Chaos theory tells us that the flutter of a butterfly wing in
Brazil can alter the weather on the other side of the globe. So
what would the world look like if what is arguably the most
influential company in the most dynamic industry on the planet had
never existed. Danny Bradbury reports
Have you ever wondered what would have happened if Bill Gates had,
for instance, taken an arts degree? What if he had never started
tinkering around with Basic for the Altair computer back in 1975,
but instead had discovered a love for the paintings of Dante
Gabriel Rosetti, and had embarked on a Bachelor of Fine Arts
degree, to explore the works of the romantic period?
Things would no doubt have turned out very differently, although
it is still possible that Gates would be a prominent public figure.
People like Gates tend to rise to the top in one way or another.
Perhaps he would be a leading artist, producing stunning paintings
and photographic images, rather than simply buying the electronic
rights to them all, as he is doing now.
What would have happened to the rest of the industry? It's
unlikely that very much would've changed early on. Consider
Microsoft's impact on the business until IBM launched the PC, and
you'll find that it was fairly minimal. In fact, from a
microcomputing standpoint Gary Kildall's Digital Research was a
leading light, with a huge market share of this immature market in
the late 1970s, when there were many different microcomputing
players, none of whom was dominant.
Things would only have departed from our real-world timeline
after IBM signed an agreement with Microsoft for the latter to
produce a disc operating system for its new desktop model. At this
point, IBM might have found Seattle Computer Products and purchased
the operating system that Microsoft bought in real life.
Alternatively, disillusioned by failed negotiations with outside
parties, it may have tried to cobble together its own. As with all
of these predictions, our chosen theoretical timeline is highly
speculative, as no-one can really know what would have happened.
Our alternative history shows that IBM tried harder to negotiate
with Digital Research, securing a non-exclusive licence from
Kildall.
What of Apple? Why hasn't the company featured more prominently
in our alternative history than it did in real life? The company
went through something of a slump in market share in the late 1980s
and early to mid 1990s, becoming almost a niche model for creative
types, but never capturing the same mass-market as the PC. The
primary reason for this is that Apple had complete, proprietary
control over its system, building both the hardware and the
software from scratch. Consequently, it became easy for the firm to
shoot itself in the foot, refusing to license the model to clone
manufacturers.
Apple's downfall
If it had realised the importance of the PC a little earlier and
attempted to spread its net a little wider in the market, sharing
some of its profit around, it would have secured a larger market
share earlier on. It certainly had the technical resources to do
so, with a graphical user interface (GUI) that was intuitive and
attractive to use at the same time that viable GUIs such as Gem
emerged from the PC market. Still, Apple fumbled the ball at this
stage with decisions that have haunted the company ever since.
Ironically, Microsoft helped to put it back on its feet with a 1997
investment, and Jobs has worked wonders with the iMac.
Things get complicated very quickly in our parallel Bill-less
universe. Companies buy different firms than they did in real life,
and it is also worth pointing out that there are many other
variables that we simply didn't have room for. The list of
questions that we can ask ourselves could more than fill a book.
With Microsoft out of the frame, for example, would the position of
John Warnock's company Adobe have altered significantly? What about
Corel, which in a strange twist of fate sold a significant portion
of its equity at the start of this month to Microsoft? Would Linux
have gathered so much momentum, given that the industry supported
it predominantly as an alternative to what it perceived as a
dominant, dangerous company in Microsoft?
Not even the most astute industry analyst can really answer
these questions with any accuracy. One of the most defining
characteristics of this industry is that small players come from
nowhere to rapidly take hold of the market and represent a
significant threat to their older, more established competitors.
Take Netscape, for example, which was a nothing company run by
nobodies until the mid-1990s, when the financial markets suddenly
decided that it was hugely important, and gave it a large cash
injection, turning it into a significant force.
So, in an industry that moves at an accelerated pace, and in
which the opportunity for fast growth is a major driver, it is
impossible to see what is coming out of left field. Gates said this
himself in an on-stage interview at an IDC conference in Paris in
the autumn of 1995, when Netscape and the Internet were just
becoming significant forces. Since then, of course, he has
displayed the business acumen to survive and prosper in an
uncertain market, although the courts have decided that Microsoft
has leveraged its existing success in the market to an unfair
extent in order to do so.
