Lou Gerstner's keynote address

IBM Chairman and CEO Louis V. Gerstner Jr. delivered the following remarks on Monday morning, Nov. 13, 1995 at the Aladdin Hotel and Casino's Theatre for the Performing Arts in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Thank you, Masa.

Good morning.

Every now and then, a technology or an idea comes along that is so
profound,so powerful, so universal that its impact changes everything.

The printing press.  The incandescent light.  The automobile.  Manned
flight.

It doesn't happen often, but when it does, the world is changed forever.

I joined this industry and IBM because I believe that information
technology has that potential.

Now that I've been through our laboratories, talked to thousands of
customers and even a few competitors, I am even more convinced that I/T
is the defining technology of this decade and will be well into the next
century.

I think that's why so many of us are here at Comdex.

When you get past all the glitz, this event is really about two things:
enthusiasm for our industry and a keen interest in its future.

We'll see it, hear it and feel it when the show opens in less than an
hour. We'll be bombarded by extraordinary new products and by promises
-- oh yes, lots of promises -- of dazzling innovations that are just
around the corner.  You just have to find the corner.

All of this makes our industry fascinating and exciting.  It's all about
discovery and creating new things ... new technologies, new products,
new capabilities ... the future.

So what do I think after 30 months on the job?

My expectations have been exceeded.  This industry does have an
incredible future.  I say that for a couple of reasons.

First -- and this isn't surprising to any of you -- IBM researchers see
no limits for at least a decade to the underlying technologies that
drive our industry.  Processor power, memory, disk capacity, bandwidth
-- the trajectories will continue upward without hitting any scientific
limits for at least a decade or more.

I don't need to spend a lot of time on this because there are examples
of hot technologies everywhere you turn -- and I know a lot of you work
on them every day.  But let me share with you a few of the things under
development in IBM labs.

A few weeks ago, I visited one of our major research facilities. I was
briefed on a new kind of optical microscope they've invented. It has the
potential of imaging a single atom in visible light, which would be
unprecedented, and I'm thinking: What do we do with this?  Where do we
fit it into our product line?

It turns out that this same technology may eventually enable incredibly
dense storage devices that can pack information at densities 100 times
higher than anything we can demonstrate today.  That's the equivalent of
putting the entire collection of the Library of Congress -- that's 16
million books -- on a diskette the size of a penny.  Now, I'm not sure
if anyone wants to carry around the Library of Congress on a penny, but
it may be possible.

Next, they showed me two ThinkPad flat-panel displays.  One was a
prototype high-resolution display ... the other was a color photograph
attached to a ThinkPad display.  They challenged me to distinguish
between the two.  I honestly could not tell the difference between this
color photo and a color panel displaying a digital image.  They went on
to tell me about pixels per square inch and all that.  I said:
&quot;Forget it. I need it.  Just get it to me today.&quot;

Let me tell you about one other thing they showed me.  It was a
speech-technology interface that didn't just recognize dictation (we
have products today that already do that).  This interface understood
what I was saying, it extracted the meaning of what I was asking for and
delivered some information in response (something some of my IBM
managers can't do when I talk to them).

I could go on and on with examples from IBM and other companies about:

-- microprocessors with several billion or a trillion transistors

-- intelligent agents

-- transponders the size of postage stamps that will be attached to
everything and everybody.

But even more impressive than these individual technologies is how
they're being put to use today in new applications.  Some are really
&quot;out there.&quot;

Like what they're doing at the MIT Media Lab.  One of their projects is
called &quot;things that think.&quot;  The idea is to put intelligence
into everyday, inanimate objects: door knobs, furniture, glasses, even
shoes.

A computer in a shoe?

Actually, it's not such a crazy idea.  As I understand it, you power the
computer with every step you take, and when you shake hands with someone
who's also wearing a shoe computer, you establish a low-voltage
electrical connection and you instantly exchange information through
that handshake -- sort of a &quot;personal area network.&quot;  Maxwell
Smart, eat your heart out!

What happens is, you download to your shoe the person's title, what he
does, where he works, phone and fax numbers, maybe a digital photo or a
video clip.

If you think that's nutty, think about it tonight before you hit the
sack.  Try to remember the names and faces and affiliations of all the
people you meet today... empty your pockets of all the business cards
you've collected... then look at your shoes.  Not such a wacky thought,
after all.

So, in terms of raw technology, our industry's future is extraordinary.
There's no letup in sight.


