10 Biggest Computer Flops of all time

Over the years, computers have changed the way we live! Marketing and Technology have recently started to "merge" together to create new amazing experiences.  Howeverm In order to get us to where we are today, many software development and hardware companies have pushed the envelope to create what we use today.  Software development companies have evolved, Hardware has improved. Although we currently live in an age of amazing hardware and software achievements, these products did not come without a price.  Below is a list of some of the worst flops in computer history.

1. The Xerox Alto
   Developed in 1972 at Xerox's Palo Alto Research center, the Alto had a bitmap display, windows, drop-down menu bars, a mouse, built-in Ethernet and hard disk, keyboard, word processor and more in their software productivity suite, a paint application, and even e-mail.  Xerox was far too busy fighting the copier patent war, and was not interested.  Steve Jobs was, and in 1984, Apple introduced Apple Lisa, and the Apple Macintosh.  Although this was the most ingenious creation of the time, quite possibly responsible for the way we use computers today, it should be viewed also as a huge flop when Xerox did not capitalize on its innovation.
2. NeXT computer
   This seemed like a great idea at the time.  Steve Jobs resigned from Apple back in 1985 to start a new company called NeXT.  The NeXT computer would be the most affordable UNIX super computer of its time.  Running a Motorola 33-MHz 68030 processor, enclosed in a black case, there was no doubt this was the hottest and most powerful computer of its time.  However at $6,000 apiece, and with no software that would run on the machine, it was really a $6,000 brick.  Roughly 50,000 were ever produced.  The company had spent over $250 million producing them.  Although a huge disaster, this was also the computer that Tim Berners-Lee would later use to create the World Wide Web, and Steve Jobs would use as the core principles behind the new OS X.
3. IBM PCjr
   IBM was trying to build an affordable machine for the classroom and the masses.  Unfortunately, they ended up building an inferior non IBM-PC compatible machine with a ridiculously small keyboard that wouldn't run any software.  The costs was a few dollars less than some IBM-PC compatible clones, so it was pointless to buy one.  Another nice feature, the keyboard communicated with the computer via infrared beams.  This provided hours of enjoyment in the classroom screwing up other peoples computing.
4. Apple Newton
   Although produced for six years, it was never as successful as Apple had hoped.  The main reasons:  High price, Large size.  It's handwriting recognition was notoriously bad, a problem that was featured in the Doonesbury comic strip.  However, although the Newton product itself never made mass appeal, the technologies that were developed for the Newton are still used today and responsible for many huge success' for Apple (iPod, OS X) and started the PDA line of computer products.
5. Apple 3
   Released in 1980, the Apple 3 became one of the worst computers ever built and most expensive.  It was designed for the high end business market, but at a cost of $7,800, even businesses had trouble justifying the cost.  To make matters worse, the computer was made far too cramped with parts to make it smaller.  When it became too hot inside the computer (Engineers opted to not use a fan), chips would start popping out of the boards!  In order to correct the issue, Apple tech support could be heard saying "please lift up your Apple 3 about 10 centimeters off the desk, and drop it."  this would put the chips back in the slots sometimes.
6. Apple Lisa
   How much to get into an amazing Apple Lisa?  $10,000 dollars.  Announced in 1983, this was a complete disaster for Apple.  Hardly any were ever sold.  How many were produced?  100,000.  The machine itself was far from powerful, and Apple users simply preferred the Macintosh.  The development costs aren't to be found.
   
   
7. Microsoft Windows ME
   Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition was touted as the first operating system to support Universal Plug and Play.  Unfortunately, this operating systems was quite possibly less compatible with hardware, than its predecessor, Windows 98.  It was also notoriously difficult to re-install, which was terrible since this operating system needed to be re-installed almost weekly.  This was one of the worst software development projects of all time for Microsoft. Hardcore users claimed that Windows ME was more stable than 98, or 98SE, and the instabilities came from users installing bad drivers that were not approved and certified.  Nevertheless, most users of Windows were beginners, and thus the perception that Windows ME actually stood for "Microsoft Experiment", "Moron Edition", "Mistake Edition", and "Memory Eater".
8. Microsoft Bob
   Another Software development disaster. This one is great.  In 1995 Microsoft released a software package and interface that was aimed at replacing the Windows desktop with one aimed at novice computer users.  The interface featured a big yellow smiley face with glasses and virtual rooms.  Complete disaster!  Far too simple, not powerful enough, overpriced, and all and all, ridiculous.  This software development project was run by Bill's wife by the way!It was replaced that same year by Windows 95.
9. IBM OS/2
   In the 1990's after feeling "Had" by Microsoft, IBM decided they could trounce Microsoft and come up with their own operating system.  A great idea gone bad by marketing,  the idea became to market OS/2 and the PowerPC Chip together.  Had IBM pushed OS/2, and later OS/2 Warp as an operating system alternative to Windows, the computing landscape might have been different today.  Instead, by the latter half of the 1990's, Windows 95 and 98 had obliterated OS/2.
10. Gary Kildall's CP/M
    Grab a cup of coffee for the biggest mistake, and largest computing stroke of luck that created Microsoft, and one of the wealthiest fortunes the planet has ever seen.  This one created the software industry as we know it! In 1980, IBM finally realized they needed to put a home computer out on the market extremely fast.  However they could not find the time to wait around to build their own operating system.  They wanted to buy one, and the best one at the time, Gary Kildall's CP/M operating system.  Where was Gary Kildall on this fateful day that the IBM suits came knocking?  Out of office flying a private plane.  IBM went back to the office's and looked up Microsoft, which they thought had a broad license to sell CP/M.  Microsoft came in and negotiated a per licenses model to sell the operating system at 50 dollars per machine.  Bill Gates had created the Software Licensing Industry! 
    