In spite of the uncertainty inherent in our theoretical
timeline, there are some things which we can be pretty sure would
not have changed. The framework for the development of the industry
is one such static factor. Having seen the importance of the
desktop computer, the end-user community would be eager to network
them together to exchange information, regardless of whether
Microsoft was around or not. Indeed, the company had very little
success in the networking market until the mid-1990s anyway.
Similarly, the development of the Web would have happened no
matter what. The infrastructure for the Internet existed before
Microsoft signed its agreement with IBM, and would have continued
to grow. Tim Berners-Lee would have invented the interface to the
Internet that generated the World-Wide Web regardless of Microsoft,
and the Net would still have become a commercial force.
Finally, the progression from mainframe-oriented connections,
through peer-to-peer networking, into client/server and finally to
an Internet-oriented computing environment would probably still
have happened. Only the players would have altered. With Microsoft
experiencing most of its success in the desktop operating system
and desktop applications markets, and latterly the application
server operating system and server applications market, huge holes
would have been left in this area for other companies to
exploit.
Likely successors
The only question is, which companies would have succeeded?
Novell doesn't seem to have had the wherewithal to combat
Microsoft's success with Windows NT as much as it would have liked
- and it is likely that it would have needed some help from other
players, even if Microsoft was not around. A number of questionable
decisions by Novell showed an arguable lack of judgement on the
part of the management that we can speculate would have cost the
firm market share with or without Microsoft. These include the
purchase and subsequent sale of WordPerfect [what was it thinking?]
and the sale of the Unix source code to SCO only two years after
buying it, thus putting itself behind in the application server
game while Microsoft steamed ahead with NT.
Then again, it's all too easy to look at other people's mistakes
and poke fun, and even easier to do so with hindsight. When you are
embroiled in the tempest that constitutes the day-to-day dynamic of
the IT market, it is easy to make poor judgement calls.
One thing that we can say with impunity is that even without
Microsoft one or two other players would very likely have risen to
the top of the pile, gathering huge market share and displaying
dominant tendencies. If it hadn't been Microsoft, it might have
been IBM, or Sun, or Hewlett-Packard. But anyone looking for a
utopian view of an egalitarian market, free from the tyranny of
supplier domination, is whistling in the dark.
The most annoying thing in this industry is the sanctimony with
which some companies criticise dominant players such as Microsoft,
truly believing that under different circumstances, other players
would have been more charitable and less arrogant in their
success.
The IT business is all about making money. Success breeds
success, unless you wrong-foot yourself and take a fall, letting
the competition stride ahead. There are multiple possible outcomes
of a Microsoft-free market, but the American-based nature of the IT
sector means that government regulation would have been minimal,
and someone would have stepped up to take its place very
quickly.
History without Bill
| | Industry | Desktop OS | Server OS | Applications |
| 1975 | MITS launches the
Altair computer. Gary Kitdall founds Digital Research to sell the
CP/M microcomputer operating system | CP/M operating systems
available | | Altair relies on
hobbyist versions of Basic |
| 1976 | CP/M Bios developed to
interface with different Intel 8080 machines | | | |
| 1977 | Number of different
microcomputers proliferates. CP/M gathers market share | | | |
| 1978 | Apple launches Apple
II | | | |
| 1979 | Apple passes on buying
Visicalc. Wordstar produced. WordPerfect formed | | | Dan Bricklin produces
Viscicalc, the first spreadsheet, for Apple II |
| 1980 | IBM starts work on the
PC with a one-year deadline. IBM licences CP/M for the
machine.Lotus is formed | | | |
| 1982 | PC launched as rival
to Apple II. Compaq starts selling PC's after reverse engineering
the IBM Bios. Licenses CP/M for the machine. Lotus is
formed. | | | WordPerfect 1.0
introduced |
| 1983 | Apple introduces the
Lisa, its first GUI machine. | Digital Research
launches the Gem GUI. Visicorp launches its VisiOn GUI | Novell gives up on
desktop hardware, concentrates on producing network OS software,
but the company is unable to deliver. IBM licenses Novell's
Netware | |
| 1984 | Apple introduces the
Lisa, its first GUI machine. IBM launches the PC-AT. Apple launches
the Mac | IBM announces Topview,
its own GUI | | Lotus announces Jazz
suite for the Macintosh |
| 1985 | | IBM ships
Topview | Novell launches
Netware 2.0 | |
| 1986 | Compaq ships the 386
PC, beating IBM to market | Digital Research
launches Gem 2.0, sitting on top of CP/M | | |
