Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-thh2z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-07T23:20:19.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plumbers of the Internet: The Creation and Evolution of the LAN Industry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2015

Urs Von Burg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1973 at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center (Xerox PARC), one of the first local area networking (LAN) technologies was invented: Ethernet. Today, Ethernet is the dominant LAN standard but, as is the case with most other information technologies, Ethernet was neither the only available alternative nor a technology well suited for all networking needs from the outset. In fact, when it was first commercialized in 1980, Ethernet was a relatively expensive, high-end technology, suited for connecting minicomputers or workstations but too expensive for connecting microcomputers or personal computers (PCs), soon to be the largest LAN market.

Type
Dissertation Summaries
Information
Enterprise & Society , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , December 2000 , pp. 705 - 714
Copyright
Copyright © Enterprise and Society 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Some seminal works on standardization theory are David, Paul, “Clio and the Economics of QWERTY,”American Economic Review 75 (1985):332–37Google Scholar; Arthur, W. Brian, “Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events,”The Economic Journal 99 (March1989):116–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Katz, Michael andShapiro, Carl, “Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility,”American Eco-nomic Review 75 (1985):424–40Google Scholar; Katz, Michael andCarl Shapiro, , “Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities,”Journal of Political Economy 94 (Aug.1986):822–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and David, Paul andGreenstein, Shane, “The Economics of Compatibility Standards: An Introduction to Recent Research,”Economics of Innovation and New Technology 1 (1990):3–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. For a similarly defined community concept, see Wade, James, “Dynamics of Organizational Communities and Technological Bandwagons: An Empirical Investigation of Community Evolution in the Microprocessor Market,”Strategic Management Journal 16 (Summer1995):111–33Google Scholar, and Wade, James, “A Community-Level Analysis of Sources and Rates of Technological Variation in the Microprocessor Market,”Academy of Management Journal 39 (1996):1218–44.Google Scholar

3. For the concept of corporate path dependencies, see, for example, Teece, David,Pisano, Gary, andShuen, Amy, “Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management,”Strategic Management Journal 18 (1997):509–333.0.CO;2-Z>CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Nelson, Richard, “Why Do Firms Differ, and How Does It Matter?”Strategic Management Journal 12 (1991):61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. For Metcalfe’s charisma see, for example, Kirsner, Scott, “The Legend of Bob Metcalfe,Wired” (Nov.1998),182–86,232–34,246–47.Google Scholar Professor David Farber, inventor of Token Ring technology, made similar statements in an interview with author, 31 Jan. 1997.

5. Sirbu, Marvin andHughes, Kent, “Standardization of Local Area Networks, paper presented at the 14th Annual Telecommunications Policy Research Conference,”Virginia,1986.Google Scholar

6. Liddle, David, previously head of theSystems Development Division at Xerox PARC, interview with author, 21 June1995.Google Scholar

7. Rodgers, David, previously with theEthernet Development Group at Digital Equipment, interview with author, 28 June1995Google Scholar; and Fuller, Samuel,previously vice president of Digital Equipment, interview with author, 23 Feb.1996.Google Scholar

8. For Metcalfe’s role in bringing Intel into the alliance, see Barney, Clifford, “1983 Award for Achievement: Robert M. Metcalfe,”Electronics (6 oct.1983),112–15Google Scholar; and Metcalfe, Robert, “Let the Ethernet Chips Fall Where They May”,Network Computing (1 Nov.1991).Google Scholar

9. For the standardization efforts by the IEEE, see Sirbu, andHughes, , “Standardization of Local Area Networks;” andStallings, William, “IEEE Project 802,”Computerworld (13 Feb.1984): “In Depth”27–41Google Scholar. Additional information was ob-tained from Graube, Maris,previously chair of the IEEE 802 project, interview with author, 5 Oct.1995.Google Scholar

10. Crane, Ronald,previously senior engineer with Xerox PARC and 3Com, interview with author, 17 May1995Google Scholar; and Liddle, David,interview with author, 21 June1995.Google Scholar

11. For the split into three IEEE standards, see Data|Channels, “IEEE Local Net Committee Endorses Both Token and Ethernet Type Standards”8 (5 Jan.1981):2Google Scholar; Sirbu, andHughes, , “Standardization of Local Area Networks;” andMaris, Graube, interview with author, 5 Oct.1995.Google Scholar

12. Charney, Howard,previously vice-president of 3Com, interview with author, 14 July1995Google Scholar; and 3Com, Securities and Exchange Commission Form S-1 (1984).Google Scholar

13. Ungermann, Ralph,founder of Ungermann-Bass, interview with author 26 and 28 April1995.Google Scholar

14. Nelson, Jim, “802: A Progress Report,”Datamation (Sept.1983),136–52.Google Scholar

15. See, for example, Channels, Data, “3Com Enters Token-Ring Market with New Networking Products,”13 (6 Aug.1986):1Google Scholar; and Haber, Lynn, “IBM’s Token Ring Network Signals Start For LAN Vendors,”Mini-Micro Systems (Jan.1986),38–42Google Scholar. Additional information was obtained from Salwen, Howard,founder of Proteon, interview with author, 5 July1995.Google Scholar

16. See, for example, Corvus, Annual Report, 1983; Data Channels, “Corvus Systems,” 9 (17 May1982):6Google Scholar; and D'Addio, Michael,founder of Corvus, interview with author, 2 April1996.Google Scholar

17. For the number of Ethernet vendors, see Killorin, Eric, “Will Token Ring or Ethernet Dominate?”Telecommunication Products and Technology (March1987),34–39Google Scholar; and for the number of Token Ring vendors, see Greenfield, David, “Multivendor Token Ring Networks Come of Age,”Data Communications (21 Nov.1989),37–43.Google Scholar

18. For IBM’s domination of the Token Ring standard, see Carlo, Jim andHughes, John, “Token Ring Compatibility: It's Time to Plug and Play,”Data Communications (21 Nov.1989),26–34Google Scholar. Additional statements were obtained from Werner Bux, Token Ring designer at IBM’s research lab in Zurich, interview with author, 10 Oct. 1998; and from Love, Robert,Token Ring designer at IBM, interview with author, 5 Feb.1996.Google Scholar

19. ”IBM Maintains Token-Ring Dominance,”Network World 8 (1 April1991),19.Google Scholar

20. Bux, Werner,interview with author, 10 Oct.1998Google Scholar; Metcalfe, Robert, “Looking Out for No. 2; IBM LAN on Upswing,”Infoworld 15 (25 Jan.1993):46Google Scholar; and Mier, Edwin, “Question: How Open Is IBM’s Much-Touted Token Ring?”Data Communi-cations (Jan.1986),47–52.Google Scholar

21. Salwen, Howard andMarshall, Alan, “16-Mbit/s Token Ring LANs and UTP: Perfect Together,”Data Communications (21 Sept.1990),41–50.Google Scholar

22. For the expectations of some analysts, see, for example, Brown, Bob, “IBM Token-Ring Had Major Impact in First Five Years,”Network World 8 (11 Feb.1991):2, 6Google Scholar; Davis, Dwight, “LAN Vendors Covet Lowly Telephone Networks,”Electronic Business (30 April1990),70–72Google Scholar; and Greenfield, David, “Multivendor Token Ring Networks Come of Age,”Data Communications (21 Nov.1989),37–43.Google Scholar