Now, we tend to think about our industry in terms of faster, better,
cheaper pieces of hardware and software -- this product, that
application.  And that leads me to the second reason I'm excited about
our future.

We're at the threshold of the next major phase of computing.  It draws
upon many of the technologies we've been discussing, but one in
particular -- high-speed, high-bandwidth networking -- which is why we
refer to it as network-centric computing.

Now, this term doesn't exactly roll off your tongue, but what we call it
isn't nearly as important as what it means to people: to individual
consumers, to businesses and institutions around the world ... and all
of us.

As you well know, this phase of computing follows two others.  The first
was mainframe-centric.  Naturally, we at IBM can talk about this one at
great length because that's where we really thrived for many, many
years.

What did that model of computing look like?  A large central processor,
centralized data, centralized applications, centralized systems and
network management -- all serving hundreds and hundreds of
&quot;dumb&quot; terminals.  This wasn't a great model for end users
because they were chained to the central I/S department for computing
power and applications.

But the technology at the time simply didn't support personal computing.

All of that changed in the 1980s with the microprocessor, which made
possible the PC, which made possible shrink-wrapped software, local area
networks and on and on.

So the model of computing went from centralized to decentralized and,
not surprisingly, so did the composition of our industry.  We went from
a few large integrated companies to 60,000 niche players, and that
nearly blew IBM up.  I remember.  I was there as a customer.  I helped
light some of the fuses.

So computing was democratized, and we placed the power of information
technology and applications into the hands of millions of end-users and
consumers. And there have been a lot of advantages.

But the promise of distributed computing has not been fully delivered.
Our industry promised customers that they could buy all these individual
pieces and put them together very easily.  But that hasn't happened.

It's harder than a lot of people thought, mostly because of system
incompatibility -- the pieces were never designed to interoperate or
share applications.  And when you try to scale these piece-part
solutions up to support thousands and tens of thousands of users -- as
well as critical functions like heavy transaction processing and data
mining -- it gets very, very tough.

Client/server computing has also been far more expensive than anyone
imagined.  It's expensive because of the complexities I've just
mentioned and also because a lot of customers -- especially large
organizations -- are waking up to the fact that they have put the
equivalent of a 1985 mainframe on the desks of every one of their
clerical workers -- with all the maintenance, backup and service costs
now multiplied by thousands, and in some cases tens of thousands.

I think consumers are also beginning to wonder if they're getting full
value from all of the horsepower and software capability they buy -- and
the industry expects them to keep buying -- every nine months or so.

No question: the PC solution in many situations is less expensive and
more accessible to people than the mainframe era... but is it really the
end-game?

As I see it, that's pretty much the situation we're in today...
customers continuing to buy increasingly powerful PCs, and they grapple
to integrate them in these very complex client/server systems.

But we've come to understand that client/server is, in fact, not a
full-blown phase of computing.  It's really the leading edge of what
will be the next phase: network-centric computing.

There are a lot of forces propelling us to this phase.

An obvious one is the technology itself.  If you look at
microprocessors, memory, software, storage... the laggard of the
technology family has been communications technology. PCs and servers
have become enormously powerful, but they communicate through the
equivalent of soda straws.

Well, all of that is changing.  Very powerful networking technologies --
principally ATM -- will be to the next phase of computing what the
microprocessor was to the current phase.

But I think the most profound implication of this new technology is that
it will change the nature of computing itself.

If the communications link between the PC and the network is cheap
enough, fast enough and has virtually unlimited bandwidth, why not
migrate a lot of the functions that currently reside inside the PC to
the network -- the applications, the data, the storage, and even some of
the processing?

This is not a throwback to the mainframe era. End users will still have
the user-friendly features they value in PCs.  They'll still click on
applications, and response time will be just as good, if not better.
And because we won't have to stuff this new device with lots of
technology, it can be much less expensive to purchase, maintain and
upgrade.

Frankly, I think few end users -- particularly consumers -- care where
the processing, storage, data movement and all that stuff takes place --
whether it happens inside their tin box or somewhere in a network --
just as long as what happens in front of the screen is compelling,
simple to use and is the least-expensive solution available.  And,
really, that's what it's all about - the way it should be.

Sounds pretty good.  But what will end users give up? They'll give up a
lot.

Like having to upgrade their PCs every year to get the next fastest
processor -- or have that sinking feeling they've fallen behind the
times.  Instead, they'll &quot;upgrade&quot; by subscribing to higher
levels of computational power on the network -- effortlessly.

