OT: Re: Time to declare State of Massachusetts the ENEMY! He

From: jpero_at_cgocable.net <(jpero_at_cgocable.net)>
Date: Thu Apr 15 15:14:44 1999

Date sent: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:14:02 -0400 (EDT)
Send reply to: classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu
From: John Ruschmeyer <jruschme_at_hiway1.exit109.com>
To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers" <classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: OT: Re: Time to declare State of Massachusetts the ENEMY! He

SNip!

> I'll agree on the performance issue, particularly since all but the
> cheapest 486s had external cache, while only the most expensive 386s
> had it.
>
> I tend to disagree on the expandability, though. Pretty much every

Reasons for ease of expansion, at the time when XT and 286 were
king till up to '93, most of them don't have onboard ports, mostly on
cards. 386 and 486 was "THE high end" between '87 to '93 Those
386/486 boxens were very few often found in branded models with
onboard ports. Clones didn't. Memories was expensive still and
clones always comes with cards, very few used onboard ports.
Remember, common people can't afford more than 2.5 grand for
most machines that are where clones abrounds. Till very late
around '95 that we saw turn from many cards for i/o to onboard i/o
for motherboards. Memories still expensive, I do recall I had paid
700CDN for set of 2 8MB EDO in early '96 along with P5 100, asus
board (TP4XEG model) and 1gig hd.

30pin simms of any kind is very hard to come by now compared to
ease of obtaining used 72pin of all types.
Now SDRAM is for short time, cheapest possible to go. :)

LBA is better avoided if possible in "idiotic" enviroments like
schools because that said computer with lost LBA driver sits for
days even weeks till someone is found to reinstall it because
school must send in requests for repairs approvals and most don't
have good nerdy teacher and few young bright hackers is very rare
and usually not allowed into school stuff. Older 386 and slower
486 also don't need the trouble large hd brings with. Keeping
smaller hd on them helps to deal with cpu limitations because
older s/w is also smaller. Putting big one in invites "newer" s/w
that cpu can't keep up and get a unhappy users and troubles.

I DO rememeber that case years ago...in early 90's, remember, XT
is plentiful and parts can be had off the streets by bunches. Case
in point: I was taking a machine shop class which has small CTC
run by a IBM XT that needed full 640K. Guess what? nearly 4
months to get that job done. Soon after I found a tip that needs
TTL IC, 18 256K x 1 and a piece of wire can do the job in few
hours. Which I did myself on one of XT board for fun. :-(

Snip!

> Weren't the Aero's the ones with the PCMCIA floppy or were they the
> pen-based ones? (I always get the Aero and the Contura mixed up.)

Aero is PCMCIA floppy type 4lbs cut down, excessive no frills
notebook. I don't like the trackball with buttons location, cramped
expansions, weak 486 and odd video chipset. But for "floppy"
making and light reading, run win 3.xx, using it as go between
instead of verbal or when paper n pen is not needed with hearing
people. I'm deaf.

> Would I like something faster, sure, but I really can't justify it for
> what I use them for- basic connectivity and recreation while on the road
> (though I have considered putting in a bigger drive in the NCR and setting
> up a NetBSD partition).

If you're looking for larger HD, sounds like you're ready for a
powerful notebook. Older machines with "weaker" CPU only needs
small HD usually. Don't dodge that one! Please go ahead and
flich a 486DX2 or better class, TFT panel notebook with big hd. I
excused myself like this idiotic thing for years till this LTE 386s/20,
10MB ram w/ 300MB fitted in. First thing next I tried was linux and
xwin on it. Total distraster. And soon after Aero was bought in
and rest is history. Suggestion: Go TP! Parts sources from ibm
servicer places is still can be had for old TP's. That is how I did
yesterday last nite on 701C. Ditto to 700C which was traded away.

Xwin is CPU-hungry + Ram eater, this does helps very much when
HD is good in high speed transfers with largest possible internal hd
buffer. I found that out on 486dx2 then to p5-100 (much better!)
then K6-2 400 (perfect).

>
> <<<john>>>
>

Wizard
Received on Thu Apr 15 1999 - 15:14:44 BST