Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
m History of software industry, including licensing |
||
Line 22:
Until that time, software was ''[[Bundled software|bundled]]'' with the hardware by [[Original equipment manufacturer]]s (OEMs) such as [[Data General]], [[Digital Equipment]] and IBM. When a customer bought a [[minicomputer]], at that time the smallest computer on the market, the computer did not come with [[Pre-installed software]], but needed to be installed by engineers employed by the OEM. Computer hardware companies not only bundled their software, they also placed demands on the ___location of the hardware in a refrigerated space called a [[computer room]]. Most companies had their software on the books for 0 dollars, unable to claim it as an asset (this is similar to financing of popular music in those days). When Data General introduced the [[Data General Nova]], a company called Digidyne wanted to use its [[RDOS]] operating system on its own [[Clone (computing)| hardware clone]]. Data General refused to [[Software license|license their software]] (which was hard to do, since it was on the books as a free asset), and claimed their "bundling rights". The [[Supreme Court]] set a precedent called Digidyne v. Data General in 1985. The Supreme Court let a 9th circuit decision stand, and Data General was eventually forced into licensing the Operating System software because it was ruled that restricting the license to only DG hardware was an illegal ''tying arrangement''.<ref>[http://www.jstor.org/pss/1372482 Tying Arrangements and the Computer Industry: Digidyne Corp. vs. Data General]</ref> Soon after, IBM 'published' its [[DOS]] source for free, and [[Microsoft]] was born. Unable to sustain the loss from lawyer's fees, Data General ended up being taken over by [[EMC Corporation]]. The Supreme Court decision made it possible to value software, and also purchase [[Software patent]]s. The move by IBM was almost a protest at the time. Few in the industry believed that anyone would profit from it other than IBM (through free publicity). Microsoft and [[Apple]] were able to thus cash in on 'soft' products. It is hard to imagine today that people once felt that software was worthless without a machine. There are many successful companies today that sell only software products, though there are still many common software licensing problems due to the complexity of designs and poor documentation, leading to [[patent troll]]s.
With open software specifications and the possibility of software licensing, new opportunities arose for software tools that then became the [[de facto standard]], such as DOS for operating systems, but also various proprietary word processing and [[spreadsheet]] programs. In a similar growth pattern, proprietary development methods became standard [[Software development methodology]].
== Overview ==
| |||