last to market

[[e-mail]]

I think there is a fundamental disconnect. Most people are
trying to be "first to market" so that they win the market
share and make the most money.

But what am I going to do with money? The thing I want
to do is compete with MSDOS (and Freedos). How is
money going to help me to do that? I still haven't
finalized a design I am happy with to go head to head
with MSDOS 5.0. If I pay someone enough they're going
to come up with a design that I'm happy with?

I can't be happy with someone else's design until I
understand what the issues are. It is only a few
minutes ago that I realized that all drivers could
potentially go on the other side of this equation, not
just disk drives and serial ports.

BFN. Paul.

[Joe Monk]

Do you even understand your market?

Joe

[[e-mail]]

Post by Joe Monk
Do you even understand your market?

The market for pure 16-bit 8086 operating systems that
will potentially inspire pure 32-bit operating systems for
a theoretical 32-bit processor that has 32-bit segment
registers?

I'm pretty sure no-one in that market is actually going to
be paying me, if that's what you mean.

But if they did pay me, what would I use the money for?
I can go to Bondi any time I want, for free, other than
the train ticket (done via Opal) and turn from white to
red in 10 minutes, and get skin cancer. But that's even
more pointless than competing with MSDOS 5. So
what's left to spend the money on?

BFN. Paul.

[Joe Monk]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by Joe Monk
Do you even understand your market?

The market for pure 16-bit 8086 operating systems that
will potentially inspire pure 32-bit operating systems for
a theoretical 32-bit processor that has 32-bit segment
registers?

And thats the failure in the original proposition. The manfacturer doesnt create the market. The manufacturer senses the market and merely answers the call. Since there is no market for what you propose, what is the cost/benefit analysis that justifies the ROI necessary to build it in the first instance?

Think about this. When NASA wants to build a moon rocket, NASA designs it, then asks for bids to build it. Thats the market. The possible manufacturers then analyse the NASA request, compute the ROI, and come up with a schedule and price to deliver the product.

As you were told on IBM-MAIN when you proposed adding AMODE 32 to the mainframe, there was no market to justify the investment by IBM, and so your RFE was declined.

Joe

[[e-mail]]

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by Joe Monk
Do you even understand your market?

The market for pure 16-bit 8086 operating systems that
will potentially inspire pure 32-bit operating systems for
a theoretical 32-bit processor that has 32-bit segment
registers?

And thats the failure in the original proposition. The manfacturer
doesnt create the market. The manufacturer senses the market
and merely answers the call. Since there is no market for what
you propose, what is the cost/benefit analysis that justifies the
ROI necessary to build it in the first instance?

Manufacturers don't speak with one voice.

http://allblackadderscripts.blogspot.com/2012/12/blackadder-ii-episde-3-potato.html

Rum: Opinion is divided on the subject.

Post by Joe Monk
Think about this. When NASA wants to build a moon rocket, NASA designs it,
then asks for bids to build it. Thats the market. The possible manufacturers
then analyse the NASA request, compute the ROI, and come up with a schedule
and price to deliver the product.

And when a university in the Philippines instructed their
students a couple of weeks ago to fire up "debug" under
MSDOS and use "a" to enter some assembly code, I was
inspired to support .com for PDOS/386.

I'm not sure anyone involved computed an ROI. I sure
didn't.

Post by Joe Monk
As you were told on IBM-MAIN when you proposed adding
AMODE 32 to the mainframe, there was no market to justify
the investment by IBM, and so your RFE was declined.

Fortunately IBM are not the only manufacturer of mainframes,
and the people on IBM-MAIN are not the only customers of
mainframes.

BFN. Paul.

[Joe Monk]

Post by ***@gmail.com
Manufacturers don't speak with one voice.

No, but the market does. It's called buying power. If they don't buy your product, you die.

Post by ***@gmail.com
Fortunately IBM are not the only manufacturer of mainframes,
and the people on IBM-MAIN are not the only customers of
mainframes.

They are these days. But guess what ... they still listen to and respond to/are driven by their customers, aka the market.

Joe

[[e-mail]]

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com
Manufacturers don't speak with one voice.

No, but the market does. It's called buying power. If they don't buy your product, you die.

No, some manufacturers produce products at a loss,
perhaps because they are being subsidized by other
products they produce, or perhaps to buy market
share.

IBM was giving away their operating systems for free,
that's right, free, until someone put a gun to their head
and told them to start charging something.

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com
Fortunately IBM are not the only manufacturer of mainframes,
and the people on IBM-MAIN are not the only customers of
mainframes.

