From: none@this.time (No Name) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: What does AT stand for ? Date: 8 Feb 2000 04:22:11 GMT Organization: NOT Lines: 10 Message-ID: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-058.newsdawg.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.10 beta4 [mds] (x86 32bit) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.datacomm.ch!newscore.gigabell.net!newsfeed.germany.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!pln-w!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49432 Hello, I know the difference between XT, AT, and ATX computers, but does anyone know what the actual letters AT stand for ? How about the other 2, XT and ATX ? Thanks, Jeff (jeff at eskimo dot com) ###### From: "Charlie Gibbs" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 08 Feb 00 10:21:08 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Lines: 34 Message-ID: <1302.73T426T6213327@sky.bus.com> References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-624.newsdawg.com X-Newsreader: THOR 2.5a (Amiga;TCP/IP) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!pln-w!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!news2 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49525 In article <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> mwandel@nortel.ca (Markus Wandel) writes: >In article , >Bruce Hoult wrote: > >>In the beginning there was the IBM PC. Then there was the IBM >>PC/XT, which was basically the same but with a hard disk. Didn't it also have a beefed-up power supply? >>Then there was the IBM PC/AT (Advanced Technology) with a >>6 MHz 80286. Some cynics referred to it as "Ancient Technology". (But it sure ran fast compared to a 4.77-MHz 8088.) > Then there was the IBM PC/RT which was some sort of RISC machine. The term "PC/xT" (where x is a letter of your choice) was a bit of a fad for a while. Sperry adopted the convention for their first IBM PC clones; their XT clone was referred to as the HT, while their AT clone was called the IT. (Historical note: "IT" had yet to be adopted as an abbreviation for "Information Technology", although it wasn't far off. DP (Data Processing) had already evolved into MIS (Management Information Systems), but the jargonauts were getting bored with that and were starting to search for a new buzzword.) The PC/xT fad ran out of steam before it ran out of letters. -- cgibbs@sky.bus.com (Charlie Gibbs) Remove the first period after the "at" sign to reply. ###### From: Charles Eicher Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 7 Feb 2000 20:52:28 -0800 Lines: 12 Message-ID: <87o7ec$1vua@edrn.newsguy.com> References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-248.newsdawg.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newspeer.te.net!news.indigo.ie!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!pln-w!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!edrn Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49414 In article <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com>, none@this.time says... > >Hello, > >I know the difference between XT, AT, and ATX computers, but does >anyone know what the actual letters AT stand for ? How about the >other 2, XT and ATX ? I was an IBM rep at the time the IBM AT came out, and I was told it meant "Advanced Technology." I don't think this was anything more than IBM internal chitchat, AFAIK it isn't an official term or anything. ###### Sender: marc@hana.snafu.org Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> From: Marco S Hyman Date: 07 Feb 2000 21:49:27 -0800 Message-ID: Organization: S.N.A.F.U. (www.snafu.org) X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.3 Lines: 9 NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.54.48.250 X-Trace: nntp1.ba.best.com 949988875 212 marc@206.54.48.250 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!news2.best.com!news3.best.com!nntp1.ba.best.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49420 none@this.time (No Name) writes: > I know the difference between XT, AT, and ATX computers, but does > anyone know what the actual letters AT stand for ? How about the > other 2, XT and ATX ? AT = Advanced Technology Don't remember the others. ###### From: brucehoult@pobox.com (Bruce Hoult) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 19:04:55 +1300 Organization: The Internet Group Ltd Lines: 11 Message-ID: References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: macinnat.static.star.net.nz X-Newsreader: MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newspeer.te.net!news.indigo.ie!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed.icl.net!ihug.co.nz!brucehoult Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49462 In article <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com>, none@this.time (No Name) wrote: > I know the difference between XT, AT, and ATX computers, but does > anyone know what the actual letters AT stand for ? How about the > other 2, XT and ATX ? In the beginning there was the IBM PC. Then there was the IBM PC/XT, which was basically the same but with a hard disk. Then there was the IBM PC/AT (Advanced Technology) with a 6 MHz 80286. -- Bruce ###### From: mwandel@nortel.ca (Markus Wandel) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 8 Feb 2000 12:51:44 GMT Organization: Nortel Lines: 14 Message-ID: <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: wcars0mc.ca.nortel.