On 08/01/2019 11:44, silverdr@wfmh.org.pl wrote: > I recall the discussions still from the early to mid-eighties and people wondering "why on Earth" would anyone want a machine like that. The original IBM PC compared reasonably well to the apple 2. My c64 and tape deck may have had better games, but also 40 columns and slow disk drives. > Also the common conclusion (back then!) was that IBM allowed the clones because they themselves saw no value in the design that came out of this exercise. I don't know how anyone came to that conclusion. They couldn't do anything about the MSDOS machines that weren't IBM PC compatible, but as soon as companies cloned their BIOS then they sued. > But extrapolating from this to giving undeserved credit to how it was designed is what I find an unjustifiable offence to every engineering team of the same era, who put lots of good thought into their designs, while dealing with the same constraints. You think it's worse than c64 IEC?Received on 2019-01-08 22:02:11
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.