The Cooperation Conspiracy with Computers and Technologies

I once met a friend of my parents, old, and he works in a senior position in IBM, somewhere quite high up there.

We were having general conversation about what the future computers would look like, and he told us about a conspiracy that is already going on.

He said about how IBM and Windows are actually connected, and to the outside world what seems like competition between the two PC giants, underneath the camouflage is actually Windows and IBM sharing the profit together as monopolies.

The current technology of computer are already developed so advance beyond our imagination for the next 20 years, voice recongnition, AI, RAM 10 times greater than the ones we have now, speed 5 times faster than the current Pentium, you name it.

But the cooperations are concealing this, and would only release an improvement of generation of PCs over the previous one slowly, so that they would make the most profit over each generation.

If this is true i think it is a very sinister and evil thing to do. Imagine how standard of living for humans would enhance with those current existing highly advance computers.

But then that old man may just be bluffing, this theory sounds like too far fetched, but on the contray it also makes perfect sense for such a conspiracy to exist......



[edit on 27-12-2005 by EarthUnificationFrontier]

I actually agree with the old fella there. In actuality, technology being held from the public is at least 30 years in advance and the theory to profit the most is spot on.

Unfortunately, the more control that the 'secret' govt has by slowly releasing such products, not only does it give more profit, but it gives more power and control over those who use them. What would happen if a product thats 30 years in advance was released. Too many things would happen at once, new discoveries in science, new discoveries in medicine, new discoveries in space, too much overflow of information would create panic and chaos, and thus the control aspect.

Kind Regards
Merger

Was your IBM friend talking about supercomputing? He's totally right about some technologies out there in the industry way more advanced than the wimpy computers toys available to the general public.

I would not go as far as calling it a conspiracy concealing it from us, though. Unless I'm missing something here and he was talking about more advanced tech than that. Supercomputing stuff is all publicly known if you know where to look for.

IBM BlueGene Astron Footage (WMV - 14,55 Mb)

We know the technology exists, the difference is those computers listed in TOP500 Supercomputers List are very expensive. For example the Cray XT3 supercomputer is priced at $2 million each, not what I would call affordable, and I say 'each' because those are the kind of computers you would buy in a bundle to build a cluster covering a surface the size of a football field. You want that thing in your home? Well, you must have a really big house, my friend!

And if somebody was behind that control of tech progress, I think we can discard Microsoft because they are not even in the high-end computing business. I'm not saying that to start a flamewar or anything, but just to name one example I can think of, Windows for 64-bit processors is still not ready for market as we speak, yet I own a Sun Microsystems workstation with 64-bit processor dating from 10 years ago sitting on my desk right there. And they are not alone, Silicon Graphics got powerful 64-bit computers since many years as well. Does Microsoft forgot to hide that technology from us?

Just saying.

Na, they have to hold back new releases so that the NSA can keep up with the tech.

How NSA access was built into Windows

Thats what I hear anyway.

If this were true...

Why did IBM develop OS/2 as a "Windows Killer"?

Why did IBM buy Lotus to compete with Microsoft?

Why does IBM try to promote DB2 as a SQL Server "killer"?

Why did IBM sell-off it's personal computer division?

Why don't the audiors know of secret profit-sharing between IBM and Microsoft?

Why did IBM suffer financially in the late 1980's and early-to-mid 1990's?

Sounds like good business sense to me.

Technology is always way ahead of consumer goods - it's all about economies of scale - the cheaper items are to manufacture and distribute, the cheaper they are to sell - the bigger the user-base gets.

As a technology becomes more wide-spread, a better model, or replacement is produced in order to keep revenue coming in - When products first appear, they are expensive and new to the market, as parts become cheaper, the product becomes cheaper and a wider userbase is established........ and so on, and so on.

I've no doubt big businesses collude to strengthen their monopolies in their respective markets.

It's where we are today isn't it, with concerns to business and consumer goods - Everyone is now a consumer from very early childhood onwards.