|
|
|
|
|
|
by num
952 days ago
|
|
|
Interesting perspective and agree a good example of the Innovator's Dilemma. The IBM history is rife with innovation that is similar to much of what the tech industry is today, but what strikes me as the most important was the magic that happened in the mid-40s of IBM's Poughkeepsie Lab. So much happened in this period that were major catalysts but two struck me as the most important: the end of the war and leveraging code-breaking innovation (especially from those working in electronics) and a high-rank champion (Jr.) willing to embrace innovation (electronics). This all seemed to converge in the Poughkeepsie lab in short time and the rest, well, is history. There are same amazing books (https://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/20...), declassified documents relating to the early IBM employees post-wartime, and so much more that really tell amazing and still relevant stories. I find the more I learn of the early IBM transition to electronics, the more I see direct parallels to the modern startup world. It was seemingly a startup within a massive company with a monetary "umbrella" to help foster innovation, although likely not the first. Another motivator for the lab's success was how they had to demonstrate value with electronics well beyond a normal burden of proof (overcoming the Innovator's Dilemma). There's still a lot more to learn from their stories. |
|
|
And then that kind of repeated itself with the origin of the IBM PC, didn't it?