They are these days.

No, they're not. There's some company I've forgotten
the name of, based in Switzerland I think, Lazarus or
something, and there is Jujitsu.

Post by Joe Monk
But guess what ... they still listen to and respond to/are
driven by their customers, aka the market.

Some companies are in monopoly position and don't
need to listen to anyone. Others are producing a
particular product at a loss, so don't really give a shit
either. Companies don't speak with one voice.

BFN. Paul.

[Joe Monk]

Post by ***@gmail.com
No, some manufacturers produce products at a loss,
perhaps because they are being subsidized by other
products they produce, or perhaps to buy market
share.

Youre of course referring to a loss leader. There is no such thing in computers, or operating systems. Computers, because the margins are already razor thin. Operating systems, because they are licensed. You never actually buy the code, only a license to use it.

Post by ***@gmail.com
IBM was giving away their operating systems for free,
that's right, free, until someone put a gun to their head
and told them to start charging something.

That's not what happened.

"The costs of developing the System/360 operating system software had proved a major trauma for the company, and seemed to foreshadow still further cost increases. In addition, the growth of independent software vendors made it possible by the late 1960s for IBM to consider separate pricing for software and to retreat from its commitment to provide all of the software tools that users might need in order to purchase or lease IBM computers." - https://www.aei.org/economics/taking-a-second-look-at-the-idea-that-antitrust-action-created-the-u-s-software-industry/

Post by ***@gmail.com
No, they're not. There's some company I've forgotten
the name of, based in Switzerland I think, Lazarus or
something, and there is Jujitsu.

Youre of course referring to LZLabs, which is 100% virtual. No actual hardware.

Jiujitsu, of course, doesnt make anything. Everything they have is vaporware, the pipe dreams of some guy.

Post by ***@gmail.com
Some companies are in monopoly position and don't
need to listen to anyone. Others are producing a
particular product at a loss, so don't really give a shit
either. Companies don't speak with one voice.

See above.

Joe

[Joe Monk]

Post by Joe Monk
Youre of course referring to LZLabs, which is 100% virtual. No actual hardware.

BTW, both Roger Bowler and Jan Jaegar work at LZlabs. Their current offering is based in part on hercules.

Joe

[[e-mail]]

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com
No, they're not. There's some company I've forgotten
the name of, based in Switzerland I think, Lazarus or
something, and there is Jujitsu.

Youre of course referring to LZLabs, which is 100% virtual. No actual hardware.

That's a weird definition. Software requires hardware
to run on. It's true that there are more layers than
just microcode like IBM use. And thus slower. So?
That doesn't stop them from being a mainframe
vendor.

Post by Joe Monk
Jiujitsu, of course, doesnt make anything. Everything they
have is vaporware, the pipe dreams of some guy.

None of it is vaporware. You can download it all already,
and it has been available for literally decades.

BFN. Paul.

[Joe Monk]

Post by ***@gmail.com
None of it is vaporware. You can download it all already,
and it has been available for literally decades.

No going concern is using it to generate profits - aka vaporware.

Joe

[[e-mail]]

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com
None of it is vaporware. You can download it all already,
and it has been available for literally decades.

No going concern is using it to generate profits - aka vaporware.

That is not the definition of vaporware. Vaporware is
something that hasn't been delivered.

Lack of *currently* *known* (by you and me - at least that either
of us is admitting) profit-generating use is something completely
different.

Note that someone (a company in Finland) used my zmodem code
in a product, and I only knew about years later because they sent
me some fixes. I thanked them and asked if they wanted to be
acknowledged in the documentation, but they asked me to not
mention their name.

BFN. Paul.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 14:30:23 -0700 (PDT)

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com
IBM was giving away their operating systems for free,
that's right, free, until someone put a gun to their head
and told them to start charging something.

That's not what happened.
"The costs of developing the System/360 operating system software had
proved a major trauma for the company, and seemed to foreshadow still
further cost increases.

Wrong scenario? I think IBM DOS on a PC ...

[[e-mail]]

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com
IBM was giving away their operating systems for free,
that's right, free, until someone put a gun to their head
and told them to start charging something.

That's not what happened.
"The costs of developing the System/360 operating system software had
proved a major trauma for the company, and seemed to foreshadow still
further cost increases.

Wrong scenario? I think IBM DOS on a PC ...

Joe had the right target for this one. I didn't even remember the PC. :-)

I don't know whether his description is correct though.
A guy called Gerhard wasn't happy about his involvement
in forcing IBM to charge for their software, but I don't care
enough about it to research.

