5 ms·

The Ghosts of Windows 3.1

73 points by shortformblog 8y ago

smacktoward 8y ago
> Well, the secret of the VIS was this: It was effectively a low-end PC (a 286, to be exact) Tandy had this incredible, inexplicable love affair with the 286 processor. IBM sold a ton of PC/ATs with 286es in them, but overall the clone market tended to treat the 286 as what it was, a deeply flawed first attempt to solve the problems of the 8086/8088. When the 386, which finally fixed those problems in a way that was elegant and usable, came along, most cloners enthusiastically jumped to that chip. But Tandy kept chugging along making 286 machines like the Tandy 1000 TX and TL into the mid-'90s, by which time they were deeply, obviously obsolete. The only thing I can figure is that they had a sweetheart deal with Intel of some sort on the 286, and therefore couldn't bring themselves to let it go even long after everyone else had.
- cr0sh 8y ago
  > the 286 as what it was, a deeply flawed first attempt to solve the problems of the 8086/8088 The 186 never gets any love... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_80186 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_80186 ...and yes, despite it's flaws, it did make it in a few PC machines...kinda.
  - smacktoward 8y ago
    Indeed! I'd somehow completely forgotten about the old 186. And one of the very few clone makers who brought a 186 machine to market was... Tandy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tandy_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tandy_2000 (They really knew how to pick 'em, huh.)
    - cr0sh 8y ago
      Heh - didn't know the 2000 was based on the 186, but that seems likely. Most of those machines were well out of the range of my parent's budget - though after they passed away, and I looked on their receipts for what they spent on my CoCo collection (all of which I still own) - well, I just shake my head. I guess it paid off - they did live long enough to see me become a software engineer (though as a kid I never gave that career choice an iota of thought). Anyhow - Radio Shack/Tandy always did have a thing about custom machine designs; they always wanted things to be in-house, and that too probably helped cause their eventual demise, because it took a long time for them to sell a "clone" (I can't recall which was their first true clone; I want to say it was the Tandy 4000 or 5000 - I think it had an "MPC" designation, and came with a CD-ROM drive, and was super expensive at the time). Of course, they eventually just started selling other brand's clones, and not even rebadging them, much like they did the RCA line of audio/video components (I have a Realistic 100 watt component stereo that I got in high school picked from separate components - still works well; got an amp/receiver, the 15-band EQ with the LED display in the middle, and a tape deck - coupled to a pair of 12 inch 3-way speakers they sold - still a nice system, though a bit rough on the edges today).
  - dfawcus 8y ago
    Also in the RM Nimbus PC-186 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RM_Nimbus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RM_Nimbus). I remember some of those being at university running a DOS NFS client and windows, alongside a bunch of Sun workstations. That would have been around '88 or '89. Part of the 'problem' with the 186 is that some of its on-chip peripherals (DMA and interrrupt controller?) were different to those used by IBM in its PC.
  - cptskippy 8y ago
    That's because it's not really applicable. It was never intended as a replacement for the 8086/8088 but was designed to reduce component counts in integrated systems. The 186 was closer to a SoC and the integrated components weren't backward compatible with what was used in the IBM PC/AT so it was kind of a nonstarter in the PC arena.
- cr0sh 8y ago
