Reason 3 Orkester Bank

Chapter II: 8.0 sound and smoke

It started with smoke and mirrors. It ended in darkness and fog. A case that made history: Cintrol Data (CDC) against IBM. More than that: a game of poker in which a quarter of a billion dollars was set against a database. Poker Face, William (Bill) C. Norris, president of CDC.
It began in 1964. In the delivery of comprehensive / 360 system, in which the computing world forward to the new generation waited, CDC tilled very successful, a market segment with the highly skilled, scientific calculator CDC 6600th With this system, dominated the multiprogramming and was designed for time-sharing, CDC joined a market gap that IBM had overlooked. Fully attuned to commercial, neglected the / 360 part of the scientific mainframe computer market so strong that Control Data sold not only, but also deserved. She was thus the first company to IBM, which ran the computer business at a profit. The idea was so simple that IBM would have been proud. For it was obvious. Two things settled, the CDC strategists:
- So far, no manufacturer in the upper range of technological and scientific applications targeted action.
- This area required minimal amount of software support, as scientists have developed their own software.
This strategy was so successful that IBM was nervous, which were by the / 360 situation already been attacked. comes to the motto "on a model now it no longer even announced they jauntily to the largest computer in the world.. the IBM 360-90 The early birth was dizzy addicted and never came out of the incubator But CDC got into a headlock. The 6600 jobs that Control Data had almost certainly been changed. In 1966, the company was in the red. Meanwhile, the waiting / 360-90-Purchaser on the delivery of the ordered trick box. In vain. The delivery dates were not implemented, ignoring the benefit plans, and with a nachgeschobenen / 360-91 was again battered image. The wind machines CDC gave a new impetus was given to doc h is still not satisfied. The new flight of CDC boss Norris was arrogant. "God damn, we will sue IBM," he swore end of 1968. So far he had only provoked. "IBM is out to ruin us. You can publish calm," he told a reporter.
Keep Going:
http://rv-ibm.blogspot.com/2009/02/kaiptel-ii-90-tatenbank.html

What Are Good Fast Cameras?

Chapter II: 7.0 evidence

Action No. 1: United States against IBM in 1932
- was contrary to the provisions of the competitive process
the first time that IBM's antitrust in touch, because it forced the users of its punch-card systems, only IBM's board as a data carrier to use. 1936 finally came to the verdict, which ordered the first unbundling. However, IBM was enigeräumt the right to dictate the quality of the cards from other manufacturers for their equipment. The ruling had no effect on the market situation.
Action No. 2: United States against IBM in 1947
- violation of the provisions of the Competition Act
The process is successfully used by IBM to abducted 1954th At that time she was due to a parallel ruling against the United Shoe Company in Schwulitätetn and quickly sought a Vergle3ich (consent decree), which was adopted in 1956 to the following conditions:
- sale of IBM now has at their machines, too.
- IBM may not buy used machines.
- machine buyer must receive the same service as machines tenants.
The comparison showed no significant change in market conditions.
Action 3: U.S. v. IBM, 1969
- violation of the provisions of the Competition Act
special price discrimination, increase market barriers for competitors, predatory competition and announcement of computers, the paper Weset allegations of extensive indictment. The process workflows and runs and ...
-plaintiff No. 1: Telex v. IBM, 1972
- violation of the provisions of the Competition Act
verdict in the first instance in September 1973; lagged a friendly judge in Tulsa (Oklahoma), the IBM 352 million dollars in damages and makes some hard conditions for the behavior of multinationals to the mixed-hardware industry. But just alls only in the first instance.
countersuit 1: IBM to Telex, 1973
- breach of patent rights, exploitation of trade secrets
verdict on appeal: Telex is sentenced to $ 18,500,000 damages. As the Company does not raise this money, she retired from the business process, including a comparison (October 1975) and tried to make their money back in competition. Conclusion: IBM tolerate continued successful mixed-hardware company.
-plaintiff 2: Control Data (CDC) against IBM
- violation of the provisions of the Competition Act specifically
announcement of paper machines. Taken without trial: CDC, the quiet giant of the computer business, he succeeded as the only to escape the control loop of the "impotence of knowledge".