3 ms·

IBM sold computers in cheesy clone-looking cases, with turbo buttons? Do you have a source to support that? And you know for a fact they're only sold with 5.25"

IBM sold computers in cheesy clone-looking cases, with turbo buttons? Do you have a source to support that? And you know for a fact they're only sold with 5.25" drives, because you say they were all upgraded? Sounds like overconfident and incorrect speculation, unless you can provide a link to these IBM models. Also, supporting more than one modem at a time is literally the definition of multitasking. You can't do it without multitasking. Are you talking about not needing a multitasking OS, because the software does its own multitasking?

beckerdo 5y ago
Weren't the IBM Ambra, Aptiva, and Vista brands efforts by IBM to out clone the clones? As I remember, these IBM brands from the 1990s gave the impression of an IBM computer, but they were all made by third-party companies.
- justinlloyd 5y ago
  I believe you are correct, and they had the perfect little IBM logo slapped on them to make everyone believe that. Those were found throughout banks in the UK for the longest time. I am not sure those machines in the image are IBMs, but the case is very reminiscient of IBM's machines. We know they aren't Dell (wrong logo placement) and we know they aren't Compaq (wrong size/shape logo). But this is a minor detail, clones or IBMs isn't really relevant.
justinlloyd 5y ago
Source? Yes. IBM. IBM made crappy clones. I am not saying those are absolutely IBMs, they could easily be clones. But I do recall IBM making a case very similar to that. I also speculated, it doesn't mean I was stating it as fact under oath. "I know for a fact" - why so accusatory? No, I'm saying those particular machines were sold with 5.25" drives and then upgraded to 3.5" because none of the plastic matches. "supporting more than one modem at a time is literally the definition of multitasking" - no, it isn't. You might as well claim that a single threaded application that can respond to the UI and also do processing in the background is multitasking when it clearly isn't. "You can't do it without multitasking" - yes, you can. There is a vast difference between a multitasking OS or multithreaded program and simply polling a couple of devices or getting IRQ'd. Now this I know, "for a fact" and we can argue about that until the cows come home, but frankly, I have more productive things to be doing. "Sounds like overconfident and incorrect speculation" Take five minutes and just chill. There was an awful lot of speculation in my post, and I was very clear to say "I believe" an awful lot, based on a grainy image, and a hazy memory of wrangling those kinds of BBS setups but apparently reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. This isn't reddit, you don't need to go full bore attack because someone said something on the internet you think might be wrong.

beckerdo 5y ago

Weren't the IBM Ambra, Aptiva, and Vista brands efforts by IBM to out clone the clones? As I remember, these IBM brands from the 1990s gave the impression of an IBM computer, but they were all made by third-party companies.

justinlloyd 5y ago
I believe you are correct, and they had the perfect little IBM logo slapped on them to make everyone believe that. Those were found throughout banks in the UK for the longest time. I am not sure those machines in the image are IBMs, but the case is very reminiscient of IBM's machines. We know they aren't Dell (wrong logo placement) and we know they aren't Compaq (wrong size/shape logo). But this is a minor detail, clones or IBMs isn't really relevant.

justinlloyd 5y ago

Source? Yes. IBM. IBM made crappy clones. I am not saying those are absolutely IBMs, they could easily be clones. But I do recall IBM making a case very similar to that. I also speculated, it doesn't mean I was stating it as fact under oath. "I know for a fact" - why so accusatory? No, I'm saying those particular machines were sold with 5.25" drives and then upgraded to 3.5" because none of the plastic matches. "supporting more than one modem at a time is literally the definition of multitasking" - no, it isn't. You might as well claim that a single threaded application that can respond to the UI and also do processing in the background is multitasking when it clearly isn't. "You can't do it without multitasking" - yes, you can. There is a vast difference between a multitasking OS or multithreaded program and simply polling a couple of devices or getting IRQ'd. Now this I know, "for a fact" and we can argue about that until the cows come home, but frankly, I have more productive things to be doing. "Sounds like overconfident and incorrect speculation" Take five minutes and just chill. There was an awful lot of speculation in my post, and I was very clear to say "I believe" an awful lot, based on a grainy image, and a hazy memory of wrangling those kinds of BBS setups but apparently reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. This isn't reddit, you don't need to go full bore attack because someone said something on the internet you think might be wrong.