Comment by ModernMech
4 months ago
Even if we accept that premise, it still doesn't follow that PARC-like research centers are the only or best way to achieve that outcome. PARC's remit was to invent the office of the future, not to do the typical R&D thing which would be to make incremental improvements on their current products. Laser printers are exactly an incremental improvement on their current products.
So what you're saying here is that the best thing to come out of PARC for Xerox was an incremental improvement to their existing product line that could have been proposed by a typical R&D team.
Again, not a great selling point for the ROI of PARC from Xerox's perspective.
No, the laser printer was revolutionary. Xerox' previous business was photocopiers that could only make copies of existing physical documents you'd already typed out or pasted together. The laser printer was connected directly to your mainframe and allowed customized mass printing at a speed and quality not seen before. Before the laser printer, the alternatives were dot-matrix printers, plotters, automated typewriters, all at least an order of magnitude slower than the first laser printers and only the plotter had any chance of looking nice.
Laser printers were a central part of the computerized mass-customized printing of things like insurance policies and bank statements that happened in the 70's and were definitely a revolutionary change in what kind of problem Xerox was solving for their customers.
> Xerox' previous business was photocopiers that could only make copies of existing physical documents you'd already typed out or pasted together. The laser printer was connected directly to your mainframe and allowed customized mass printing at a speed and quality not seen before.
But I'm not saying laser printers weren't a great thing, I'm saying it doesn't take setting up a research playground like PARC to get that kind of result.
Laser printers are the kind of improvement typical R&D comes up with. Xerox's customers wanted more speed and quality out of their printers, laser printers got them that. It's not exactly clear that a typical R&D wouldn't/couldn't have come up with that. Apple for instance does this kind of R&D all the time, and they're very good at it.
Xerox PARC wasn't about getting the next incremental improvement in speed and quality for printers, it was about inventing the office of the future. But the office of the future doesn't require laser printers or printers of any kind. PARC's vision was that Xerox's core business would be eliminated, and that's precisely why Xerox couldn't be the one to actually capitalize on PARC research.
> were definitely a revolutionary change
I would say going from dot matrix printers to laser printers is an incremental change; whereas something more revolutionary would be going from dot matrix printers to no printers at all because you don't need them since you have e-mail and the Internet.