Engh 101 Fall 2012, Final Exam Paper on Xerox Parc--Brief Historical Argument

For Mon Dec 17th, write a 2-3 page paper (typed and double spaced) on one of the questions below.  Include at least three in-text cites and a works-cited page. See Diana Hacker's Research and Documentation Online to review citation formats. See Hacker, for example, on how to reference video clips on your works cited page, and how to cite a book. Also study carefully the sample paper on her site for how to include headers, titles, etc. Make sure you clearly define the issue you are exploring and set out your thesis somewhere near the beginning of the paper. Do not try and cover too much since this is a short paper you are writing it in a limited period of time.  You are required to see one of the LLC tutors as you work on paper #4.  You can brainstorm or go over drafts.  You can also meet this requirement by seeing a tutor if you revise paper #3.  In either case, include a statement of what you went over in your session and what you changed as a result.   

You can write on one of the following questions:

  1. "Did Xerox Blow It" by failing to market one or more of the inventions developed at Parc? This paper covers some of the same ground as question #2 but focus more on the claim that Xerox "blew it" (389-398) because it failed to commercialize the inventions of its scientists and engineers.  You may want to introduce this paper by discussing Steve Jobs visit to Xerox Parc in December of 1979 and the questions Jobs raised about Xerox during and after his visit (Hiltzik 329-345, 423-4) .   

    In developing your argument, you should cover at least one invention discussed by Hiltzik as well as his ideas on Xerox's failures and/or Clayton Christensen's notion of disruptive innovation.  One fruitful area where you might apply Christensen's ideas would be in explaining Xerox's relative success in commercializing the laser printer (Hiltzik 127-144) or Ethernet (178-192) as opposed to its failures with the Alto (261-5, 278,  283-287) or the Star (243-253, 261-270).

    NOTE:  You do not have time to read Christensen's book The Innovator's Dilemma now but may want to look at it later along with his four part Fortune Global Forum lecture on YouTube (New Delhi, 2007).   


  2. Who was the most interesting and/or important figure who worked at Parc and why? 
    In addition to individuals like Bob Taylor, Alan Kay, Gary Starkweather (Hiltzik 127-144) and Bob Metcalfe (178-193) who we have or will talk about in class, Hiltzik covers several other figures and inventions you could write about instead (choose only one figure for paper #4).  These include Charles Simonyi, Tim Mott and Larry Tesler, who worked on the Bravo and Gypsy word processing programs (194-210); Dick Shoup and Alvy Ray Smith, who worked on Superpaint and video graphics (229-241); and David Liddle, who brought the Star office system to market (242-256, 361-370).

    For an introduction to some of these later options, watch the interview with the developers of the Gypsy Word processing program, Tim Mott and Larry Tesler on the companion website to the book Designing Interactions. On the same site is an interview with David Liddle, who was the project leader on the development of the Xerox Star. If you decide to work on Liddle and the Star, you should watch his Xerox Star 8010 Final Demo at Xerox Parc from 1998.