They'll have to give up figuring out those arcane things called
operating systems... why applications run on some but not others... why
applications that ran last year are slower or don't work at all on the
new version of the operating system.  Instead, the network will mask
that complexity and incompatibility. 

And they'll give up having to buy a shelf-full of applications, swapping
dozens of diskettes in and out, and repeating this delightful task when
version 2.5.4 comes out in nine months. Instead, they'll get the new
version through the network -- effortlessly.

And, of course, these applications will support collaboration and the
interactive sharing of information.  We already see it happening in the
Notes phenomenon.

Some people, of course, will worry about flexibility and choice. The way
I see it, customers will have infinitely more choice in a networked
world.  You can move from application to application without throwing
away hundreds of dollars of software investment.

You'll be able to access more storage, memory and processing power than
you could ever economically justify in a PC -- or even put in a PC.

I assume that all of you have at least one PC. Most of you probably have
several. Unless you're quietly tapping on your notebook while I'm over
here talking, all of those PCs are sitting idle -- in your briefcase,
back in your hotel room, office, in your car, or your home.

Think about all that latent computing power that's wasted, totally
unused.  But in a truly networked world, we can share computational
power, combine it and leverage it.

So this world will reshape our notions of computing and, in particular,
our notions of the Personal Computer.

For 15 years, the PC has been a wonderful device for individuals. But,
ironically, the personal computer has not been well-suited for that most
personal aspect of what people do: We communicate.  We work together.
We interact.  So maybe we'll end up calling these new kinds of devices
I-PCs -- Interpersonal Computers.  We'll see.

Now, I have to be careful here.

One of the things I've discovered about this industry is that it
absolutely thrives on hype. It just loves hype.  It's constantly
prowling for the &quot;Next Big Thing&quot; to promote, with the
presumption that everyone will instantly move to the next wave, and all
that preceded is dead.  It's the most brilliant example of planned
obsolescence I've ever seen in an industry.

The network-centric world will not replace the PC world entirely any
more than the PC world replaced the mainframe world entirely.  Yes,
there will be fundamental changes in PCs.  Many will be like the
inexpensive appliances I've described, which draw their sustenance from
the network.

As a matter of fact, we're building one today in one of our labs, and we
expect to be shipping it to selected customers early next year.

But let's not lose our perspective.  There will still be very powerful
standalone PCs to perform applications that are not network-centric,
just as mainframe demand today is the highest in history.

So rest assured, I'm not here at Comdex trying to win this year's
industry Pied Piper Award.

When will network-centric computing arrive?  Well, it's already arriving
-- just look at the Internet, the most powerful and important of all
networks.  People, organizations and networks are connecting at a rate
no one expected, and that pace will continue, if not accelerate.

I think we'll see network transactions -- electronic commerce -- take
hold very quickly.  The final step -- pushing the applications,
operating system, storage and processing up into the network -- will
take longer.

A lot of people are looking for network-centric computing to pay off in
the consumer space first -- interactive services to the home, 500 TV
stations -- but we are seeing it take off first in businesses and large
institutions.

That's because while I've talked a lot about technology driving us
toward network-centric computing, technology is only an enabler of a
much more powerful force: a whole new way that institutions, and
companies, have conceptualized their strategic priorities.  They've
discovered a powerful new form of leverage: the leverage of
organizational knowledge as a means to compete more effectively and to
differentiate themselves in the marketplace.

When I talk to people about powerful networks, the discussion inevitably
turns to &quot;content.&quot;  Who owns it, how to deliver it, who pays
for it.  A lot of people think of &quot;content&quot; as movies, music,
artwork, sports scores, weather.

The most important, most valuable, most sought- after content in the
world belongs to corporations and large institutions.  It's created and
collected every minute, around the world: intellectual property,
designs, market intelligence, supply and demand, customer trends.

The problem is, this knowledge is spread across incompatible computer
systems, it's distributed across PCs in various departments, it's locked
up in desks and filing cabinets and, yes, some of it is locked in the
heads of employees.

Powerful networks can unlock this knowledge and move it to the people
who can use it effectively.  This drives shorter cycle times and allows
teams of people to become more productive and creative.

These are the kinds of concrete, real-world benefits that are convincing
companies to make the necessary investments in these powerful networks.
So I think the consumer will be affected, but it will happen as
companies and institutions push out and build the links to reach them.

Something very significant is happening here.