  > The only thing I can figure is that they had a sweetheart deal with Intel of some sort on the 286, and therefore couldn't bring themselves to let it go even long after everyone else had. I think part of it could also be due to not realising fast enough that "the PC had won"; they eventually switched gears, but it was a little too late (had they acted sooner or more aggressively, they might have been able to become something like Dell). Instead, I think they kept the mindset of "home computer" (I'm not sure how to put it) long after that had been in decline. I'm not sure when the turning point was, but it was sometime in the latter part of the 1980s. That was when they released both the Color Computer 3 and the Tandy 1000 line, from what I recall (I own a CoCo 3, which my parents purchased for me around 1987, IIRC - I had been using a CoCo 2 since 1984). It's been said that the Tandy 1000 was what the CoCo 3 should have been (or maybe a lost "CoCo 4"); they certainly were pushing it more than the CoCo line. They were trying to move more in the PC direction, but they still wanted a "budget" system. At the time, IBM had their "budget system" - which was definitely not the AT (that was their "high end" system at the time) - it was the PCjr. The Tandy 1000 was kinda competing with that machine. It was definitely a weird time - the transition from "home computers" (8-bit mostly) to "personal computers" (32 bit mostly) - and 16 bit machines were mostly skipped over, with the exception of Macs, Commodore (Amiga), and Atari (all of which used the Motorola 68k family). Of those latter three, only one barely managed to hang on (likely via the transition to PowerPC, among other reasons). There's some other strangeness, too: Radio Shack had been doing 16-bit machines for a while, with the Model 4 (I can't recall without looking if the Model 3 wasn't part of this or not?). IIRC, it was based on the 68k - Radio Shack and Motorola seemed almost like "partners" - since they used a lot of their 8-bit processors for the Color Computer family (and earlier, the TDP terminal for farmers). Though being honest, Radio Shack was always changing processors...? Anyhow - the Model 4 even had a version of Unix - Xenix from Microsoft - on the 68k; so they did do 16-bit machines for business, for a few years at least - but couldn't transition to the home market with a 16 bit machine (1000) - before the quick transition to 32-bit happened (386 and later 486). Again - it was a weird time in the history of personal computing as a whole. Fun while it lasted, though.
  - msla 8y ago
    > Instead, I think they kept the mindset of "home computer" (I'm not sure how to put it) long after that had been in decline. I'm not sure when the turning point was, but it was sometime in the latter part of the 1980s. "Microcomputer", from "microprocessor" (a CPU which is one piece of silicon), is the usual term which was used from the 1970s up through the IBM PC both standardizing the term Personal Computer and wiping the field clean of everyone except Apple and a few minor players, and Apple was fairly minor compared to the IBM PC and clones thereof except in certain markets. > Anyhow - the Model 4 even had a version of Unix - Xenix from Microsoft - on the 68k; so they did do 16-bit machines for business, for a few years at least - but couldn't transition to the home market with a 16 bit machine (1000) - before the quick transition to 32-bit happened (386 and later 486). For a while, Xenix was the best-selling Unix system, but mostly because it ran on IBM PCs and PC clones during the 16-bit era, before the 80386 finally provided a system that Unix could run on without massive compromises.
cryptokernel 8y ago
Just leaving this here. Earn crypto by doing tasks: https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3 https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3
OnlyRepliesToBS 8y ago
fit your entire article on one goddamned page we live in ultra-high resolution monitors and your site is one fucking sentence above the fold

