Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:15:59 +0800
W B Hacker wrote:
The only 'glue' needed was level-shifters - discrete transistors on my OSI
Challenger II, Motorola 1488 & 1489 diode-coupled-logic on everything up until
the 16XXX derivative of the 8250 was sucked into a 'bridge'
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:15:59 +0800
W B Hacker wrote:
>
> The only 'glue' needed was level-shifters - discrete transistors on my OSI
> Challenger II, Motorola 1488 & 1489 diode-coupled-logic on everything up
> until
> the 16XXX derivative of the 8250 was sucked into a 'bridge' chipset.
>
I re
lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
wikipedia agrees with lucio on this point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Channel_architecture#Marketshare_issues
The majority within IBM never wanted into that part of the market in the first
place, as it was seen as cannibalizing not only 3XXX terminal sales, bu
erik quanstrom wrote:
lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
but by 1990 with microchannel &c. things were much more closed off.
i thought only one company ever really made microchannel,
and even they weren't terribly in earnest in the end,
except on non-PC things like RS6000.
IBM tried to recover contro