| 1987 | IBM launches the PS/2
using the proprietary Micro Channel Architecture. Compaq and others
unite against it. Digital Research, having missed the boat in the
applications market, buys Lotus | IBM is worried about
its lack of presence in the PC market. Launches OS/2 v1.0, an
IBM-only development with proprietary code and a revamped Topview
on top. | | Lotus ships Jazz for
Gem |
| 1988 | | IBM announces OS/2
Lan, a network version of OS/2 that is essentially Netware
underneath, with Topview on top | | |
| 1989 | IBM, distraught at its
loss of control in the PC market, stays in the market but decides
to concentrate on servers. It purchases Novell | Digital Research
launches Gem 3.0 | | Lotus Launches
Notes |
| 1990 | | Desktop OS/2 rapidly
losing market share | | |
| 1991 | | Digital Research ships
CP/M 5.0 | | |
| 1992 | | | | WordPerfect launches
WordPerfect for Gem |
| 1993 | | Digital Research ships
CP/M 6.0 | IBM announces OS/2 Lan
2.0. Unlike its file-and-print predecessor, the new operating
system features application server functionality, targeting it
squarely at the various flavours of Unix | WordPerfect launches
Skylark, a groupware and messenging product |
| 1994 | | | Unix versions from
companies including Sun, HP and SCO still holding their own against
OS/2 Lan | |
| 1995 | Everyone licenses Java
from Sun. IBM/Novell purchases WordPerfect, primarily for Skylark,
Sun and Oracle launch their network computer concept | Digital Research ships
Gem New Edition, a merged CP/M and Gem system, with multimedia
extensions | | |
| 1996 | Browser supplier
Netgrope, still with $3bn capital from IPO, buys Digital Research.
Sets up an applications division. Sets up its own network computer
division, in opposition to Sun and Oracle | | IBM launches OS/2 Lan
3.0. Fed up with all the numbers, it renames it Zeus | |
| 1997 | Aplle making losses
and losong its limited market share rapidly. Company brings Steve
JObs back as interim CEO. Jobs gain investment from Oracle and Sun
who are worried about Netgrope's hold on the desktop market, and
launches iMAc | Open Source
small-footprint OS Flummox gains market attention. Analyist rave
about possibilities for the PDA market | Netgrope launches
Grope 97, a competitor to Zues. Product fails to ignite
market | Wordperfect 7.0 for
Gem NE launched |
| 1998 | | Netgrope ships the
next version of Gem NE, renames it Firefly. The new system is
heavily Internet-oriented. Includes the Netgrope browser as an
integrated facility. Flummox-based PDAs and smart phone prototypes
appear | Zeus 2.0
launched | |
| 1999 | DoJ files lawsuit
against Netgrope for what it says are uncompetitive practices in
teh PC market. Alleges that the company is leveraging its success
in the OS market to sell its original browser product | Flummox-based products
appear on the market. Netgrope launches Firefly Lite, also for the
embedded systems market. It includes a small-footprint
browser | | Netgrope launches a
version of Wordperfect NE for the as-yet unproven application
service provider market |
| 2000 | Court faces Netgrope
to ship its browser separately to Firefly OS. All network computing
players pronounce the transformation of the largely ignored network
computing market into the corporate ASP market | Firefly New Edition
launched - sans browser. Firefly Lite 1.5 launched in browserless
form | Zeus 2000 takes the
market by storm. Attacks mission-critical market preveiously
addressed by Unix | Wordperfect 8.0 for
Gem NE launched. The product has a 90% share of the word processor
market |
History with Bill
| | Industry | Microsoft
Corporation | Desktop OS | Server OS | Applications |
| 1975 | MITS launches the
Altair computer, Gary Kildail starts Digital Reasearch to sell
CP/M | Microsoft
formed | CP/M operating system
available | | Bill Gates and Paul
Allen write Basic for Altair |
| 1976 | CP/M Bios developed to
interface with different Intel 8080 machines | | | | Microsoft revamps its
version of Basic |
| 1977 | Microcomputers
proliferate. CP/M gathers market share | Microsoft sells a
Basic licence to Apple | | | |
| 1978 | Apple launches Apple
II | | | | Microsoft launches
Cobal |
| 1979 | Apple passes on buying
Visicalc. Wordstar and Wordperfect started | | | | Dan Bricklin produces
Visicalc for Apple II |
| 1980 | IBM starts work on the
PC with a one year deadline | Microsoft buy s Qdos
and renames it MSDos. IBM buys licence to bundle with PC and agrees
to licensing the OS to other makers. Microsoft agrees to produce
versions of Basic, Fortran, PAscal and Cobal for the PC | | Microsoft licenses
Unix and begins work on Xenix, the PC version | |
| 1982 | PC launched as rival
to Apple II. Compaq starts selling PC's after reverse enginnering
IBM Bios. Lotus is formed | | | | Wordperfect 1.0
introduced |
| 1983 | Apple introduces the
Lisa, its first GUI machine | | Microsoft unveils
Windows, ships MSDos 2.0 for IBM's PC-XT. Digital Research and
Visicorp launch graphical interfaces | Novell gives up
desktop hardware for network OS software. IBM asks Microsoft to
work on network software. MS tries to build it on Dos | Microsoft ships Word.
