In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/25/2007
at 09:42 AM, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>801 was originally targeted (very) low-end ... ROMP chip was targeted
>to be used in a displaywriter follow-in ... when that project was
>killed, the group looked around for something to save the e
evidence of it being around.
> They are not even museum pieces.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007n.html#20 The Development of the Vital IBM PC
in Spite of the Corporate Culture of IBM
you didn't read the zillion previous posts mentioning that mid-range
market for both vax/vms and 43xx v
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007n.html#18 The Development of the Vital IBM PC
in Spite of the Corporate Culture of IBM
the place that 43xx had the most
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:14:15 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>My sister had an Amiga for years. I had an Atari 800 which had such
>advancements as lower case letters!
Oh, my second floppy driver for the Atari was a Z-80 powered drive
with 64K of RAM. Besides working quite well, I was able to bo
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Smith III) writes:
> Re RISC vs. 68K:
> Anyone who thinks the RISC chips killed the 68K is off base. They
> just need to check the dates. I
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Smith III) writes:
> Re VAX vs. IBM:
> I was a central, low level member of the 4300 series. I also led the
> engineering side of the fight
One of the more interesting PCs was the very expensive Heathkit that
came as a kit. I wonder what the marked was for it.
My sister had an Amiga for years. I had an Atari 800 which had such
advancements as lower case letters!
-
Phil Smith III wrote:
More from my correspondent; I'm just the messenger, don't flame me...
Re VAX vs. IBM:
I was a central, low level member of the 4300 series. I also led the
engineering side of the fight against the VAX. We never approached the
installed base of the VAX machines. Never.
More from my correspondent; I'm just the messenger, don't flame me...
Re VAX vs. IBM:
I was a central, low level member of the 4300 series. I also led the
engineering side of the fight against the VAX. We never approached the
installed base of the VAX machines. Never.
Re RISC vs. 68K:
Anyone
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 14:03:05 -0600, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you
wrote:
>and/or corporate marketing ... majority of the people in the period ...
>didn't understand what personal computing and/or PC software actually
>met ... marketing such abstractions would have little meaning
>(sufficient under
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/22/2007
at 12:34 PM, Phil Smith III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>That hardware box had all the engineering characteristics of the
>original PC - 8088 processor, same storage options, 2 floppies - as I
>remember. However, the software was closed.
Don't forget Displa
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Smith III) writes:
> Which is the end of the story, boys and girls. For, while so many
> people focus on how the PC has damaged the mainfram
I forwarded the thread to a friend who was there at the time; here's his
response.
...phsiii
=
Cool! Thanks.
My own addition would be in the category of what might be called "business
history." By the 1980s IBM was struggling in the mini and super-mini business.
IBM had 5 hardware p
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 10:05:32 -0500, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you
wrote:
>Then I saw the price, shuddered, and quickly came back to reality.
>A couple of years later I saw a Macintosh at a fraction of the price;
>but once again it was WAY out of my budget.
Recently there have been a series of arti
On 18 Jun 2007 11:48:38 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>How many bought PCs without Windows and then decided to buy Windows?
>
>Or even who bought PCs without DOS and then decided to buy DOS?
>
>
>Better yet, try to buy a NAME computer that doesn't have an O/S, or has
>Linux (any distr
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:22:15 -0600, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>as i've mentioned before ... the other market force was that the
>previous personal computers had been do-it-yourself and hobbiest market.
>individuals had to justify the cost of the box for their own personal
>interest ... that inclu
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thompson, Steve
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 1:48 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: The Development of the Vital IBM PC in Spite of
> the Cor
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Howard Brazee
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 12:47 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: The Development of the Vital IBM PC in Spite of the
Corporate Culture of IBM
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 21:22:24
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 21:22:24 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you
wrote:
>Microsoft Windows dominates the world today for the same reason - it's
>the _de facto_ standard for which you have the best chance of getting
>software. But it only became a success in the beginning because it
>*did* offer va
didn't *get* the fact that the
> open bus and configuration was what made the PC popular. IOW, it was
> the *competition* that made it such a huge success.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007m.html#42 The Development of the Vital IBM PC
in Spite of the Corporate Culture of IBM
riginal Message -
From: "Phil Payne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 3:51 PM
Subject: The Development of the Vital IBM PC in Spite of the Corporate
Culture of IBM
Spam, and reported to Google. At least the version C
Spam, and reported to Google. At least the version Copscape found on the ezine
site has been
spell checked. Still makes as little sense.
--
Phil Payne
http://www.isham-research.co.uk
+44 7833 654 800
--
For IBM-MAIN sub
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> The public history of the PC began in August 1981, when IBM first
> announced 'The IBM Personal Computer.' . This was The original
> PC.
23 matches
Mail list logo