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newshunter!cosy.sbg.ac.at!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!newsfeed.direct.ca!logbridge.uoregon.edu!!nrchh45.us.nortel.com!zcarh46f.bnr.ca!bcarh8ac.ca.nortel.com!bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49468 In article , Bruce Hoult wrote: > >In the beginning there was the IBM PC. >Then there was the IBM PC/XT, which was basically the same but with a hard disk. >Then there was the IBM PC/AT (Advanced Technology) with a 6 MHz 80286. Then there was the IBM PC/RT which was some sort of RISC machine. I remember briefly playing with one of those when they were new, in 1986. A GUI word processor that reformatted proportionally spaced paragraphs in realtime as one typed was quite a sight back then. Markus ###### From: brucehoult@pobox.com (Bruce Hoult) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 02:53:34 +1300 Organization: The Internet Group Ltd Lines: 25 Message-ID: References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: macinnat.static.star.net.nz X-Newsreader: MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!news.xtra.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!brucehoult Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49461 In article <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com>, mwandel@nortel.ca (Markus Wandel) wrote: > In article , > Bruce Hoult wrote: > > > >In the beginning there was the IBM PC. > >Then there was the IBM PC/XT, which was basically the same but with a hard disk. > >Then there was the IBM PC/AT (Advanced Technology) with a 6 MHz 80286. > > Then there was the IBM PC/RT which was some sort of RISC machine. No, that was the IBM RT/PC, which used the ROMP processor which was kind of based on the 801 but not very similar, and even less similar to the RS/6000 that followed it. > I remember briefly playing with one of those when they were new, in 1986. > A GUI word processor that reformatted proportionally spaced paragraphs in > realtime as one typed was quite a sight back then. Unless you were already using the Mac, of course. -- Bruce ###### From: jones@cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 8 Feb 2000 15:01:24 GMT Organization: The University of Iowa Lines: 29 Message-ID: <87pb44$nvg$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> References: <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu X-Trace: flood.weeg.uiowa.edu 950022084 24560 128.255.28.3 (8 Feb 2000 15:01:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uiowa.edu NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Feb 2000 15:01:24 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.datacomm.ch!newscore.gigabell.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-MUC.ecrc.net!nntp.abs.net!marge.eaglequest.com!ord-feed.news.verio.net!news.uiowa.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49465 From article <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com>, by mwandel@nortel.ca (Markus Wandel): > > Then there was the IBM PC/RT which was some sort of RISC machine. I'm typing this response on a PC/RT. Indeed, it is a RISC machine. Mine is running an operating system variously known as AOS, ACIS or BSD 4.3 UNIX, depending on what message or header comments you believe. (AOS stands for Academic Operating System. The acronym collided with names of other operating systems, so they changed it to ACademic Information System or somesuch.) The architecture is a small digression on the path from the pioneering IBM 801 RISC to the modern Power architecture that underlies today's Macintosh and RS 6000 product lines. It's a nice machine, for something that is a decade old. Good C compiler, X-windows, and software that's stable enough that the lack of any system upgrades since 1989 hasn't hurt its utility. > I remember briefly playing with one of those when they were new, in 1986. > A GUI word processor that reformatted proportionally spaced paragraphs in > realtime as one typed was quite a sight back then. I don't use that, but it sounds like something that came with it under the Andrew suite of software that I discarded. The machine also ran AIX, IBM's version of UNIX, but I never had that OS. Doug Jones jones@cs.uiowa.edu ###### From: Eric Chomko Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 8 Feb 2000 16:16:51 GMT Organization: IDT Internet Services Lines: 22 Message-ID: <87pfhj$ldr@nnrp3.farm.idt.net> References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: u1.farm.idt.net X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 unoff BETA release 961025] Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newshunter!cosy.sbg.ac.at!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!newshub.northeast.verio.net!verio!news.idt.net!nntp.farm.idt.net!u1.farm.idt.