Editing Compaq (section)

====Introduction of Compaq Portable====
[[File:Compaq portable.jpg|thumb|right|[[Compaq Portable]] (1983)]]
In November 1982, Compaq announced their first product, the [[Compaq Portable]], a portable [[IBM PC compatible]] [[personal computer]]. It was released in March 1983 at {{US$|long=no|2995}}. The Compaq Portable was one of the progenitors of today's [[laptop]]; some called it a "suitcase computer" for its size and the look of its case. It was the second IBM PC compatible, being capable of running all software that would run on an [[IBM Personal Computer|IBM PC]]. It was a commercial success, selling 53,000 units in its first year and generating {{US$|long=no|111 million}} in sales revenue. The Compaq Portable was the first in the range of the [[Compaq Portable series]]. Compaq was able to market a legal IBM clone because [[IBM]] mostly used "off the shelf" parts for their [[IBM Personal Computer|PC]]. Furthermore, [[Microsoft]] had kept the right to license [[MS-DOS]], the most popular and de facto standard operating system<ref>but not the only one</ref> for the IBM PC, to other computer manufacturers. The only part which had to be duplicated was the [[BIOS]], which Compaq did legally by using [[clean room design]] at a cost of {{US$|long=no|1 million}}.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,21218,00.asp |title = Loyd Case: A Trip Down Memory Lane with Hewlett-Packard & Compaq |access-date = 2008-01-31 |work = extremetech.com |url-status = dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080120121139/http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0%2C1697%2C21218%2C00.asp |archive-date = 2008-01-20 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url = https://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/1999/pulpit_19990930_000400.html |title = Real Trouble: How Reverse Engineering May Yet Kill Real Networks |access-date = 2008-01-31 |author = Robert X. Cringely |publisher = PBS |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20071211074325/https://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/1999/pulpit_19990930_000400.html |archive-date = 2007-12-11}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.islandnet.com/~kpolsson/comphist/comp1982.htm |title = Chronology of Personal Computers (1982) |access-date = 2008-01-31 |author = Ken Polsson }}</ref>

Unlike other companies, Compaq did not [[bundled software|bundle application software]] with its computers. Vice President of Sales and Service H. L. Sparks said in early 1984:<ref name="zientara19840402">{{cite magazine |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=kC4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA84 |title = Q&A: H.L. Sparks |magazine = [[InfoWorld]] |date = 1984-04-02 |access-date = 10 February 2015 |last = Zientara |first = Marguerite |pages = 84–85 | volume = 6 | issue = 14}}</ref>

{{Blockquote|We've considered it, and every time we consider it we reject it. I don't believe and our dealer network doesn't believe that bundling is the best way to merchandise those products.

You remove the freedom from the dealers to really merchandise when you bundle in software. It is perceived by a lot of people as a marketing gimmick. You know, when you advertise a {{US$|long=no|3000}} computer with {{US$|long=no|3000}} worth of free software, it obviously can't be true.

The software should stand on its merits and be supported and so should the hardware. Why should you be constrained to use the software that comes with a piece of hardware? I think it can tend to inhibit sales over the long run.}}

Compaq instead emphasized PC compatibility, of which Future Computing in May 1983 ranked Compaq as among the "Best" examples.<ref name="ward198311">{{cite magazine |url = https://archive.org/stream/byte-magazine-1983-11/1983_11_BYTE_08-11_Inside_the_IBM_PC#page/n249/mode/2up |title = Levels of PC Compatibility |magazine = [[Byte (magazine)|BYTE]] |date = November 1983 |access-date = 19 March 2016 |last = Ward | first = Ronnie |pages = 248–249 | volume = 8 | issue = 11}}</ref> "Many industry observers think [Compaq] is poised for meteoric growth", ''[[The New York Times]]'' reported in March of that year.<ref name="pollack19830327">{{Cite news |last=Pollack |first=Andrew |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1983/03/27/business/big-ibm-has-done-it-again.html |title=Big I.B.M. Has Done It Again |date=1983-03-27 |work=The New York Times |access-date=2020-03-16 |page=Section 3, Page 1 |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331 |url-access=limited }}</ref> By October, when the company announced the Compaq Plus with a {{val|10|ul=MB}} hard drive, ''[[PC Magazine]]'' wrote of "the reputation for compatibility it built with its highly regarded floppy disk portable".<ref name="pc19840124">{{cite magazine |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=kSzKzjWHeVEC&pg=PA39 |title = PC-Compatible Portables |magazine = [[PC Magazine]] |date = 1984-01-24 |access-date = 23 October 2013 |author1 = Cook, Karen |author2 = Langdell, James |page = 39 | volume = 3 | issue = 1 }}</ref> The company bragged that it was more IBM compatible than IBM itself.<ref name="watt19840716">{{Cite magazine |last=Watt |first=Peggy |date=1984-07-16 |title=Compaq Line Has 'Overdrive' |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yS4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA47#v=onepage&q&f=true |access-date=2025-04-27 |magazine=InfoWorld |pages=47-51 |volume=6 |issue=29}}</ref> Compaq computers remained the most compatible PC clones into 1984,<ref name="mace19840109_16">{{cite magazine |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=ey4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA79 |title = IBM PC clone makers shun total compatibility |magazine = [[InfoWorld]] |date = 9–16 January 1984 |access-date = 4 February 2015 |author = Mace, Scott |pages = 79–81 | volume = 6 | issue = 2 & 3 }}</ref>and maintained its reputation for compatibility for years,{{r|iw19890123}} even as clone BIOSes became available from [[Phoenix Technologies]] and other companies that also reverse engineered IBM's design, then sold their version to clone manufacturers.