Lotus launches 123 for the PC |
| 1984 | IBM launches the
PC-AT. Apple launches the Mac | | IBM announces own GUI
Topview. Microsoft ships MSDos 3.0 for IBM's PC-AT | | Lotus announces Jazz
suite for the Macintosh |
| 1985 | | | Microsoft launches
Windows. IBM ships Topview | Microsoft launches
network software MSNet. Novell unveils Netware 2.0 | Microsoft ships Word
2.0 |
| 1986 | Compaq ships the 386
PC, beating IBM to market | Microsoft stock goes
public, at $21 per share | | | Microsoft announces
Works (its low-end office suite) and Word 3.0 for the
Mac |
| 1987 | IBM launches PS/2
using the proprietary Micro Channel Architecture. Rivals unite
against it | Microsoft buys
Forethought, which publishes Powerpoint for the Mac | IBM/Microsoft
developed OS/2 v1.0 for the PS/2 launched. Microsoft ships Windows
2.0 and Windows 386 | | Microsoft ships Excel,
Word 4.0 for the PC, and Word 3.0 for the Mac |
| 1988 | | | | Microsoft ships OS/2
Lan Manager for Networks | Microsoft ships PC
Works |
| 1989 | IBM announces its
networked office automation system Officevision | | | | Lotus launches
Notes |
| 1990 | | Microsoft and IBM
split over OS/2 - Big Blue gets to keep versions 1 and 2 while MS
develops version 3 | Microsoft unveils
Windows 3.0. IBM launches OS/2 Lite | | Microsoft launches
Word for Windows and the Office suite |
| 1991 | Kildall sells Digital
Reasearch to Novell | | Microsoft ships MSDos
5.0 | | |
| 1992 | | | Microsoft ships
Windows 3.1 | | WordPerfect launches
Wordperfect for Windows |
| 1993 | Novell buys
WordPerfect | | Microsoft ships MSDos
6.0 | Microsoft ships
Windows NT | Microsoft ships Office
4.0 |
| 1994 | | Microsoft loses Stac
Electronics' lawsuit over disc compression technology. MS recalls
Dos 6.0 and replaces the OS | | | |
| 1995 | IBM buys
Lotus | Microsoft licenses
Java from Sun | Microsoft ships
Windows 95 | | Microsoft announces
Internet Explorer |
| 1996 | Caldera formed by
ex-Novell CEO Ray Noorda buys CP/M | Microsoft announces
its ActiveX technology as an open standard. Caldera sues Microsoft
for illegal MSDos activities | | | |
| 1997 | Apple suffers losses
and loses market share rapidly. Steve Jobs returns as interim CEO
and gains $150m investment from Microsoft, launches
iMac | Sun sues Microsoft for
breach of copwright and contract, saying the MS tampered with the
technology | | Microsoft ships NT
4.0 | |
| 1998 | | Sun sues Microsoft for
breah of copwright and contract, saying the MS tampered with the
technology DoJ and 21 states file lawsuit accusing Microsoft of
predatory conduct, tying the browser to the operating system, and
signing exclusionary agreement | Microsoft ships
Windows 98 | | |
| 2000 | | Court rules that
Microsoft to be split into an applications software firm, and an
operating supplier and to restrict MS's influence over OEM
partners. Supreme courts agrees to hear appeal. I Sun lawsuit,
court says Microsoft did not break copyright over Java. Other
breach-of-contract issues pending - settles out of court with
Caldera | Microsoft shisp the
Windows 2000 desktop operating system and the Windows ME consumer
operating system | Microsoft shis the
Windows 2000 server operating system. Microsoft unveils SOAP
technology. It also announces .net initiative | |