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49430 No Name wrote: : Hello, : I know the difference between XT, AT, and ATX computers, but does : anyone know what the actual letters AT stand for ? How about the : other 2, XT and ATX ? AT and XT have been addressed. ATX is a type of case w/PS that is beyond and incompatible with AT cases which first came out with the AT systems and has been the norm in computer PC cases for about 15 years. I believe that new motherboard technology has ushered in the new ATX PC cases, which cost about 33-50% more than AT cases. Eric : Thanks, : Jeff (jeff at eskimo dot com) ###### From: michael.wojcik@merant.com (Michael Wojcik) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 8 Feb 2000 21:52:17 GMT Organization: MERANT Inc. Lines: 113 Message-ID: <87q36h01i7p@news2.newsguy.com> References: <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> <87pb44$nvg$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> Reply-To: michael.wojcik@merant.com NNTP-Posting-Host: p-331.newsdawg.com X-Newsreader: xrn 9.00 Originator: mww@lorelei-n Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newspeer.te.net!news.indigo.ie!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!pln-w!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!mww Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49533 In article <87pb44$nvg$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu>, jones@cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes: > From article <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com>, by mwandel@nortel.ca (Markus Wandel): > > > > Then there was the IBM PC/RT which was some sort of RISC machine. As someone else (Bruce?) already pointed out, it was actually called the "IBM RT PC", but that's a minor quibble. The "RT" stands for "RISC Technology", of course. The processor was the ROMP - the IBM Research/Office MicroProcessor, so named because it was a joint venture between the IBM Office Products division and IBM Research. Again, as already noted, loosely based on the 801, one of the contenders for the title of First RISC Processor (cue history flame war). Later on there was the ASP, the Advanced System Processor, that replaced the original ROMP with something a bit more sprightly. (The RT's CPU was on a card. In fact, nothing but traces, glue logic, and the like on the motherboard, which made the machine nicely expandable.) The RT used the AT bus and came in either an AT- style desktop case or a tower, with more drive bays and probably more expansion card slots. An array of video adapters were available, though many were never commercially released (but schools could get them), and like all good Unix workstations the RT supported multiple heads. Mine had a PC Monochrome Monitor and Printer Adapter for the console, an EGA for kernel debugging messages, an IBM Megapel 1024x1024x8 graphics head, and a prototype image-processing board we were writing a device driver and X Window support for. The console could be switched among them (this was with AOS; with AIX, you had SysV-style virtual consoles created with the "open" command, to cross-thread this post a bit), but most of them had terrible text-mode drivers (notably the Megapel, which scrolled more slowly than my attached Epson MX-80 dot matrix printer could print the same text). There was also the much rarer "Outrigger", a bus-mastering MCA card for PS/2s, which was essentially an RT-on-a-card. You booted the PS/2 and ran a "unix" binary from DOS, which booted the Outrigger. The Outrigger used the 286 or 386 in the PS/2 as an I/O processor. Neat, though I don't think it was ever sold. > I'm typing this response on a PC/RT. Indeed, it is a RISC machine. > Mine is running an operating system variously known as AOS, ACIS or > BSD 4.3 UNIX, depending on what message or header comments you believe. > (AOS stands for Academic Operating System. The acronym collided with > names of other operating systems, so they changed it to ACademic > Information System or somesuch.) Sometimes it seems there are so many RTs around they hardly qualify as folklore machines. They weren't big sellers (though as late as 1989 I saw one being demo'd at a computer store in Burlington, VT, of all places), but IBM sold them at a discount to colleges. They were a mainstay of MIT's Project Athena and Carnegie-Mellon's Project Andrew (along with several other minicomputer lines from other vendors, of course). RT PC FAQ at http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~shadow/ibmrt/faq/. "ACIS" was the IBM division that did the AOS port - the Academic Computing Information Services Division. I started working for them (at the Cambridge Scientific Center, same place Lynn Wheeler was) right around when AOS 4.3 was released. > > I remember briefly playing with one of those when they were new, in 1986. > > A GUI word processor that reformatted proportionally spaced paragraphs in > > realtime as one typed was quite a sight back then. > I don't use that, but it sounds like something that came with it under > the Andrew suite of software that I discarded. Andrew (named after Carnegie and Mellon, of course) was a bizarre collection of stuff. There was a whole suite of X Window applets that were actually one giant binary with more than a dozen links - its function was selected by argv[0], the name you ran it under - presumably to avoid duplication of code