AT&T Joining OSF

[Brian Thomson]

In article <24355 at bu-cs.BU.EDU> madd at bu-it.bu.edu (Jim Frost) writes:

>....  IBM became big by being reliable; they never
>did anything really new so what they had was most likely going to
>work.

Then, in article <4459 at cbmvax.UUCP> ditto at cbmvax.UUCP (Michael "Ford" Ditto) adds:

>On the other hand, IBM is high up on my list of companies that
>contribute to the "state of the art" of high technology.  IBM
>pours millions of dollars into abstract and obscure research
>projects which may or may not show promise of being "profitable".
>Look at Mandelbrot's work with fractals, for example.

IBM's strategy becomes obvious if you combine these thoughts with some
recent events:

1) Sponsor leading-edge research, but
2) Continue to market products based on proven technology.
3) Wait a few years until some smaller, more aggressive, and more
   agile companies have developed and commercialized the results of (1), then
4) Finally start using it yourself, and while you're at it,
5) Start making some noise about those patents you were careful to file
   during stage 1 !

Pretty sharp!  You can get the benefits of new technology without risking
any of your valuable credibility.  By the time you use it, someone else has
gone out on that limb and established market acceptance.


		    With tongue in only one cheek,
-- 
		    Brian Thomson,	    CSRI Univ. of Toronto
		    utcsri!uthub!thomson, thomson at hub.toronto.edu