IBM didn't want Microsoft to use the Tab key to move between dialog fields

IBM vs. Microsoft over the Tab key

• Commenters are puzzled what IBM wanted instead of Tab; the story as told doesn’t specify.
• Several speculate IBM disliked dual‑use keys (Tab as both input character and navigation control).
• Others think it may have been internal politics, standards battles, or patent concerns rather than a coherent UX stance.
• Some see it mainly as an anecdote illustrating cultural conflict: IBM as process‑heavy vs Microsoft as “ship it” hackers.

Historical behavior on IBM systems

• Multiple people recall IBM 3270 mainframe terminals using Tab/Back‑Tab to move between fields and Enter to submit, making IBM’s objection seem inconsistent.
• Midrange 5250/AS‑400 terminals had dedicated “Field Advance” / “Field Backspace” keys and separate Enter vs Return, supporting multiline input without conflicting with “submit.”
• IBM’s later CUA guidelines explicitly specified Tab/Back‑Tab for field navigation, suggesting the escalation in the story may have predated or contradicted their own standard.

Enter/Return, field navigation, and modern UX

• Several note the long‑running confusion where Enter can mean “next field,” “submit,” or “newline,” especially in chat apps.
• Some argue Enter‑to‑advance and Ctrl+Enter‑to‑submit or separate Enter/Return keys are more coherent; others prefer Tab for navigation.
• There are conflicting memories about DOS apps: some recall Enter for moving between fields, others remember Tab.

Tabs as characters vs navigation; tabs vs spaces

• A major sub‑thread discusses how Tab is “hijacked” by UI navigation, making it hard to insert literal tab characters in web forms.
• This is used as an argument for using spaces for indentation in code: Space almost always produces a space, Tab often changes focus.
• Counter‑arguments emphasize tabs as “logical indentation” whose visual width can be user‑configured; spaces lock everyone into one width.
• People highlight practical problems when mixed tabs/spaces meet different tab widths, causing misaligned code.

Keyboard design and anachronisms

• Several posts dive into IBM keyboard history (3270 layouts, separate Enter/Return, Back‑Tab, beam‑spring vs later designs).
• Others lament modern PC keyboards: oversized Caps Lock, largely unused Scroll Lock/Pause/Insert, and missed opportunities for dedicated “next field” keys.

Corporate culture and credibility

• Some see the story as emblematic of IBM‑style bureaucracy; others note Microsoft today feels similarly bureaucratic.
• At least one commenter questions the anecdote’s evidentiary strength and missing details (especially what IBM proposed as the alternative key).