and keep things resident, since the OS didn't have shared libraries. Andrew came with the Cambridge Window Manager, also written by ACIS, which was a tiling (non-overlapping) X window manager, the only one I've ever seen. It did include the Andrew File System, though, which was (and is) a dramatic improvement over NFS (which isn't saying much). Andrew was CMU's answer to Project Athena, more or less. Much of Athena disappeared into obscurity too (anyone here use Zephyr?), but Kerberos is still around and X made the big time. The only piece of Andrew I still see any mention of is AFS, which is now owned by Transarc, which is now owned by IBM, I believe. So the Andrew effort has come back home. > The machine also ran AIX, IBM's version of UNIX, but I never had that OS. AIX 2, specifically. AIX 1 ran on PS/2s, and AIX 3 on RS/6000s, and AIX/370 (and AIX/ESA) on S/370s (S/390s). AIX 2 was closer to SysV than to BSD. The kernel actually talked to a hardware monitor called the Virtual Resource Manager, intended for portability like Windows NT's HAL. Like the HAL, it was a drag on performance and AIX 2 never got ported to different hardware. AIX 2 had a few nice features (those virtual consoles), but like most SVR3 implementations it wasn't as fun as the BSD-derived Unixes of the time. -- Michael Wojcik michael.wojcik@merant.com AAI Development, MERANT (block capitals are a company mandate) Department of English, Miami University The lark is exclusively a Soviet bird. The lark does not like the other countries, and lets its harmonious song be heard only over the fields made fertile by the collective labor of the citizens of the happy land of the Soviets. -- D. Bleiman ###### Reply-To: "SMORT INC." From: "SMORT INC." Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 06:26:49 +1100 Lines: 31 Organization: I HATE JUNK MAIL AND MLM CORPORATION X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.101.112.114 Message-ID: <38a1c008@pink.one.net.au> X-Trace: 10 Feb 2000 06:29:12 +1000, 203.101.112.114 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newshunter!cosy.sbg.ac.at!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!newsxfer.interpacket.net!news.interpacket.net!uunet!lax.uu.net!pink.one.net.au!203.101.112.114 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49552 my god... and what a botch the 286 was... -- ICQ DANTAN UIN 12024426 EMAIL: dantan1@telstra.com ICQ ACTIVE List TASMANIA TALKING #52723669 AOL instant pager name: - smortaus http://www.icq.com/12024426 pager http://sites.netscape.net/smortaus/homepage http://web.one.net.au/~dantan/ **************************************************************************** ******* Bruce Hoult wrote in message news:brucehoult-0802001904550001@bruce.bgh... > In article <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com>, none@this.time (No Name) wrote: > > > I know the difference between XT, AT, and ATX computers, but does > > anyone know what the actual letters AT stand for ? How about the > > other 2, XT and ATX ? > > In the beginning there was the IBM PC. > Then there was the IBM PC/XT, which was basically the same but with a hard disk. > Then there was the IBM PC/AT (Advanced Technology) with a 6 MHz 80286. > > -- Bruce ###### From: hawk@hawkins.cba.uni.edu Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 9 Feb 2000 16:33:45 -0600 Organization: House of Hawkins Lines: 30 Message-ID: <87sq09$n65$1@hawkins.cba.uni.edu> References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> <1302.73T426T6213327@sky.bus.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: hawkins.cba.uni.edu Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uni.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49569 In article <1302.73T426T6213327@sky.bus.com>, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >In article <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> mwandel@nortel.ca >(Markus Wandel) writes: >>In article , >>Bruce Hoult wrote: >>>In the beginning there was the IBM PC. Then there was the IBM >>>PC/XT, which was basically the same but with a hard disk. >Didn't it also have a beefed-up power supply? Also 8 slots instead of 5, and (up to) 256k on board instead of 64k (or was it 640k on board? it's been a while). Given that on the base machine you needed a printer card, a display card, a floppy card, an io card, and a memory card, adding the hard disk controller would have been a problem :) [OK, the AST six-pack could get most of that on one card.] To further confuse things, at some point it was possible to buy an XT without a hard disk. And eventually there was the XT/286, which used the same bus as the AT, but came in an XT case, which was too low to hold the XT cards . . . -- Prof. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq. hawk@hawkins.cba.uni.edu (319) 266-7114 http://eyry.econ.iastate.edu/hawk These opinions will not be those of UNI until it pays my retainer. ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!not-for-mail From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 10 Feb 2000 20:37:59 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 61 Message-ID: <6ubt5oyhk8.