High Tech History » IBM

IBM @100

hightechhistory — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 03:09:21 +0000

Today in 1911, the Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company was incorporated. It changed its name to IBM in 1924. Many commentators on IBM’s centenary attribute its longevity to the power of idea or ideas. In “Ideas make IBM 100 years young,” IBM’s Bernard Meyerson says: “…if you really think about what keeps a company going, it’s that you have to keep reinventing yourself. You cannot reinvent yourself in the absence of great ideas. You have to have the great ideas, and you have to follow them through.” Meyerson equates the great ideas that sustain the life of a company with great innovations but The Economist quotesForrester Research’s George Colony: “IBM is not a technology company, but a company solving business problems using technology” and concludes: “Over time [the close relationships between IBM and its customers] became IBM’s most important platform—and the main reason for its longevity. Customers were happy to buy electric ‘calculating machines’, as Thomas Watson senior insisted on calling them, from the same firm that had sold them their electromechanical predecessors. They hoped that their trusted supplier would survive in the early 1990s. And they are now willing to let IBM’s services division tell them how to organise their businesses better.”

In a thoughtful essay, Kevin Maney lists five lessons he drew from his close study of IBM’s history, the first one being “At the start, convince the troops you’re a company of destiny, even if that seems crazy.” Thomas Watson Sr. did this and more. In a 1917 speech he said: “My duty is not the building of this business; it is rather, the building of the organization. … I [know] only one definition of good management; that is, good organization. So, as I see it, my work consists in trying to build a bigger and better organization. The organization, in its turn, will take care of the building of the business.”

So what was the Big IBM Idea? A trusted supplier? A focus on destiny and longevity? Building a bigger and better organization? All of the above?

In a 1994 HBR article titled “The theory of the business,” Peter Drucker advanced the argument that great businesses revolve around a certain idea or “a theory of the business,” articulating the company’s assumptions about its environment, its mission, and its core competencies. In response, I discussed in a letter-to-the-editor the similarities and dissimilarities between scientists and managers: “Managers [like scientists] must articulate their theories and how they can be refuted and then seek data that prove their theories wrong. That will prevent them from falling into the trap of discarding successful theories… the theory of the business may not just explain reality or past business success; it may also define it by communicating and convincing employees and customers that the company is unique. A business theory, then, unlike a scientific theory, can be true and false at the same time. That is how, as Drucker has illustrated, IBM and General Motors could both succeed and fail when they applied the same business theory to two different businesses.”

In short, an idea or a set of ideas may explain past business success. But, all business school education and management gurus notwithstanding, one cannot extract from history “management lessons,” prescriptions, and predictions about the future of this or any other business. Sorry, even if we had a perfect understanding of the reasons for IBM’s longevity, that would not tell us anything about the future of Apple or Cisco or Google or Facebook. There is no one explanation or theory of business success and the same reasons for success in one case can be the very same reasons for failure in another.

I didn’t know it in 1994, but it turns out I was channeling Thomas Watson Sr. who said in another speech, this one in January 1915, shortly after he joined C-T-R: “We all know there have been numerous books written on scientific factory management, scientific sales management, the psychology of selling goods, etc. Many of us have read some of those books. Some of them are good; but we can’t accept any of them as a basis for us to work on. Neither can you afford to accept my ideas as whole and attempt to carry them out, because I do not believe in a fixed method–in any fixed way of selling goods, or of running a business.”

–Gil Press

Jay Forrester and Magnetic Core Memory

hightechhistory — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:32:31 +0000

55 years ago today, Jay Forrester of MIT was awarded a patent for his magnetic core memory. It became the standard for computer memory until it was supplanted by solid state RAM in the mid-seventies. (It has continued to be used, however, in special environments, e.g., on the space shuttle, because its content was not lost when the power was shut off). Forrester’s was not the only patent granted to magnetic core memory inventions and the patent dispute continued until February 1964 when IBM (which has acquired the patent rights from other inventors, including An Wang) agreed to pay MIT $13 million—$4 more than had ever been paid to secure a patent—of which Forrester received $1.5 million. Forrester succinctly described the experience many years afterwards: “It took about seven years to convince people in the industry that magnetic core memory would work. And it took the next seven years to convince them that they had not all thought of it first.” [quoted in Memory and Storage, Time-Life Books, 1990]

In 2011, IBM Celebrates Their 100th Year

hightechhistory — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 19:59:06 +0000

This year, IB M is c elebrating their 100th anniversary. It’s pretty amazing to watch an information technology company with a history dating back to the 19th century continue to innovate and remain successful today.

