3 ms·

They did, it also went nowhere. The original DEC personal computer strategy was three-pronged: DECmate, a PDP-8 variant (12-bit), for word processing and offic

They did, it also went nowhere. The original DEC personal computer strategy was three-pronged: DECmate, a PDP-8 variant (12-bit), for word processing and office automation at the low end; for the DECmate II you could get a CP/M card and a graphics card as well, and I think the DECmate III had graphics built in. It ran a variant of OS/8. DEC Rainbow, a system with both Z-80 and 8088, for general CP/M and MS-DOS software at the midrange. This was their “consumer” system. MS-DOS software that stuck to the APIs would work, anything that expected PC hardware broke. DEC Professional, a PDP-11 variant (16-bit), as a high end workstation. It was literally a PDP-11 Qbus system, and could run RT-11 or RSTS or even UNIX. This was essentially a PDP-11 development workstation or small office server. The single biggest problem with this strategy is the confusion caused by incompatibility, even moreso than not being PC-compatible. For example, if everything had been (one of) either PDP-8 or PDP-11 based, it would have been a strong product line: Office appliance, home computer, workstation. If everything had been based on either CP/M or MS-DOS (or both, like Rainbow), they could have potentially been a much bigger player in those markets, maybe even driving more software to target APIs rather than hardware (as NEC’s non-PC MS-DOS systems did in Japan). Instead, well, that part of their business wound up being just another PC clone maker after a while. At least the VAXmate was innovative in being a PC-compatible that could boot over built-in Ethernet from a VAX…

classichasclass 6y ago
They actually didn't, because none of these were miniaturized PDPs in the sense they were compatible. As you say, they were variants, and they didn't actually run the same software as the real PDP-8s or PDP-11s. Substantial modification was required and some OSes and application software was never ported. The DEC Pros in particular suffered from poorer performance as well (the 380 finally bettered this but was too little too late). If DEC had actually sold a compatible microcomputer PDP system, they might have done better commercially, but instead they used the PDP architecture to build related but incompatible systems so as to not cannibalize sales of their big iron. In that sense, they were successful, because they sold very poorly. I like my 380 with Venix, but it's a dead end.
- ghaff 6y ago
  In a way, none of this mattered at the end of the day anyway. If one leaves aside the sui generis and complicated story of Apple, PCs became a commodity business in any case. It wasn't a sustainable business for any of the large companies that also wanted to fund research labs and otherwise invest in new technology areas.
flyinghamster 6y ago
Probably the closest we ever got in the US to a home PDP-11 was sold via Heathkit as the H-11 and H-11A. These had standard QBUS cards packaged in a Heathkit chassis. At the time, in high school, I drooled over the thought of having one, especially since the school had its own 11/34. In retrospect, it would have been fun but literally nobody I knew would have had one. It's ironic that the biggest single market for home PDP-11 clones was... the Soviet Union.
- WalterBright 6y ago
  I did have an H-11. I loved that computer. See my background picture: https://twitter.com/WalterBright https://twitter.com/WalterBright

classichasclass 6y ago

They actually didn't, because none of these were miniaturized PDPs in the sense they were compatible. As you say, they were variants, and they didn't actually run the same software as the real PDP-8s or PDP-11s. Substantial modification was required and some OSes and application software was never ported. The DEC Pros in particular suffered from poorer performance as well (the 380 finally bettered this but was too little too late). If DEC had actually sold a compatible microcomputer PDP system, they might have done better commercially, but instead they used the PDP architecture to build related but incompatible systems so as to not cannibalize sales of their big iron. In that sense, they were successful, because they sold very poorly. I like my 380 with Venix, but it's a dead end.

ghaff 6y ago
In a way, none of this mattered at the end of the day anyway. If one leaves aside the sui generis and complicated story of Apple, PCs became a commodity business in any case. It wasn't a sustainable business for any of the large companies that also wanted to fund research labs and otherwise invest in new technology areas.

flyinghamster 6y ago

Probably the closest we ever got in the US to a home PDP-11 was sold via Heathkit as the H-11 and H-11A. These had standard QBUS cards packaged in a Heathkit chassis. At the time, in high school, I drooled over the thought of having one, especially since the school had its own 11/34. In retrospect, it would have been fun but literally nobody I knew would have had one. It's ironic that the biggest single market for home PDP-11 clones was... the Soviet Union.

WalterBright 6y ago
I did have an H-11. I loved that computer. See my background picture: https://twitter.com/WalterBright https://twitter.com/WalterBright