    Microsoft did not have such an operating system themselves, nor did they have a license to sell CP/M.  In fact, Gary Kildall's Digital Research didn't have CP/M ready to run on the 16-bit computers IBM would manufacture.  Tim Patterson did at the Seattle Computer Company, which Microsoft bought for $50,000.  Had Gary Kildall been at the office, Microsoft and Bill Gates might have been eating macaroni and cheese, and the Digital Research operating system would be running on all of our computers. Gary Kildall died in July 1994 at the age of 52.  The computer media mainly ignored his passing.

What do all of these stories have in common?  Yes they were all mistakes (at the time), but almost all of them paved the way for some of the largest success's in computing history.  Sometimes for the same company, sometimes for other companies.  The lesson here is persistence, determination, and perseverance.

I've recently started a new blog focused on Social Media, Digital Marketing, and Technology at www.miguelcarrasco.com. I'd love for you to check it out as there are many more exciting posts including video casts available for you to watch.

If you would like to read other software development disasters, specifically Microsoft software mistakes, make sure you read Ten Biggest Microsoft Flops of All Time!

Comments

[Dave]

No mention of the Osborne Executive? I would rank it in the top 3, as it did wipe out a company. Most of your examples are from companies that are still in business.

[Flyonthewall]

Hmmm... I wonder if I can get Microsoft Bob to run on Windows XP? LOL! Will it run on 64bit windows?

I wonder if M$ would laugh if you called them for tech. support on it or to help install on XP or Server 2003?

[anon]

No mention of BeOS?

[whatever]

"Hmmm... I wonder if I can get Microsoft Bob to run on Windows XP? LOL! Will it run on 64bit windows?

I wonder if M$ would laugh if you called them for tech. support on it or to help install on XP or Server 2003?"

LOL! indeed. Yes, Bob runs on XP, Microsoft bends over backwards to make sure that legacy software will run on their modern incarnations of Windows. If you took reversi.exe from Windows 1.0 and ran it on a Vista RC2 install, it would work.

And no, Microsoft EOL'd Bob years ago, so your support call would either be ignored or they would charge you for it.

[Alexis]

answering to Dave's "Hmmm... I wonder if I can get Microsoft Bob to run on Windows XP?"

I got BOB to work on the computer at my job (Pentium 3, XP SP2)

[Ethan Moie]

in response to Dave, yes you can run in on XP, though it ain't worth it! lol. You need to run it in 95 compatibility mode to get full functionality though.

[Todd]

What about the Commodore 128? Two computers in one: a C-64 compatible machine and a CP/M OS that ran software that was a decade old, even then....

[Kairi]

I'm not sure precisely of your point in your overly-critical assessment of the NeXTcube. Yes, it was a new operating system at the time, and yes, the hardware was fairly unique; however, the machine and operating system were targetted towards scientific, research, and academic demographics. In all these fields, the NEXTSTEP operating system succeeded, bore the OpenStep framework then begat the components that soon became Mac OS X.

The Objective C framework and development tools available made it fairly easy for developers to make realizations of their ideas in a very quick manner, spawning the Rapid Application Development paradigm a few years later. Naturally, users of these produced a wide range of software during the operating system's thriving days, from productivity suites, web browsers, media players, and other assorted gadgets, to 3D simulations and modelling tools. Even Wolfram's Mathematica was available.

Finally, most software compatible with 4.3BSD at the time would run flawlessly under NEXTSTEP. There was even an excellent X Window client and server called Cub'X, which opened the machine up to a more broad spectrum of software, needing only a few tweaks and a recompile to operate.

I guess if I were to have a point in my rambling, I would say, don't dismiss the NeXT technology as a mere historic relic with sweeping generalizations and statements with no real facts; substantiate your claims.

[will moore]

Great list!

There's nothing wrong with your spelling. Very easy to read and informative.

Dugg!

[Arcus]

@Darious Jackson:

"And a spell check wouldn't be a bad idea either."

You cannot begin a sentence with and. I suggest you take a queue from your own advice.

[Grammer King]

You can begin a sentence with "And".

