Linked by David Adams on Tue 2nd Aug 2011 21:56 UTC, submitted by _txf_
Legal Now that these kind of issues are starting to be mentioned by The Economist, NPR, The Guardian, and Forbes, are we at last at the point where the myth that patents universally encourage innovation finally being dispelled?
Thread beginning with comment 483298
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Was it not the fact that IBM allowed clones of the IBM PC that kicked off the PC boom of the '80s and '90s?
apart from the fact that it wasnt IBM that allowed clones, but most components being made by different parties, as others have said, ...
Clones of the IBM PC popped up all over the place. you really think IBM was happy with this? quite the contrary, in the beginning IBM actually tried to resist it any way they could since it would (and did) affect their business
which was based on selling overpriced and technologically inferior machines to offices who wouldnt realize it (or would even see the "spartanity" of the business machines and application they were presented with, as added values - without fancy graphics employees are less prone to use their work tools for other purposes...) but would trust the brand

and think about this, how much did a 80286 based IBM PC AT cost? and how much for a 68000 based Amiga 2000? but which would you choose if you were a reasonably savvy user expecting to get the most versatile machine for your money in the mid 80's?
IBM allowed freedom to flourish, and we all benefitted as a result. Legislators, take note!
we didnt benefit...
we ended up stuck with the worst processor architecture ever (the X86 ISA was ugly and anachronistic already at that time, beaten wrt performance AND elegance even by contemporary arhcitectures, not to mention those to come in a few years like arm) just made faster with time at the implementation level
but this didnt happen inherently thanks to ibm, rather happened because of pure and simple market demand (people buying/using relatively inexpensive mainstream PC - otherwise one would get something else, like a DEC AlphaStation or an SGI Onyx - asking for more and more computing power to run their games and spreadsheets)
demand that intel and amd could only meet overcoming the difficulties of implementing an ugly and complex isa in an efficient fashion - at which point it was only pragmatic and rational to RISCify (decompose and regularize) the pipeline and then to apply tricks (eg pipelining, superscarity, out of order execution) that RISC architectures had been successfuly employing (while x86 and CISCs in general as they were, weren't even really fit for them) that way being way more innovative, for their times at least...

with "freedom" and multivendor-ness comes the need to let everybody go along well with everyone else - hence standards, but standards are "lowest common denominators" more often than not
thus, freedom actually stifles innovation more often than not - in some cases on a spectacular level
Another example is that works of the US government are put into the "public domain". That also includes some software (which I've seen).
and then?
since "some software" is given away by its author as public domain then ALL software (including programs whose authors rightly want to capitalise on ) should be public domain?

Reply Parent Score: 2

unclefester Member since:

The PC was deliberately hobbled by IBM engineers because they were only interested in big iron.

Unfortunately for the engineers the new-fangled spreadsheet software created a booming market for the boring beige boxes.

Reply Parent Score: 2