now)
I may have missed soemthing, but what would be the fate of the MSX - a computer line that had an important success in Japan and Asia, and a good success in Europe? This is the support on where quite a few classic console games appeared., like Dragon Quest(warrior) and Konami classics like Metal Gear.
I'm oversimplifying things. Yes, Torvalds only wrote the original kernel and about a small percentage of the updates since.
However, as of 1991 (both in OTL and TTL), Linux was still pretty much Torvalds' baby. The first GNU tools ported over (bash and gcc) were done so by Torvalds himself, and others were only beginning to contribute to the project. Aside from which, even the most diehard worshipper of St. IGNUcius would call the kernel Linux.
Also, I'm glossing over a good deal of OTL history, especially if its well known. Linux goes largely as OTL, therefore it merits only a little attention (my line was largely a throwaway mention that Linux exists).
As for other open-source OSes, the OpenBSDs/etc will likely sell less well, in large part because....
A: around the time personal computer UNIX-based systems are becoming popular (mid 90s) there is more of a commercial UNIX push (I plan on having IBM at least try to replace OS/2 with AIX after the inevitable MS/IBM divorce gives OS/x to Microsoft)....
B: Both OS/2 and ClarisOS have networked versions, at least as capable as Windows for Workgroups 3.1x or early versions of Windows NT.
C: there is much more interest in Plan 9 and its brethren (especially among the FLOSS community), to the point that, as of 2007, there is still hope that they might replace the UNIXen (a small hope, but in OTL its 'no hope')...
D: There's less of a unified 'evil empire' sentiment, with Microsoft being less of a domineering superpower, leading to less of a backlash. In TTL 2007, Richard Stallman is generally viewed as a fanatic (which he is), and often ignored by others in the FLOSS community (which is perhaps unfair). There's no real view of Microsoft as an 'Evil Empire' or FLOSS producers as valiant rebels by anyone who isn't a professional programmer or hacker (they of course grumble about closed-source software and the elephantine nature of MS products), and someone grumbling about generic evils of corporate control would be dismissed as some kind of communist freak by the public at large. Therefore, the FLOSS movement takes a more 'moderate' stance early on and sticks with it.
E: Linux, as OTL, perhaps unfairly grabs most of the limelight.
However, as of 1991 (both in OTL and TTL), Linux was still pretty much Torvalds' baby. The first GNU tools ported over (bash and gcc) were done so by Torvalds himself, and others were only beginning to contribute to the project. Aside from which, even the most diehard worshipper of St. IGNUcius would call the kernel Linux.
Also, I'm glossing over a good deal of OTL history, especially if its well known. Linux goes largely as OTL, therefore it merits only a little attention (my line was largely a throwaway mention that Linux exists).
As for other open-source OSes, the OpenBSDs/etc will likely sell less well, in large part because....
A: around the time personal computer UNIX-based systems are becoming popular (mid 90s) there is more of a commercial UNIX push (I plan on having IBM at least try to replace OS/2 with AIX after the inevitable MS/IBM divorce gives OS/x to Microsoft)....
B: Both OS/2 and ClarisOS have networked versions, at least as capable as Windows for Workgroups 3.1x or early versions of Windows NT.
C: there is much more interest in Plan 9 and its brethren (especially among the FLOSS community), to the point that, as of 2007, there is still hope that they might replace the UNIXen (a small hope, but in OTL its 'no hope')...
D: There's less of a unified 'evil empire' sentiment, with Microsoft being less of a domineering superpower, leading to less of a backlash. In TTL 2007, Richard Stallman is generally viewed as a fanatic (which he is), and often ignored by others in the FLOSS community (which is perhaps unfair). There's no real view of Microsoft as an 'Evil Empire' or FLOSS producers as valiant rebels by anyone who isn't a professional programmer or hacker (they of course grumble about closed-source software and the elephantine nature of MS products), and someone grumbling about generic evils of corporate control would be dismissed as some kind of communist freak by the public at large. Therefore, the FLOSS movement takes a more 'moderate' stance early on and sticks with it.
E: Linux, as OTL, perhaps unfairly grabs most of the limelight.
This TL is mostly US-centered so it doesn't mention MSX much; however, MSX has a mostly as-OTL fate. It hardly sells at all in the US, but maintains a good sales rate in Europe and Asia through the 1980s. In the 1990s, though, everyone in the Pacific Rim and western Europe is converting to PC-compatible systems (the 'sushi boxes' of Japan and South Korea are sold at home in addition to abroad), except for a dedicated Commodore crowd in Europe. MSX does sell fairly well in Southeast Asia and Brazil. They sell in India, too, but are outsold by Commodore.
Other popular 8-bit systems I missed include the TRS-80 Color Computer. It actually does a bit better than OTL, especially in South America. They were sometimes used for serious business (especially CoCo 3's), although Radio Shack almost completely ignored the market (as OTL).
Well... GEOS is both more and less than it is OTL. On the one hand, it was never ported to PCs/x86, and thus OTL Geoworks Ensemble, BreadBox, etc. do not exist. On the other, its the *ULTIMATE* 8-bit OS (at least for MOS 6502-based systems), and it ends up on more computers. The biggest seller is the Commodore 65 in developing countries; through the 1990s GeoWrite is probably the most-used Word Processor in India, for example (despite being feature-poor in comparison to the 1990s versions of WordPerfect and WordStar).
GEOS is very effective on minimal hardware, largely because it was written almost entirely in assembly language. On the other hand, this made it difficult to upgrade and port (the "port" to PCs was in fact a total re-write OTL). That's one reason why it never made it big; it would be nearly impossible for it to have been continuously updated at the same schedule as MacOS or Windows.
Oh, and BTW... I'm thinking about there actually being a Commodore 66 - a successor to the successor to the 64. Coming out in the mid-late 1990s, it would basically be an 'ultimate Commodore 64' with 20 mHz 65816 (OTL 'SuperCPU'), 512k standard RAM expandable to 16 mB, and an upgraded/modernized GEOS). The machine would cater to India and to a shrinking pool of Commodore 64 enthusiasts.