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19961105

Just one example, there are plenty others if you want to search for them. Try searching with:

beginning a sentence with a conjunction

[shyboy]

Eleventh: the atari falcon
twelth : MSx

[Ficus]

What about the cbm?

[Steve Channell]

Always a big challenge hitting on such a wide subject and inevitably tells us more about the author than the subject.. what the list misses more than anything else is some stonking irony..

1. Multics: Was billed as the ultimate operating system coded in a high level language ported several vendors kit... total failure... but gave rise to a “cut-down” “single-user” operating system “Unix” (“Un” was uni instead of multi, “ix” to avoid “ics” copyright)

2. OS/360: was the biggest most expensive project in history but was too resource intensive to run on the kit it was design for... gave rise to IBM’s first cut-down operating system DOS (now DOS/VSE or just VSE)... despite failure, perseverance and faster kit turned it into the greatest mainframe OS

3. iAPX-432: ?? Intel’s architecture to replace the x86 processor. 32-bit processor optimized for ADA code (NB this was 1981!) nearly had down the whole company when Intels 8080/8085 was eclipsed by the Zigol z80.. The 8086 was a 16-bit stopgap to recover market-share.. Itanium anybody...

4. OSI network stack: Open Systems Interconnect was once the product that would enable all systems to be connected… they used to say.. use TCP/IP until OSI stack is mature… the Internet killed by the simple act of just working without all the fuss

5. Hypertext!!! no, No , NO Hypertext was a twenty year-old over-ambitious un-implementable dream.. when Tim just created a kernel that changed the world.

6. Windows NT4... they wrecked a great OS to be a little bit more snappy with screen refresh (kernel graphics... daft idea)

7. Itanium: SGI server anybody?

[Reuven]

What about QuickTime 3D?

[Ivan Minic]

For end users... microsoft me and bob flops rule the world.

[Steve]

Bob, couldn't have been that much of a flop (at least for Bill). The project manager was none other than Melinda French soon to become Ms. Gates.

[charlie Travis]

How about Vista?

[Sulayman]

Microsoft offered DOS, not CP/M I think.

[William L. Jones]

Comments on the NeXT computer show some readers are missing the point. It was an assembly of great ideas and futuristic thinking. The hardware was very advanced and the software was a marvel. Steve Jobs has always had great vision. He missed on having a monochrome CRT at the start and a high price that kept experimenters away. Marketing was the worst failure. A wag at the time said it had the processor of a micro, the price of a mini, and the distribution of a mainframe. Ideas from the NexT, hardware and software, are still in daily use, and much appreciated. The same can be said about the Xerox failure.

[Robin]

@Steve: nice list, just to nit-pick, it was the Zilog z80, not Zigol. Which brings me to another superb failure, I wonder why it wasn't mentionned already: the Coleco Adam.

@Sulayman: DOS is a rewrite of CP/M. Not built to be compatible either. Embrace and extend, as they say.

@Dave: Osborne? Although it was a huge mistake, did it lead to greater pastures? That was the point of the article, I think.

[George Gray]

I'm not really sure that #10-CP/M should be on the list. CP/M was THE operating system of the mid 1970's through the early 1980's. Yes, Digital Research missed the boat, but they did get CP/M-86 out and did sell quite a few copies before throwing in the towel on the operating system. I know many love to point to Microsoft and talk about the under handed tactics and such, but, the truth is that DR and IBM let it happen. Anyway, CP/M was widely available for just about every machine sold including the Apple II via a Zilog Z80 card. It was a very successful product.

[Mark]

I agree with George Gray. Gary Kildall and Digital Research may have completely flubbed it with IBM, but CP/M was hardly a flop. (And who's to say that had the IBM PC run CP/M that it would have become the success it did?)

CP/M was, for a very long time, *the* system to run on 8080 and Z-80 systems. (I should also point out that despite the number of IBM-compatible PCs in the world, the Z-80 continues to be the world's best-selling CPU.) You could run it on almost anything regardless of bus architecture, and it did an admirable job of isolating the hardware from the applications because most applications obeyed the API. That meant you could buy WordStar, SuperCalc or a number of other applications and do your word processing on an Osborne, Morrow, Cromemco, Apple with Z-80 or the ratty S-100 box you had in the basement.

Somewhere around 1983 the developers of applications for the PC decided they could write to the screen better than the OS. So instead of fixing the OS, they started writing to the hardware directly and we got stuck with the dain-brammaged x86 architecture. Isn't it great that 20+ years later, we're still running hardware with CGA compatability. Way to go, guys.

CALL 5, baby, CALL 5.

[Avi]

What about BeOS? Any comments...

[RevWaldo]

One flop I remember but a great kludge - an adapter to connect your IBM PC to your Selectric typewriter and use it as a printer. One end plugs into the RS232 port on the PC, the other end sits on top the typewriter's keyboard. When you print, a set of actuators plunge the keys.

It *was* a real product I swear! Anyone remember the name or have a picture?