Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdsu!crash!pnet01!jca From: jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Is the XT dead? Message-ID: <446@crash.cts.com> Date: 28 Sep 89 06:56:24 GMT Sender: root@crash.cts.com Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA Lines: 124 lane@cs.dal.ca (John Wright/Dr. Pat Lane) writes: >Here is a question that's been sparking debate in the office here. >I'll toss it out to the net. > >Are 8086/8088-based machines obsolete? Nearly so? How long have they got? As long as MS-DOS is around, the 8086/8 will be around. MS-DOS is designed around the 8086/8 address space. There is big money for a company that designs a 100% implementation of MS-DOS that runs in 286/386 protect mode, but I have yet to see such an implementation. >I don't see many ads for or hear much about XT's in the magasines lately. >Many people are saying that since XT's can't run OS/2 or certain DOS >programs today, that soon they won't be able to run most new software >and as such represent a bad investment at any price. That's because the bottom has dropped out of the price of XT motherboards and AT motherboards are rapidly going down in price. I paid under $300 for my 16 MHz 286 board a year ago. At the time, it was a good investment, but now I am looking to getting a 386 box. As for OS/2, that thing is a joke of an operating system. I see a big future in Unix and Unix based OS'es, but I see OS/2 being mothballed before it even gets fully off the ground. >Others say that's just industry hype and a machine that does what you >want today will still be able to do so as long as it holds together... >"and who needs OS/2 anyway". > >Others say it doesn't matter what you buy, its going to be obsolete >before you get it out of the box...well, sooner than you think, anyway. >But that doesn't really help you decide what to buy now. The 486's are about out now. Does that mean that your 386 box is obsolete? Not by a long shot, who the hell uses the full 32-bit power of the 386? Probably only the real 386 versions of Unix. OS/2 is written in 286 protect mode, so if you have a 386 box, tough, OS/2 puts it in 286 emulation mode and chugs away...basically a software labotamy. I don't think OS/2 will be the new standard by a longshot. The only thing it has going for it is the fact it knows how to utilize microchannel. Big deal, I can order an MCA version of SCO Xenix from my software distributor. The 286 is a brain damaged chip and OS/2 is the brain damaged operating system that goes with it. >Certainly XTs are cheap. An XT is half the price of a 286 which is >half the price of a 386 (roughly of course). One dealer told me that >they don't like selling XTs anymore because there's no profit in them. > >I guess for us the turning point would be when the latest release of >WordPerfect doesnt run on an XT. Of course we're already there with >Lotus 123 rel 3. When MS-DOS is obsolete and not used anymore, then I'd mothball that XT, but I do know that nothing is completely obsolete. There are people out there still using CP/M boxes. So the buzzword obsolete is what does the job for you. An XT is obsolete for me because it won't run Unix. A 286 is the bare minimum, but then I can't have DOSMerge because of the design flaws in the 286. So what next? A 386? Well, that will do the job, as many DOS windows as the kernel can handle, but then again. I don't like DOS to begin with. So what's the solution for me? SCO Xenix 286. >Suppose you have relatively light duty tasks that, today, would be served >adequately by XTs and don't anticipate your basic tasks changing a great >deal, and you need several such machines, what do you buy if you want to >invest wisely? Where's the "smart" money going! The 'smart' money is going in what does the job for you. I bought a 286 motherboard last year because I knew I didn't need the abilities of a 386 for awhile. The only thing that a 386 can provide me with besides speed and ease of programming in a 32-bit address space is the ability to run multiple DOS windows. Well, I get that from the Sun 386i I maintain at work, so SCO Xenix 286 will do the job here at home. OS/2? Get out of here. One of my ambitious dreams in life is to run into Bill Gates at Comdex and tell him exactly what he can do with OS/2. I have had a few people I know who develop software and do consulting tell me that I should have at least gotten a 386SX. But I stuck to my guns and bought a high speed 286 motherboard and the only time I regret buying it is when I'm programming in assembly. There's also that fact that if Stallman ever gets the GNU project finished, it will not run on a 286. Most of the GNU project demands a 32-bit address space. GCC will not compile on a 286 machine. It wants a 386 machine to play with. >Ancillary question: How far behind the 8086 is the 80286? People have >been calling it a brain-damaged dead-end since the day it was released. >There is certainly software around that runs on 386's but not 286's. I'll be one of the first people to admit that the 286 is a brain damaged processor, but it does have its place in the IBM compatable heirarchy. The fact AMD and Harris are still in business with their high speed 286's is proof of that. A 286 can be a decent file server or Unix machine. I wouldn't do anything on it that would redline it though. It's very easy to redline a 286 since it doesn't quite know what virtual memory is. Your hardcore Unix box would run on a 386 since it does know what virtual memory is. The two problems with the 286 are protect mode and memory management in protect mode, and if going in and out of protect mode is something you're doing, that's a fatal problem (which is what is done for DOS windows under Unix for example). The 286 is basically a brute force processor when you want speed and you don't care about memory management, running DOS windows, etc. The problem is that there isn't a decent MS-DOS compatable OS that runs in 286 protect mode. I don't expect to see the 8086 replaced with the 286, but rather the 386 if a good standard OS is developed. The moral to all of this is that if it does the job for you, then use it. Since there is a big market in software for DOS, DOS will be around for awhile, so that XT is far from obsolete. The 386 OS'es are barely hitting the light of day, and now we have the 486's coming out. I'm not a marketing expert, but I do know that IBM and MicroSoft won't leave their established customer base out in the cold. Also, notice this trend, the hardware is developed long before the software is. When the 386 first came out I thought...wow, great! Now, what is there out there to use that power? Same story with the 486. /*--------------------------------------------------------------------------* * Flames: /dev/null (on my Minix partition) *--------------------------------------------------------------------------* * ARPA : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil * INET : jca@pnet01.cts.com * UUCP : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca *--------------------------------------------------------------------------* * Note : My opinions are that...mine. My boss doesn't pay me enough to * speak in the best interests of the company (yet). *--------------------------------------------------------------------------*/