
INTERNATIONAL
With time, technology surpassed the regulations. In the 80s, IBM, without meaning to do so, stimulated the personal computer market which, in the end, would make them loose their dominant role in the world of computers but, at the same time, would help them shake off the government restrictions. So, when IBM developed its own personal computer, it did so as an answer to the rise of new and small businesses like Apple and Tandy. IBM never thought this to be an interesting market. Therefore, instead of developing its own system, it went out to buy existing technology. This one decision is responsible for the exponential growth in the personal computer market in the following decade.
Fifteen years later, the personal computers changed the world so greatly, that the Justice Department recognized that regulations had no more reason to exist. All regulations have now been abolished, with the exception of those pertaining to mini-computers AS/400 and the mainframes of System 390.
It is now up to the Court of New York to decide on the future of IBM, which no longer means the future of computers, as it could have been 40 years ago. Would IBM have had a monopoly on the computer market? If regulations were effective, why is it that after 40 years IBM still holds a large percentage in the mainframe market?
Write to us at agg@guate.net