Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This betting wrong on specialization happened over and over again in the late 70s and 80s. The wave of improvements and price reduction in commodity PC hardware was insane, especially from the late 80s onwards. From Lisp machines to specialized graphics/CAD workstations, to "home computer" microcomputer systems, they all were buried because they mistakenly bet against Moore's law and economies of scale.

In 91 I was a dedicated Atari ST user convinced of the superiority of the 68k architecture, running a UUCP node off my hacked up ST. By the end of 92 I had a grey-box 486 running early releases of Linux and that was that. I used to fantasize over the photos and screenshots of workstations in the pages of UnixWorld and similar magazines... But then I could just dress my cheap 486 up to act like one and it was great.




Atari ST and Intel PC are not distant categories. Both are "'home computer microcomputer' systems". Not all home computer systems can win, just like not all browsers can win, not all spreadsheets can win, not all ways of hooking up keyboards and mice to computers can win, ...


They were distant on market tier but most importantly on economies of scale. The Intel PC market grew exponentially.


Sure, but the economy of scale came from the success. The first IBM PC was a prototype wire-wrapped by hand on a large perf board.

When you switched to Intel in 1992, PC's had already existed since 1981. PC's didn't wipe out most other home computers overnight.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: