A world without general-purpose computers
One silly thought haunts me, would it be possible to develop IT without general-purpose computers? That is, for scientists and engineers, mainframes, for games, gaming consoles, phones only “to call”, “Home Kitchen Eniac” to go online and see mail, some kind of “jukebox 2000” as a jukebox. And there are no problems with licenses, all at the level of firmware, cartridges with games-software-music, only incompatible formats ... Beauty! Again, viruses are few.
It seems to me that still not possible. Not even because there are people like Stallman.
First, there are few factories producing microprocessors, controllers and memory, and with the development 2-3 large components for 1 type of components remain, small ones die. Secondly, although there are quite a few universities, there are again 3-4 training programs, there are no more fundamental works. The formats for all wars also remain in general, 2-3 per type: popular, alternative and niche exotic. That is, there is some natural unification caused by the need to transfer knowledge in a minimum time, since there is a rotation of specialists and it is impossible to retrain them when moving from company to company from scratch. Yes, and the "secret knowledge" in the transition they will carry with them irreparably, if everything is unique. Thus, in order for the IT world to be completely non-free, it is necessary that it consists of 2-3 companies that produce absolutely all parts of computers, operating systems, etc., where people are forbidden to switch to competitors, dismissal only to the grave, any knowledge only are sold. It is necessary to unify something - immediately there is an opportunity to assemble a “handicraft computer”, write an assembler for it, a compiler, and anything else. Immediately there is an opportunity to present unification as a competitive advantage, openness of interfaces as a business model. That was exactly what happened when computers and components began to fall in price and became in demand.
There is, of course, another possibility - the prohibition of the transfer of knowledge, information and technology for free at the legislative level. But I don’t believe in such a development outside the needs of warriors :-). Well, I wrote a complete nonsense?
It seems to me that still not possible. Not even because there are people like Stallman.
First, there are few factories producing microprocessors, controllers and memory, and with the development 2-3 large components for 1 type of components remain, small ones die. Secondly, although there are quite a few universities, there are again 3-4 training programs, there are no more fundamental works. The formats for all wars also remain in general, 2-3 per type: popular, alternative and niche exotic. That is, there is some natural unification caused by the need to transfer knowledge in a minimum time, since there is a rotation of specialists and it is impossible to retrain them when moving from company to company from scratch. Yes, and the "secret knowledge" in the transition they will carry with them irreparably, if everything is unique. Thus, in order for the IT world to be completely non-free, it is necessary that it consists of 2-3 companies that produce absolutely all parts of computers, operating systems, etc., where people are forbidden to switch to competitors, dismissal only to the grave, any knowledge only are sold. It is necessary to unify something - immediately there is an opportunity to assemble a “handicraft computer”, write an assembler for it, a compiler, and anything else. Immediately there is an opportunity to present unification as a competitive advantage, openness of interfaces as a business model. That was exactly what happened when computers and components began to fall in price and became in demand.
There is, of course, another possibility - the prohibition of the transfer of knowledge, information and technology for free at the legislative level. But I don’t believe in such a development outside the needs of warriors :-). Well, I wrote a complete nonsense?
')
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/19261/
All Articles