[ih] Why did TCP win? [Re: Internet-history Digest, Vol 63, Issue 3

[Dave Crocker]

On 2/3/2025 1:43 PM, Craig Partridge wrote:
> I would argue that 1989 was ahead of the curve (and we should give due 
> credit to Brian and Tim -- they were 6 years ahead of Bill Gates!).


With respect to networking futures, I've never considered Gates a useful 
metric.

The public awareness of what was happening was not there by 1989,  But, 
well, les jouex sont faits. It just took a few more years for the ball 
to show its place.

And, yes he should have, but he was doing marketing.  Things like the 
Web had sex appeal that email never did, and it was coupled with serious 
utility.  So as marketing efforts were concerned, it was perfect for 
finishing the last bit of debate.

Probably again, in that 1994 time-frame, I arrived late at a working 
group meeting in the Electronic Messaging Association.  It had been 
thoroughly dominated for years by X.400 vendors as devotees.  I'd 
regularly engage in battles with them, of course. It was perversely fun.

The exchange I liked the most was when one of them noted that X.400 use 
had been growing at a steady rate.  Let's say 10% a quarter.  I noted 
that networking had exploded and was growing exponentially.  And linear 
growth in an exponential market constitutes decreasing market share...

Anyhow this time I came in and some friends visibly stiffened. An X.400 
vendor was still touting his technology, with a line like "Yes, Internet 
Mail is proving popular, but X.400 is still the future."  I sat down and 
didn't say anything.  After the meeting, my friends hassled me about my 
silence.  I noted that it wasn't worth the effort because the war was 
well and truly over.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker

Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social