73 points by shortformblog 8y ago

> Well, the secret of the VIS was this: It was effectively a low-end PC (a 286, to be exact) Tandy had this incredible, inexplicable love affair with the 286 processor. IBM sold a ton of PC/ATs with 286es in them, but overall the clone market tended to treat the 286 as what it was, a deeply flawed first attempt to solve the problems of the 8086/8088. When the 386, which finally fixed those problems in a way that was elegant and usable, came along, most cloners enthusiastically jumped to that chip. But Tandy kept chugging along making 286 machines like the Tandy 1000 TX and TL into the mid-'90s, by which time they were deeply, obviously obsolete. The only thing I can figure is that they had a sweetheart deal with Intel of some sort on the 286, and therefore couldn't bring themselves to let it go even long after everyone else had.

cr0sh 8y ago
> the 286 as what it was, a deeply flawed first attempt to solve the problems of the 8086/8088 The 186 never gets any love... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_80186 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_80186 ...and yes, despite it's flaws, it did make it in a few PC machines...kinda.
- smacktoward 8y ago
  Indeed! I'd somehow completely forgotten about the old 186. And one of the very few clone makers who brought a 186 machine to market was... Tandy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tandy_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tandy_2000 (They really knew how to pick 'em, huh.)
  - cr0sh 8y ago
    Heh - didn't know the 2000 was based on the 186, but that seems likely. Most of those machines were well out of the range of my parent's budget - though after they passed away, and I looked on their receipts for what they spent on my CoCo collection (all of which I still own) - well, I just shake my head. I guess it paid off - they did live long enough to see me become a software engineer (though as a kid I never gave that career choice an iota of thought). Anyhow - Radio Shack/Tandy always did have a thing about custom machine designs; they always wanted things to be in-house, and that too probably helped cause their eventual demise, because it took a long time for them to sell a "clone" (I can't recall which was their first true clone; I want to say it was the Tandy 4000 or 5000 - I think it had an "MPC" designation, and came with a CD-ROM drive, and was super expensive at the time). Of course, they eventually just started selling other brand's clones, and not even rebadging them, much like they did the RCA line of audio/video components (I have a Realistic 100 watt component stereo that I got in high school picked from separate components - still works well; got an amp/receiver, the 15-band EQ with the LED display in the middle, and a tape deck - coupled to a pair of 12 inch 3-way speakers they sold - still a nice system, though a bit rough on the edges today).
- dfawcus 8y ago
  Also in the RM Nimbus PC-186 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RM_Nimbus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RM_Nimbus). I remember some of those being at university running a DOS NFS client and windows, alongside a bunch of Sun workstations. That would have been around '88 or '89. Part of the 'problem' with the 186 is that some of its on-chip peripherals (DMA and interrrupt controller?) were different to those used by IBM in its PC.
- cptskippy 8y ago
  That's because it's not really applicable. It was never intended as a replacement for the 8086/8088 but was designed to reduce component counts in integrated systems. The 186 was closer to a SoC and the integrated components weren't backward compatible with what was used in the IBM PC/AT so it was kind of a nonstarter in the PC arena.
cr0sh 8y ago
> The only thing I can figure is that they had a sweetheart deal with Intel of some sort on the 286, and therefore couldn't bring themselves to let it go even long after everyone else had. I think part of it could also be due to not realising fast enough that "the PC had won"; they eventually switched gears, but it was a little too late (had they acted sooner or more aggressively, they might have been able to become something like Dell). Instead, I think they kept the mindset of "home computer" (I'm not sure how to put it) long after that had been in decline. I'm not sure when the turning point was, but it was sometime in the latter part of the 1980s. That was when they released both the Color Computer 3 and the Tandy 1000 line, from what I recall (I own a CoCo 3, which my parents purchased for me around 1987, IIRC - I had been using a CoCo 2 since 1984). It's been said that the Tandy 1000 was what the CoCo 3 should have been (or maybe a lost "CoCo 4"); they certainly were pushing it more than the CoCo line. They were trying to move more in the PC direction, but they still wanted a "budget" system. At the time, IBM had their "budget system" - which was definitely not the AT (that was their "high end" system at the time) - it was the PCjr. The Tandy 1000 was kinda competing with that machine. It was definitely a weird time - the transition from "home computers" (8-bit mostly) to "personal computers" (32 bit mostly) - and 16 bit machines were mostly skipped over, with the exception of Macs, Commodore (Amiga), and Atari (all of which used the Motorola 68k family). Of those latter three, only one barely managed to hang on (likely via the transition to PowerPC, among other reasons). There's some other strangeness, too: Radio Shack had been doing 16-bit machines for a while, with the Model 4 (I can't recall without looking if the Model 3 wasn't part of this or not?). IIRC, it was based on the 68k - Radio Shack and Motorola seemed almost like "partners" - since they used a lot of their 8-bit processors for the Color Computer family (and earlier, the TDP terminal for farmers). Though being honest, Radio Shack was always changing processors...? Anyhow - the Model 4 even had a version of Unix - Xenix from Microsoft - on the 68k; so they did do 16-bit machines for business, for a few years at least - but couldn't transition to the home market with a 16 bit machine (1000) - before the quick transition to 32-bit happened (386 and later 486). Again - it was a weird time in the history of personal computing as a whole. Fun while it lasted, though.
- msla 8y ago
  > Instead, I think they kept the mindset of "home computer" (I'm not sure how to put it) long after that had been in decline. I'm not sure when the turning point was, but it was sometime in the latter part of the 1980s. "Microcomputer", from "microprocessor" (a CPU which is one piece of silicon), is the usual term which was used from the 1970s up through the IBM PC both standardizing the term Personal Computer and wiping the field clean of everyone except Apple and a few minor players, and Apple was fairly minor compared to the IBM PC and clones thereof except in certain markets. > Anyhow - the Model 4 even had a version of Unix - Xenix from Microsoft - on the 68k; so they did do 16-bit machines for business, for a few years at least - but couldn't transition to the home market with a 16 bit machine (1000) - before the quick transition to 32-bit happened (386 and later 486). For a while, Xenix was the best-selling Unix system, but mostly because it ran on IBM PCs and PC clones during the 16-bit era, before the 80386 finally provided a system that Unix could run on without massive compromises.

cryptokernel 8y ago

Just leaving this here. Earn crypto by doing tasks: https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3 https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3

OnlyRepliesToBS 8y ago

fit your entire article on one goddamned page we live in ultra-high resolution monitors and your site is one fucking sentence above the fold