Re: Apple's ways

[Roy Miller <millers@inebraska.com>]

Raymond Wiker wrote:

> "william strutts" <wrstrutts1@nospam.home.com> writes:
>
> > "Roy Miller" <millers@inebraska.com> wrote in message
> > 3B94ECF4.A4992B97@inebraska.com">news:3B94ECF4.A4992B97@inebraska.com...
> > > You have contradicted yourself here, twice!
> > >
> > > 1) The PS/2 line, from the very beginning included a 386. (While it is
> > > true that Compaq had the first 386 PC, it wasn't because IBM failed to
> > > recognize the significance of the 386, rather, it has to do with your
> > > second self contradiction)
> >
> > Say what Roy. The Model 30 and the Model 50 were 286 machines
> > with Microchannel and the Model 25 was an ISA 286 machine. If I
> > recall properly the 386 wasn't introduced until the PS/2 model 80 came
> > out.
>
>         The original PS/2 model 30 was an 8086, I think.

You are correct. And, William is also wrong in that the Models 25 and 30 had
ISA slots. There was, however, a model 30 that had a 286. And the Model 80
came out the same year as the rest of the PS/2 line. So, William is once
again, incorrect.

>
>
> > Hardware for the machines was hard to get

PC magazine had lots of ads for MC cards, as did Computer Shopper.

> and expensive since IBM
> > had the only viable microchannel machines.

Ever hear of Tandy? The fact is that MC didn't catch on because people did
want an upgrade path that was also downward compatible. However, the point
that I was reacting to was the contention is that innovation will win every
time, when in fact the PS/2 line shows that it doesn't

> Most PC makers meaning
> > the majority of the market stuck with the ISA architecture.

Not at all. They moved to EISA and VLB and then PCI.

> If it was
> > doomed so much then why is microchannel no longer with us? It didn't
> > disappear completely until recently so how bad was ISA then?

IBM sold a plenty of MC machines, as well as ISA machines.  The problem with
MC is that IBM didn't offer both MC and ISA in the same box (at least they
didn't to start, I don't know if they EVER did) If a machine had both ISA and
MC in the same box there would have been the same upgrade path that later
machines had with both PCI and ISA.

>
>
>         I think MCA is still used in the RS-6000 series (used to be,
> anyway). The *main* reason that MCA did not become a success was that
> IBM wanted license fees for it. This license fee was per machine, and
> even included IBM-compatible machines without MCA slots, *and* machines
> shipped before the introduction of MCA.

Right. Which is why most PC manufactures tried to develop the EISA, so they
wouldn't have to pay for their past cloning.

Roy

>
>
> --
> Raymond Wiker
> Raymond.Wiker@fast.no