For the first time, the models of computing supporting businesses and
institutions on the one hand and individual users on the other are
coming together.  They're becoming one and the same.  They're converging
in network-centric computing.

Frankly, most of the knowledge in businesses and institutions around the
world resides on IBM legacy systems.  That's why one of the major
thrusts of our network-centric computing strategy is to help our
customers get their valuable content to the right people: to employees
in far-flung locations, suppliers, partners or -- and we're seeing more
and more of this -- directly to the consumer.  Let me give you an
example.

I would argue that Federal Express today doesn't compete on the basis of
its 500 airplanes, 35,000 vehicles and 110,000 employees -- although
obviously those are very valuable resources.  I think FedEx competes on
the basis of making vital knowledge instantly available to its
customers.

FedEx has put a front-end on its databases, which happen to run on IBM
mainframes. That front-end enables customers via the Internet and online
services to track their packages around the world, day or night, every
step of the way.  FedEx already has that information, of course, to run
their worldwide enterprise. But now they're using networks to get that
information in a secure way to customers and seek differentiation and
competitive advantage.

As companies use networks to push out to their customers directly, we'll
see dramatic changes in the nature of competition.  Companies that stand
between a supplier and a customer will be on dangerous ground.

Maybe you're familiar with what Levi Strauss is doing. They have a
Notes-based system that goes in a store. It takes four measurements from
you. Those measurements go directly through the network to a factory
where a custom-tailored pair of jeans are cut for you and are expressed
to your house. They charge you an extra ten bucks, and you're delighted
to pay ten dollars for a custom-made set of jeans.

And guess what?  Levi's has eliminated the need to have mega-retail
stores stocked to the ceilings with pants of every conceivable
waistline, inseam, cuffs, no-cuffs, relaxed fit, traditional fit.  No
huge inventories. No obsolescence, no waste. And the supply chain
they've depended on for decades - and that has depended on them - is
obsolete.

And the implications of network-centric computing go on and on.  It will
transform every business, organization and institution in the world.  It
will create winners and losers. It will change the way we do business,
the way we teach our children, communicate and interact as individuals.

A while ago I met with Nelson Mandela and he was telling me about one of
the greatest challenges facing South Africa. One of the legacies of
apartheid is that the best education infrastructure is concentrated in a
few major cities. What were formerly the &quot;homelands&quot; have very
little infrastructure. It will cost millions and millions to build it
and it will take years. We got into a discussion about distance
learning, about bringing teachers in cities to students in the homelands
via interactive networks. I saw a light bulb light up.

He's very interested in this as a possible solution to the problem.

As the network world develops, we're seeing combinations of networks
being built and interconnected: Private networks to support secure
mission-critical business applications...  At IBM, we're building a lot
of these for customers in industries like health care, pharmaceuticals,
finance and travel.  These applications are hosted on the IBM Global
Network -- which we're rapidly upgrading to ATM capability -- and
customers subscribe to applications on the network.

These private networks are interconnected with other corporate networks,
with public-switched networks and, of course, the Internet.

We are making enormous investments in Internet products and services
because we think the Internet represents the most powerful manifestation
of what network-centric computing will be.

The Internet has been a wild and wooly electronic frontier. The settlers
are arriving. Every day, the Internet grows, in size, in reach and
importance. Every day, people add more function, more security and
capability to the net.

You may have seen our announcement at Internet World a few weeks ago.
We're putting together Lotus Notes, InterNotes, IBM network software and
services... the idea is to help our customers reach their customers by
securely linking their core business systems to the Internet.

Notes -- with its collaboration, security and replication features -- is
the ideal way to do that. It's exactly what customers have been telling
us they need in the Internet.

So I hope you get the idea that we're taking network-centric computing
very seriously at IBM. I'd say we're betting much of our future on it.

We at IBM know all too well that those who dominate one phase of
computing are not necessarily the ones to lead the way to the next
phase. In fact, if you think about it, they are the least likely to
accelerate the transition. It's in their best interests to maintain the
status quo for as long as possible -- we certainly tried to do that in
the mainframe era. And as we found out, when the industry moves to the
next phase, the current leader doesn't always have the right skills to
lead the next one.

The skills and technologies of the PC-centric, piece-part phase are not
the important assets needed in network-centric computing.  What is
important? Complex network management, systems management, heavy
transaction processing, massive databases, powerful scalable servers,
systems integration...

Now, let me think... what company knows how to do all that?

Obviously, we think many of these requirements play to IBM's
strengths... and they open doors for many other companies in our
industry... and for an entirely new breed of competitors, some of whom
have already burst onto the scene... and others are probably just
getting started in a garage somewhere.

Now I know a lot of what I've been describing about this new networked
world may not be new to your ears.  In fact, many Comdex keynoters who
have preceded me on this very stage -- and perhaps a few who will follow
me -- have proclaimed or will proclaim the same.

Some have put on multimedia extravaganzas depicting future scenarios --
how we're all going to be connected, work differently, play differently.
Everything will change.  Everything will be better.

But at this very important juncture in our industry's history, I'm
reminded of what Dickens wrote in a &quot;A Christmas Carol&quot; --
maybe because the holiday season is upon us.

Remember when Scrooge encounters that last ghostly spirit who reveals
the future?  Scrooge asks: &quot;Are these the things that will be... or
might be?&quot;

I think we're looking at the same question in our industry.  We can see
the future. It's there before us.  The question is: Will it happen?

I think it will, but only if we step up to certain responsibilities as
an industry.  If we don't, we will not grow as quickly as we'd like, and
we will not realize the potential of our technologies -- no matter how
impressive they may be.

All of these challenges fit under one banner: listening to the customer.

I don't think we pay nearly enough attention -- or spend nearly enough
money -- being sensitive and responsive to customers.  I think I can
make that statement since I was a customer of this industry for 20
years.  I've also led consumer-oriented companies, and I can tell you,
we have a lot to learn.

I think we need to work on many things, but three in particular.

The first is ease of use.

This is a tough, multi-dimensional problem. It ranges from basic
confusion over on-off switches and loading software to the way we
integrate and manage complex systems.

Think about it: Entire segments of our industry have been spawned from
this failure. Look at the explosion in computer services. Customers are
spending billions for smart people to help them figure it out, pull it
together, manage it for them.

Consumers, of course, run into problems all the time.

We all have our favorite examples of clunky products. But let me pick on
my own company.

You may recall the 1983 debut of this exciting product...

[ Video of TV commercial for IBM PC Jr.: ]

    "Everyone is cordially invited to an important event...
    Presenting a computer demonstration starring PC Jr. from IBM.  But,
    what can you do with a PC Jr.?" [ Stops commercial ]

That's enough! Customers -- lots of them -- told us what we could do
with the PC Jr.

We got some things right with that product, but a lot of important
things wrong -- like its infamous &quot;chicklet&quot; keyboard. It was
really cute.  Too bad no one could use it.

Or remember this baby?

[ Pulls out IBM PC Convertible ]

This is the IBM PC Convertible, circa 1986.

I think people called this the &quot;lovable luggable.&quot; At 14
pounds, I understand the &quot;luggable&quot; part.

It had no hard drive, but it did have dual 3 1/2-inch diskette drives.

Very advanced. Too advanced.

There were only a handful of applications on 3 1/2-inch diskettes at the
time.

I'm happy -- very happy -- that our company has learned a lot from those
early disappointments. Today we've got retractable keyboards and
trackpoint and voice recognition. And I know a lot of other companies
are investing in ease of use.  But we can and must do more -- as an
industry.  If we expect the whole world to be connected, and if we
expect to grow as an industry, we must make it easier to learn, to use,
and to maintain.

The second issue we've got to focus on is standards -- open industry
standards.

Ours is the only major industry I can think of that refuses to rally
around standards.  I really don't understand why customers have
tolerated it.

I mean, would you buy a telephone that only dialed certain area codes...
or a TV that received only odd-numbered stations?  I wouldn't.

Think about the networked world that we see before us... every digital
device connected to every other digital device in the world, all
supporting seamless, easy access.  How are we ever going to get around
the problem of incompatible hardware and software systems?

I think we have two choices.

We can ask customers to set aside their freedom of choice and
preferences in hardware, operating systems, applications and user
interfaces... junk their trillions of dollars of investment in
information technology... and all of us -- everyone, everywhere -- move
to one architecture provided by, priced by and controlled by one
company.

Or ...

We can embrace open industry standards.

Open means that software from one vendor can operate on or with hardware
and software from any vendor -- not just one guy's.  We need to work
with standards organizations.  We need to openly agree on APIs,
interfaces, tools and protocols -- on anything the customer sees and
touches in the journey to get something done.

Compliance with standards does not mean that we won't compete
aggressively or that we can't distinguish our products.  We will.  But
we'll compete on the basis of innovative implementation of
industry-standard technologies and architectures, on performance,
features, design, service and support.

