Introduction - Computer Busses - page 22

• Initially missing the market for systems based on 32-bit microprocessors (80386). IBM

missed the 32-bit processor when they developed their AT and PS/2 ranges of com-
puters, as, initially, they used the 16-bit 80286. This had been intentional, as IBM did
not want to make their new computer too powerful, as they would start to compete with
their lucrative mainframe market.

• Trying to move the market towards MCA. After IBM realized that they had lost the bat-

tle against the cloners, they developed their own architecture: MicroChannel Architec-
ture (MCA), which would force manufacturers to license the technology from them. Un-
fortunately, for IBM, Compaq took over the standard as they introduced a computer,
which used standard IBM PC architecture, but improved on it as they used the new Intel
80386 in their DeskPro range. IBM would, in time, come back into the fold and follow
the rest in their architecture. From then on, IBM became a follower rather than a leader.

After loosing a large market share, IBM soon realized, after the failure of MCA, that they
had also lost the market leadership for hardware development. They then decided to try to
turn the market for operating system software, with OS/2. It was becoming obvious that the
operating system held the key to the hardware architectures, and application software. In a
perfect world, an operating system can hide the hardware from the application software, so
the hardware becomes less important. Thus, if the software runs fast enough, the hardware
can be of any type and of any architecture, allowing application programmers to write their
software for the operating system and not for the specific hardware. Whichever company
developed the standards for the operating system would hold the key to hardware architec-
ture, and also the range of other packages, such as office tools, networking applications, and
so on. OS/2 would eventually fail, and it would be left to one company to lead in this area:
Microsoft. Not even the mighty Intel could hold the standards, as Microsoft holds the key
link between the software and the hardware. Their operating system would eventually de-
couple the software from the hardware. With the Microsoft Windows NT operating system,
they produced an operating system that could run on different architectures.
Unfortunately, for IBM, OS/2 was a compromised operating system, which was devel-
oped for all their computers, whether they be mainframes or low-level PCs. Unlike the de-
velopment of the PC, many of the organizational units within IBM, including the powerful
main-frame divisions, had a say about what went into OS/2 and what was left out. For the
IBM PC, the PC team at Boca Raton was given almost independence from the rest of the
organization, but the development of OS/2 was riddled with compromises, reviews and
specification changes. At the time, mainframes differed from PCs in many different ways.
One of the most noticeable ways was the way that they were booted, and the regularity of
system crashes. Most users of PCs demanded fast boot times (less than a minute, if possible),
but had no great problems when it crashes at a few times a day. These crashes were typically
due to incorrectly functioning and configured hardware, and incorrectly installed software. In
the mainframe market, an operating system performs a great deal of system checks and tries
to properly configure the hardware. This causes long boot-up times, and is not a problem
with a mainframe, which will typically run for many weeks, months, or years without requir-
ing a re-boot. However, for the PC, a boot time of anything more than a few minutes is a big
problem. In the end, OS/2 had too long a boot time, and was too slow (possibly due to its
complexity) to compete in the marketplace. In total, IBM spent over $2 billion on OS/2 with
very little in return. It is perhaps ironical that new versions of the Microsoft operating system
perform a great deal of system checks and try to configure the system each time it is booted.
Now, though, this can now be done in a relatively short time, as the hardware is a great deal