BFN. Paul.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 04:12:09 -0700 (PDT)

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com
Manufacturers don't speak with one voice.

No, but the market does. It's called buying power. If they don't buy your product, you die.

Post by ***@gmail.com
Fortunately IBM are not the only manufacturer of mainframes,
and the people on IBM-MAIN are not the only customers of
mainframes.

They are these days. But guess what ... they still listen to and
respond to/are driven by their customers, aka the market.

Why do you not understand that his OS is a market of one? (for now)
He has no customers, no users (except himself).

[Rod Pemberton]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 02:04:48 -0700 (PDT)

Post by Joe Monk

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by Joe Monk
Do you even understand your market?

The market for pure 16-bit 8086 operating systems that
will potentially inspire pure 32-bit operating systems for
a theoretical 32-bit processor that has 32-bit segment
registers?

And thats the failure in the original proposition. The manfacturer
doesnt create the market. The manufacturer senses the market and
merely answers the call. Since there is no market for what you
propose, what is the cost/benefit analysis that justifies the ROI
necessary to build it in the first instance?

While I agree with that logical and rational perspective, if everyone
else followed that logical rationale, we never would've had any Forth
micro-processors. Yet, those Forth micro-processors produced lots of
patents on new processor technology which other companies, like Intel
and AMD, had to pay up billions for. Universities play the same game,
get there first, patent it up, make others pay. Patent trolls do to.

Anyway, "You doth protest too much!" Whenever DOOM is ported to yet
another device, no one complains. Yet, when DOS is ported to yet
another device, everyone runs away screaming.

[[e-mail]]

Anyway, "You doth protest too much!" Whenever DOOM is ported to yet
another device, no one complains. Yet, when DOS is ported to yet
another device, everyone runs away screaming.

Can you elaborate on this? I wasn't aware of either thing.
There is a principle that games are good but certain
operating systems are bad?

Thanks. Paul.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Mon, 12 Jul 2021 12:06:05 -0700 (PDT)

Post by ***@gmail.com

Anyway, "You doth protest too much!" Whenever DOOM is ported to yet
another device, no one complains. Yet, when DOS is ported to yet
another device, everyone runs away screaming.

Can you elaborate on this? I wasn't aware of either thing.

DOOM is perceived as "cool" and has been ported to just about every
electronic device in existence. (*)

Lots of people are turned off by the idea of DOS or DOS-like CLI,
especially people from the *nix or Linux communities. Any time
someone brings up this topic, such people balk, act like DOS was a
useless joke, either express hatred or simply ignore it. Now, I'm
thinking we need to add people from the IBM communities to that list
too.

Post by ***@gmail.com
There is a principle that games are good but certain
operating systems are bad?

That was my point.


(*) E.g., on Hackaday alone there are articles on DOOM for:

nRF5340 SoC
A smart light bulb
A restaurant kitchen bump bar (order terminal)
Bootloader
iCE40 FPGA
Altera CycloneV FPGA
Nintendo Game & Watch
Nintendo NES
Printers
Smart Watches
Amiga
Cisco IP Phone
GPS device
ATMega328
Oscilloscope
Honeywell Prestige thermostat
Sansa MP3 Player
Leap TV console
Raspberry PI
Intel Edison
VoCore (SoC from routers)
ATM machine
TI-nspire calculators
Epaper display
BifferBoard
Portrait Screen
Game Boy

and,

A Roomba which generates DOOM levels
A neural network which generates DOOM levels

[[e-mail]]

Post by Rod Pemberton
DOOM is perceived as "cool" and has been ported to just about every
electronic device in existence. (*)
A smart light bulb

I was wondering what "Doom" actually was, that it could
be played on a light bulb.

Is this it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_(1993_video_game)

That's a graphics program. What relation does it have to
a light bulb?

Thanks. Paul.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Mon, 12 Jul 2021 16:03:47 -0700 (PDT)

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by Rod Pemberton
DOOM is perceived as "cool" and has been ported to just about every
electronic device in existence. (*)
A smart light bulb

I was wondering what "Doom" actually was, that it could
be played on a light bulb.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_(1993_video_game)

Yes.

Post by ***@gmail.com
That's a graphics program. What relation does it have to
a light bulb?

The inexpensive 3-color light bulb has a powerful micro-controller
built-in which was harvested to produce a small small hand-held sized
gaming device. (I.e., waste of a micro-processor ...)

https://hackaday.com/2021/06/15/a-smart-light-bulb-running-doom-is-a-pretty-bright-idea/