←back to thread

CP/M creator Gary Kildall's memoirs released as free download

(spectrum.ieee.org)
244 points rbanffy | 2 comments | 18 Jul 25 10:22 UTC | HN request time: 0.432s | source
Show context
pavlov ◴[18 Jul 25 12:12 UTC] No.44603830[source]▶
"“Our father, Gary Kildall, was one of the founders of the personal computer industry, but you probably don’t know his name. Those who have heard of him may recall the myth that he ‘missed’ the opportunity to become Bill Gates by going flying instead of meeting with IBM. Unfortunately, this tall tale paints Gary as a ‘could-have-been,’ ignores his deep contributions, and overshadows his role as an inventor of key technologies that define how computer platforms run today.

"Gary viewed computers as learning tools rather than profit engines. His career choices reflect a different definition of success, where innovation means sharing ideas, letting passion drive your work and making source code available for others to build upon. His work ethic during the 1970s resembles that of the open-source community today.

"With this perspective, we offer a portion of our father’s unpublished memoirs so that you can read about his experiences and reflections on the early days of the computer industry, directly in his own voice."

Sounds really interesting. Thanks for making this available!

replies(2): >>44604091 #>>44605235 #
elzbardico ◴[18 Jul 25 14:46 UTC] No.44605235[source]▶
Let's be frank. Gates was from the WASP elites, old money stuff. IBM would probably find a reason to give him the deal rather than to Gary no matter what.
replies(4): >>44605296 #>>44606938 #>>44610302 #>>44610993 #
acdha ◴[18 Jul 25 14:51 UTC] No.44605296[source]▶
In particular, his mother – Mary Maxwell Gates – was on the United Way board along with IBM’s chairman John Opel and reportedly discussed her son’s company with Opel a few weeks before they made the decision to license MS-DOS.

https://www.nytimes.com/1994/06/11/obituaries/mary-gates-64-...

replies(1): >>44606388 #
WalterBright ◴[18 Jul 25 16:10 UTC] No.44606388[source]▶
There's little doubt that Ms Gates suggested that IBM look into Bill Gates, but I seriously doubt that IBM made the major business decision to contract with Gates because of his mother's suggestion.
replies(3): >>44606933 #>>44607549 #>>44608148 #
acdha ◴[18 Jul 25 17:32 UTC] No.44607549[source]▶
None of us know what was said but I have no reason to doubt it based on the reports of his subsequent conversations with lower-level IBM executives. It probably didn’t seem like an especially consequential decision both because neither Gates nor Kildall were especially proven at that time by the standards of a Goliath like IBM and the mainframe guys were notoriously dismissive of PCs (Opel came up through S/360). I’ve seen enough nepotism not to question the plausibility but it’s especially easy to imagine people high up the management ladder at the biggest mainframe manufacturer thinking it didn’t really matter which of the toy computer operating system vendors they picked. I didn’t work in that world then (that was my dad’s generation) but even in the mid-90s when I started working in tech it was not uncommon to find mainframe people who were dismissive of PC or Unix systems as non-serious.
replies(1): >>44608178 #
WalterBright ◴[18 Jul 25 18:26 UTC] No.44608178[source]▶
Ms Gates wasn't on the board of IBM, she was on the board of another company. That isn't nepotism.

There is no way successful IBM would commit to Microsoft without a thorough vetting.

Few remember, but IBM also sold CPM/86 for the PC. Kildall had his chance, and muffed it with the high price.

replies(3): >>44608865 #>>44608942 #>>44609207 #
Tor3 ◴[18 Jul 25 19:31 UTC] No.44608865[source]▶
I remember the very high price of CP/M-86. If that was because of DRI's pricing and not something IBM did, then indeed that made the choice simple, in Kildall's disfavour.
replies(2): >>44610057 #>>44610147 #
1. ndiddy ◴[18 Jul 25 21:44 UTC] No.44610147[source]▶
According to the oral history of Tom Rolander (VP of engineering at DRI, he was in the famous IBM meeting), IBM wanted to call CP/M-86 "PC-DOS" and pay a one-time licensing fee, but DRI said they had to keep it as CP/M-86 and pay a per-device royalty. About a month after the meeting, Rolander heard through the grapevine that IBM had licensed QDOS instead of CP/M-86 for their operating system. Kildall informed IBM that he was already aware of QDOS and was preparing a lawsuit against SCP because he believed it to be an illegal CP/M clone. To defuse the situation, IBM promised that they wouldn't bundle an OS with the PC, would offer PC-DOS, CP/M-86, and UCSD P-System alongside the PC, and would pay the royalties up front for some large number of copies of CP/M-86. The condition was that DRI wouldn't sue IBM or Microsoft over the similarities between QDOS and CP/M. When the PC was released, Kildall and Rolander discovered they had been double crossed:

> So we got the notice about the rolling out and all the rest of that, and so as Gary and I were want to do, we flew up to San Jose and took a cab over to the IBM store, and we came in the store, and sure enough there was the IBM PC sitting there, and here were the three boxes of the operating system. And we looked at this and the IBM PC-DOS was priced at $40, and then over here was CP/M and it was priced at I’m pretty sure it was $260. It was more than $200 above PC-DOS, and I don’t even remember what the UCSD P-System was. But we looked at that and I’ve never had my face slapped in my life, but I know what it would feel like to have my face slapped. It was such an unexpected thing. I mean we had totally assumed that this was going to be a level playing field, that PC- DOS was going to be priced the same as CP/M, the same as the UCSD P-System, and that we were going to let the market, the users decide which one, which clearly it wasn’t. And Gary described that day later on in his memoirs as kind of the day innocence was gone.

Here's a link to the full oral history if you're interested: https://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/20...

replies(1): >>44610497 #
2. skissane ◴[18 Jul 25 22:30 UTC] No.44610497[source]▶
> It was such an unexpected thing. I mean we had totally assumed that this was going to be a level playing field, that PC- DOS was going to be priced the same as CP/M, the same as the UCSD P-System, and that we were going to let the market, the users decide which one, which clearly it wasn’t. And Gary described that day later on in his memoirs as kind of the day innocence was gone.

This seems like a rather unrealistic expectation when one has per-device royalties and the other hasn’t. Of course, that probably can’t fully explain the magnitude of the price difference-which may indeed have involved some underhandedness on IBM’s part-but a vendor who charges a reseller more for a product than its competitor and then complains that reseller sells its product for a higher price the competitor’s, is being a bit silly