[rbanffy]

> You say "only" as if the OS weren't a critical part of running a computer

An OS is a critical piece of software, but the PC was also offered with CP/M-86 (IIRC, for a price DR considered suicidal)

> You say as if that was a chance happening and not a deliberate and very insightful strategy

Demanding non-exclusive contract was, in fact, brilliant. That single move turned Microsoft from a small niche software company to the powerhouse it was in the 90's. Had IBM said "no" (as they should), Bill Gates would still be filthy rich and a lot more popular.

> If Apple had won instead of Microsoft (...) having only a single vendor that's known to charge exorbitant margins.

I believe Commodore would have taken care of that. Or Atari. Or VTech, maybe Franklin. Or anyone else. Apple never had the dominance PC cloners have.

[tanzam75]

Suppose that there was no Microsoft. Who would have taken its place? DR was charing $240 for CP/M 86 -- the same amount it charged for CP/M on other platforms. At the same time, Microsoft was charging $40 for DOS. The other option on the IBM PC was UCSD p-system, which was fatally crippled by the overhead of the interpretation layer -- we didn't yet have JIT.

Or perhaps you think that a system not backed by IBM would have found success. In other words, multiple companies duking it out with incompatible OSes. How often does that work out?

I submit that the most likely scenario would've been a duopoly -- Apple with the home and education market, IBM with the business market.

[rbanffy]

> Suppose that there was no Microsoft. Who would have taken its place?

Why would a single company take its place?

> DR was charing $240 for CP/M 86 -- the same amount it charged for CP/M on other platforms.

I remember the price was for the IBM-PC bundle and that DR was uncomfortable with it. I also remember CP/M came bundled with many Z-80-based computers of the time - there was not enough hardware standardization to allow shrink-wrapped cross-platform operating systems to exist.

> The other option on the IBM PC was UCSD p-system, which was fatally crippled by the overhead of the interpretation layer

UCSD p-system was cross-platform, at least.

> -- we didn't yet have JIT.

Or maybe we would have one by the late 80's

> multiple companies duking it out with incompatible OSes. How often does that work out?

We don't have enough data to make any accurate predictions. I suppose we may have arrived at a set of basic compatible APIs, much like POSIX, that allowed software designed for it to run on many different computers.

> I submit that the most likely scenario would've been a duopoly -- Apple with the home and education market, IBM with the business market.

And Commodore and Atari sharing the home/gaming market in the US, Acorn and Sinclair in the UK. Commodore would possibly own TV and special effects. 68K (or ARM) based 32-bit boxes would be considered basic home machines and the average person would have access to preemptive multitasking in the mid 80's.

[yuhong]

Yea, my favorite topic is the MS OS/2 2.0 fiasco: http://yuhongbao.blogspot.ca/2012/12/about-ms-os2-20-fiasco-...