Computer History 101: The Development Of The PC

Status
Not open for further replies.

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
[citation][nom]mayankleoboy1[/nom]just one question: why this article? in the whole wide range of PC, why this?you could have done the second part to the Antiliasing article.[/citation]

That's still on its way. It's very data-intensive and Don has been plugging away at it.
 

SteelCity1981

Distinguished
Sep 16, 2010
1,129
0
19,310
2006: Microsoft releases the long-awaited Windows Vista to business users. The PC OEM and consumer market releases would follow in early 2007:

It should really read.

2006: Microsoft releases the long-awaited Windows Vista to business users. The PC OEM and consumer market releases would follow in early 2007 and the vast majority of people quickly downgraded back to Windows XP:

lol
 

jj463rd

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2008
1,510
0
19,860
One thing that I disliked about the Timeline of Computer Advancements was leaving out Douglas Englebart and the Mother of All Demos in 1968(if you don't know about him you know very little about computer history )and giving accolades instead to Xerox.
 

Mark Heath

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2010
837
0
19,010
Nice read, reminded me to read up a bit more history on Apple, I knew jobs left for a while, but only found out today that he's apparently taken LSD and went Hindu after a trip to India. Yes, *apparently*, go look it up :)
 

molo9000

Distinguished
Aug 14, 2010
646
0
18,990
he system’s $8975 price placed it out of the mainstream personal computer marketplace
That's a mild understatement. In 1975 you could buy a brand new V8 powered Ford Mustang for $4000.

The move to a PC-based architecture is without a doubt the smartest move Apple has made in years—besides reducing Apple’s component costs, it allows Macs to finally perform on par with PCs.
Eh? Apple had to move to Intel because PowerPC was going downhill in 2006, but a there was a time when PowerPC chips were faster than Intel chips.

I would say it is a safe bet that PC-compatible systems will continue to dominate the personal computer marketplace for the foreseeable future.
That's a bold statement considering that the next version of Windows is going to be ARM compatible.
The personal computer isn't going anywhere, but we might see the end of x86 dominance soon.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
Quite a few mistakes, but the most glaring is the overstatement with regards to the Apple II. What standard did it set? Expansion slots were on other machines, although IBM certainly saw this on the Apple. Of course, you didn't have the problems where certain card wouldn't work in certain slots (except in VERY rare cases), whereas Apple was much more rigid. The weird video where you couldn't put certain colors next to other colors were certainly never copied. The 6502 was a dead end, and Apple's next computer went to the 68K. The design where the keyboard was part of the computer was not copied by IBM,and in any case had been predated.

Also, it was NOT a huge standard. The TRS-80 was at least as important in 1977 and the next few years, and was the best selling computer before the IBM PC came out. Also, don't forget Atari, which was also out there with the Atari 400 and Atari 800, and had very powerful video acceleration technology.

It's not the Apple II wasn't selling, but it wasn't a predominate standard as stated, and had very strong competition. It was basically overpriced junk, with a slow, very annoying processor (which is the basis for ARM's instruction set), annoying video modes, weird floppy disk technology, and a price excessive for what the machine was.

Also, the Pentium II was not basically a Pentium Pro with MMX. It had much more important changes (in retrospect, since MMX didn't matter much). For one, the Pentium Pro ran 16-bit code very poorly, and it was obscenely expensive because of the L2 cache on the processor package. They slowed down the L2 cache with external chips (for the Klamath, Deschutes, and Katmai), but doubled the L1 cache. This cut costs dramatically. Also, the Pentium II was able to run 16-bit code better than the Pentium for the first time.
 

jcknouse

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2008
447
0
18,780
They still make that book?

I think I have the 2nd Ed of that book at home, with ISA ports listed in it.

A free copy would mean I have one that's up-to-date. lolz
 

TeraMedia

Distinguished
Jan 26, 2006
904
1
18,990
My father still has a working MITS altair. The disk drives are a bit flakey, and I don't think the punch tape drive has been used since the 70s, but it packs a full 64KB sRAM, and has switches on the front by which you can actually toggle in the machine code if you want. Working in 64 KB of program and data space is challenging to say the least. It runs a variant of BASIC written by William Gates, whoever that is.
 

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
[citation][nom]madsbs[/nom]Pics or it didn't happen!Where are the illustrations for this rather interesting piece?[/citation]

Alas, we weren't able to add artwork to the story as it appears in the book; believe me, I wanted to as well :)
 

JohnA

Distinguished
Aug 20, 2010
84
0
18,640
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]Quite a few mistakes....[/citation]

Yeah, I was going to add similar. One thing they also forgot was LIM, Lotus/Intel/Microsoft. Before MS put out the Office suit, and IBM headed down it's lonesome OS/2 trail (wow, not even a mention of OS/2 ???), Lotus played a role in the early evolution.

What made the PC standard was open hardware, AND software the masses could use.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.