Introduction - Computer Busses - page 43

clair C-5 (the electric slipper).
15. Compaq , for startling growth, that is unlikely to be ever repeated. From zero to one bil-
lion dollars in five years. They achieved this growth, not by luck, but by shear superior
technology, and with the idea of sharing their developments.

Other contenders include Hewlett-Packard (for their range of printers), CISCO (for their
networking products), Java (for ignoring the make of the computer, and its network, and,
well, everything), the Power PC (for trying to head off the PC, at the pass), Dell notebooks
(because I've got one), the Intel 80386, the Intel Pentium, Microsoft Visual Basic (for bring-
ing programming to the masses), Microsoft Windows 95, Microsoft Windows NT, and so on.
Okay, Windows 95, Windows NT, the 80386 and the Pentium would normally be in the Top
10, but, as Microsoft and Intel are already there, I've left them out. Here's to the Wintel
Corporation. We are in their hands. One false move and they will bring their world around
themselves. Up to now, Wintel have made all the correct decisions.

When it comes to failures, there are no failures really, and it is easy to be wise after the
event. Who really knows what would have happened if the industry had taken another route.
So instead of the Top 15 failures, I've listed the following as the Top 15 under-achievers
(please forgive me for adding a few of my own, such as DOS and the Intel 8088):

1. DOS , which became the best selling, standard operating systems for IBM PC systems.

Unfortunately, it held the computer industry back for at least 10 years. It was text-based,
command-oriented, had no graphical user interface, could only access up to 640 KB, it
could only use 16 bits at a time, and so on, … . Many with a short memory will say that
the PC is easy to use, and intuitive, but they are maybe forgetting how it used to be. With
Windows 95 (and to a lesser extent with Windows 3.x), Microsoft made computers much
easier to use. From then on, users could actually switch their computer on without have
to register for a high degree in Computer Engineering. DOS would have been fine, as it
was compatible with all its previous parents, but the problem was MAC OS, which really
showed everyone how a user interface should operate. Against this competition, it was
no contest. So, what was it? Application software. The PC had application software
coming out of its ears.

2. Intel 8088 , which became the standard processor, and thus the standard machine code

for PC applications. So why is it in the failures list? Well, like DOS, its because it was
so difficult to use, and was a compromised system. While Amiga and Apple program-
mers were writing proper programs which used the processor to its maximum extent, PC
programs were still using their processor in 'sleepy-mode' (8088-compatiable mode),
and could only access a maximum of 1 MB of memory (because of the 20-bit address bus
limit for 8088 code). The big problem with the 8088 was that it kept compatibility with
its father: the 8080. For this Intel decided to use a segmented memory access, which is
fine for small programs, but a nightmare for large programs (basically anything over
64 KB).

3. Alpha processor, which was DEC's attack on the processor market. It had blistering

performance, which blew every other processor out of the water (and still does). It has
never been properly exploited, as there is a lack of development tools for it. The Intel
Pentium proved that it was a great all-comer and did many things well, and was willing
to improve the bits that it was not so good at.

4. Z8000 processor, which was a classic case of being technically superior, but was not

compatible with its father, the mighty Z80, and its kissing cousin, the 8080. Few compa-