IBM was actually founded in 1896 as the Tabulating Machine Company by Herman Hollerith. It was incorporated as Computing Tabulating Recording Corporation (CTR) on June 16, 1911 after a merger of the Computer Scale Company of America and the International Time Recording Company with the Tabulating Machine Company. CTR became International Business Machines (IBM) in 1924 when Thomas J. Watson took control of it.

As you saw in the video, IBM was known for technology that used punch cards, typewriters, and other business machines. Today, IBM is known for manufacturing and selling computer hardware, software and services for products ranging from mainframe computers to nanotechnology. IBM has over 388,000 employees and is one of the largest and most profitable information technology employers in the world. They hold more patents than any other U.S. based technology company. Over the last 100 years, IBM employees have earned five Nobel Prizes, four Turing Awards, five National Medals of Technology, and five National Medals of Science. Pretty amazing, isn’t it?

History of PC Magazine

hightechhistory — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 20:39:41 +0000

With every industry, comes its trade publications. And with the IBM personal computer industry came many publications like PC Magazine. ”PC” was originally published in January, 1982. It was created by David Bunnell and financed by Tony Gold.

Originally, a monthly magazine, “PC Mag” moved to biweekly publication in 1983 when one monthly issue grew to over 800 pages! In January, 1986, the magazine had a major redesign and the word “magazine” was added to the logo.

Due to popularity, the magazine outgrew its financing and was sold to Ziff-Davis around 1982. At this time, the staff left to form PC World magazine. The online edition of the magazine started in 1994, and as of 2009, it is only available online. That decision was made due to declining print ad sales.

The magazine provides reviews and previews of the latest hardware and software. Regular departments include:

First Looks (a collection of reviews of newly released products)
Pipeline (a collection of short articles and snippets on computer-industry developments)
Solutions (which includes various how-to articles)
User-to-User (a section in which the magazine’s experts answer user-submitted questions)
After Hours (a section about various computer entertainment products)

R.I.P. 2009: Circuit City, Geocities, SiCortex

hightechhistory — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:28:16 +0000

Halloween has us here at High Tech History reviewing a seasonal offering, if not a treat, from Network World: the IT Industry Graveyard slideshow.

Geeks can indulge in ghoulish fascination over the demise of industry tradeshows, rebranding of HP’s IT services, Palm OS products, and the IBM – Sun buyout that didn’t happen. Remember that?

We did read with interest, but a little sadness, about the demise of SiCortex, a supercomputer company based in Maynard, Mass. that was enjoying success and profitability of 100% in Q1 2009 until its venture capital was yanked.

Based in Clock Tower Place, the same building where Digital Equipment Corporation was established, it’s heartening to know the high-tech industry endures in the very place that it was established. But the VC expectations are totally different.

But the winds won’t be howling through the abandoned offices in those brick buildings for too long.

Another Maynard-based computer company passed into history

– Leigh Montgomery

This day, April 3, 1986: IBM introduces the first “laptop” computer

hightechhistory — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 21:48:08 +0000

On April 3, 1986, IBM introduced the 5140 “Convertible.” It weighed 12 lbs., listed at $1,995, and had a grand total of 256K Random Access Memory, or “RAM.” It was considered a big improvement over its predecessor, the giant IBM Portable PC 5155, which was introduced in 1984. That model, which was much bulkier, had a handle on it, giving it “portability.”

The ”Convertible” had a detachable miniature monitor, which theoretically allowed the user, with a monitor adapter, to hook up the unit to a larger, external monitor.

It was notable for its capacity to run on batteries, and from its being the first computer to utilize 3.5″ floppy disks.

One of several drawbacks was that with its smaller screen, typical letters were compressed to half their normal size (at this time, IBMs did not utilize a graphic interface).

In addition to the criticism of its screen and keyboard, there were a number of other problems which resulted in poor sales. The Convertible was heavier and no faster than its predecessor the 5155 (despite the innovations of a CMOS processor and static RAM), and didn’t include traditional PC expansion ports.

It also had to compete against faster portable computers based on the Intel 80286 processor made by Toshiba and Zenith – that were lighter and offered similar specifications, sometimes at half the price.

– Christopher Hartman