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> <87p3h0$m2f$1@bcarh8ab.ca.nortel.com> <1302.73T426T6213327@sky.bus.com> <87s q09$n65$1@hawkins.cba.uni.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: chonsp.franklin.ch X-Trace: chonsp.franklin.ch 950211479 501 10.0.3.2 (10 Feb 2000 19:37:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@chonsp.franklin.ch NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Feb 2000 19:37:59 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49593 hawk@hawkins.cba.uni.edu writes: > Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >(Markus Wandel) writes: > >>Bruce Hoult wrote: > > >>>In the beginning there was the IBM PC. Then there was the IBM > >>>PC/XT, which was basically the same but with a hard disk. > > >Didn't it also have a beefed-up power supply? > > Also 8 slots instead of 5, and (up to) 256k on board instead of 64k > (or was it 640k on board? it's been a while). Up to 256k on board ([1-4] * 9 * 64kx1 chips, IIRC). 640 was the limit when using RAM expansion cards. > Given that on the > base machine you needed a printer card, a display card, Actually the same card for video and printer if you used MDA video. > a floppy card, an io card, With io I assume you mean RS232? Not needed, unless you were into telecoms (many were not in 198[1-5]). Later RS232 and printer were on the same card (sometimes together with joystick). > and a memory card, Only if 256k were not enough. I have seen people do early AutoCAD on a PC with MDA+EGA video and 192k (actually I installed the 128k->192k upgrade for them). So it is possible to live without an RAM expansion card. > an XT without a hard disk. And eventually there was the XT/286, > which used the same bus as the AT, IIRC the XT/286 had an XT bus (at least it did on the photo I saw in one of the trade rags. > but came in an XT case, which > was too low to hold the XT cards . . . I assume you meant to say too low for _A_T cards. The XT/286 was intended to be used as an speeded up XT. Of course its speed was not much above an 10MHz NEC V20. But IBM customers would have not known that. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ Nerd, Geek, Hacker, Unix Wizzard, Sysadmin, Roleplayer, Mystic Computer: toy speeds work, you have more time to play with it ###### From: bonomi@newsguy.com Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 16 Feb 2000 02:35:02 GMT Organization: Not Much Lines: 18 Sender: bonomi@newsguy.com Message-ID: <88d2cm0qob@enews3.newsguy.com> References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-554.newsdawg.com Originator: bonomi@newsguy.com X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test69 (20 September 1998) Originator: bonomi@diskless. (Robert Bonomi) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newspeer.te.net!news.indigo.ie!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!pln-w!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49882 In article , Marco S Hyman wrote: >none@this.time (No Name) writes: > >> I know the difference between XT, AT, and ATX computers, but does >> anyone know what the actual letters AT stand for ? How about the >> other 2, XT and ATX ? > >AT = Advanced Technology That was IBM's 'official' derivation. Of course, given that it was the _second_ "true 16-bit" micro to hit the mass-market -- the first being the "Tandy 2000" from Radio Shack (a _wonderful_ machine, BTW), and one that absolutely _blew_away_ the PC/XT on performance (had an effective processing power/speed that was 2x-3x that of the 'fast' [8mhz] version of the IBM PC/AT.), it was widely rumored that, in this instance, 'AT' stood for "Another Tandy". ###### From: Walter Bushell Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: What does AT stand for ? Date: 19 Feb 2000 19:05:42 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Lines: 25 Message-ID: <88mpi6$dr$1@news.panix.com> References: <87o5lj09gq@enews4.newsguy.com> <88d2cm0qob@enews3.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: panix6.panix.com X-Trace: news.panix.com 950987142 443 166.84.0.231 (19 Feb 2000 19:05:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Feb 2000 19:05:42 GMT User-Agent: tin/1.4.2-20000205 ("Possession") (UNIX) (NetBSD/1.4.2_ALPHA (i386)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!panix!news.panix.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:49972 bonomi@newsguy.com wrote: >In article , >Marco S Hyman wrote: >>none@this.time (No Name) writes: >> >>> I know the difference between XT, AT, and ATX computers, but does >>> anyone know what the actual letters AT stand for ? How about the >>> other 2, XT and ATX ? >> >>AT = Advanced Technology >That was IBM's 'official' derivation. >Of course, given that it was the _second_ "true 16-bit" micro to hit >the mass-market -- the first being the "Tandy 2000" from Radio Shack >(a _wonderful_ machine, BTW), and one that absolutely _blew_away_ the >PC/XT on performance (had an effective processing power/speed that was >2x-3x that of the 'fast' [8mhz] version of the IBM PC/AT.), it was >widely rumored that, in this instance, 'AT' stood for "Another Tandy". And of course "RT" stands for "retarded technolgy". -- walter And differing opinions serve but to declare, The truth lies somewhere, if we knew but where. A. Pope