Besides, in the long run, closed, proprietary architectures -- that's a
losing strategy.  I bet you thought you'd never hear that from IBM.  But
having had a near-death experience, we know what we're talking about.

Every time I meet with customers, I say the same thing.  I urge them to
demand compliance with open industry standards in the products they buy.
And you know what? They're beginning to listen.  They understand the
need for the industry to move to this level.

The third and final issue I want to talk to you about is broader than
these two other issues.

Our industry operates in a free space. It's part of the reason for its
success. This freedom must be honored and protected -- but it also must
be earned.

We've got to come to grips with the fact that the proliferation of our
technology raises some very provocative and serious societal issues.

Some people feel that the Internet is getting out of control... that
instead of being an information superhighway it's a dangerous pipeline
for pornography, intellectual property theft, and a serious threat to
commerce and privacy.

Governments are going to be increasingly concerned with the impact of
our industry on the future of the nation-state -- which has been the
basic form of political and societal organization for centuries.

People are concerned about universal access... about creating a society
of technological &quot;have's&quot; and &quot;have-not's.&quot;  Just
last week, I read a survey in Time magazine.  Nearly half the
respondents said that technological change was responsible for the
growing economic inequality between people.

These are serious issues.  There are many different and divergent views
on what to do about them.  Frankly, most of the solutions that are being
proposed are equally troubling.  They raise questions of censorship,
over-regulation and, of course, the specter that the fires of innovation
that drive our industry will be stamped out.

Yes, these are tough, tough questions.  But we can't shrink back from
them just because they're potentially explosive.

Let me tell you why.  A few decades ago, there was another
&quot;defining&quot; technology.  You may remember it: nuclear power.
It, too, was going to change the world.  It was going to make energy as
cheap as water... bring air conditioning to deserts, heat to frozen
tundras. Reactors would power cars and ships, airplanes and spacecraft.
Inexhaustible energy.

But what happened?  The nuclear power industry is a dormant industry
today.

Those grand visions were never realized.  Why?  Was it because of bad
science, disappointing technology?  Not really.

While that industry was focused on megawatts and reactor cores,
communities and governments were worried about the implications of that
technology.  They stopped that industry dead in its tracks.

Today, our industry has grand visions.  I've shared some of that with
you this morning. And they are grand. And very ambitious. We're talking
about no less than changing the world in very fundamental ways.

Yet, too often, what are we focused on?  What will you hear and see here
at Comdex?  Megahertz, gigabits and multitasking.  There's a disconnect
between our priorities and those of a lot of people and governments.

So, I'd like to leave you with the thought that the time has come to
step up to these challenges.  Even as we continue to innovate and
create, we must now also think about the broader implications of the
future we are creating.

We must do this as individual companies, but also as an industry. And,
in fact, there's quite a bit of activity already underway to address
some of these issues.

The Worldwide Web Consortium based at MIT is working with many
companies, including IBM, on filtering technologies and content rating
for parents to use.

The Center for Democracy and Technology, also with the support of many
companies and advocacy groups, is working on free speech and child
protection.

And trade associations like the Computer Systems Policy Project are
working on privacy and cryptography.

I'm sure these organizations have a lot of good thinking under way, but
we have to be careful not to confuse activity with results.  We've got
to be impatient, drive toward consensus.  We've got to lead rather than
be led.

And we need to keep doing our part as individual companies and put our
money where our mouth is.  I think what AT&amp;T is doing to bring the
Internet to schools across the country is an outstanding initiative.  At
IBM, we're investing millions on a program called &quot;Reinventing
Education,&quot; which is aimed at reforming public schools with the
help of information technology.

The printing press.  The incandescent lightbulb.  Manned flight...

It is an extraordinary and rare -- and humbling -- opportunity to earn a
place in history.

I, for one, think we will.

I think we will make our visions reality.

I think that as stewards of our industry, we will step up to the
challenges of social responsibility.

We will improve the world, and the way we work, the way we communicate,
live and learn as people.

That's why as much as I've talked to you today about various phases of
computing, I also wanted to emphasize that we must now also pass into a
new phase as an industry.

We have grown, we have innovated, and we have prospered at a rate
unsurpassed by any other. It's been an amazing, breathtaking ride. It
can continue -- and accelerate -- if we remember that our future rests
on how well we respond to the total needs of society and of our
customers all around the world.

Thank you, and I hope you have a great day at Comdex.


