Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: AFreeBird

That was it. Never did figure out why the 8088’s were worse/came out before the 8086’s.


24 posted on 03/31/2016 1:07:05 PM PDT by ro_dreaming (Chesterton, 'Christianity has not been tried and found wanting. It's been found hard and not tried')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: ro_dreaming

IBM. 8088 was an 8 bit bus. The 86 had the full 16 bit bus for the architecture, which was best for a multi user system.

The 8087 was an optional math co-processor.

The 88 was cheaper and designed for a single user system. IBM was taking a chance on the PC. Their main focus was big iron.

It ended up exceeding their expectations, of course. They screwed the pooch with the PS/2 and micro channel. Not that micro channel was bad, it just wasn’t backward compatible with the iSA bus. Expansion cards were expensive back then. Small businesses couldn’t just scrap their investments like large corporations could.

Compaq won the day with EISA.

Back in the day we used to take hex editors to command.com and replaced “International Business Machines” with “Ignorant Business Men” in the boot up copyright screen.

}:-)


27 posted on 03/31/2016 5:19:37 PM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson