ergo@netcom.UUCP (Isaac Rabinovitch) (06/27/90)
In <1990Jun26.212154.2980@amd.com> phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >For people who want to do multi-tasking with DV or such, why >would you spend $300(list) on an ACC when you could get an >entire 16 Mhz 386SX mother board for about the same amount of >money? Well, some of us have don't have the expertise to rip out and replace a motherboard. And I dunno if a generic 386 motherboard would fit in my Zenith machine (very idiosyncratic, physically). Zenith sells a 386 replacement motherboard, but for proprietary prices. And could I go on using my 16-bit extended memory cards? Also, you're comparing the list of the ACC with the street price of a 386SX motherboard. The street price of an ACC is about $100 less. Still, the difference is small enough to make me hesitate.
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (06/27/90)
In article <1990Jun26.212154.2980@amd.com> phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >The All Charge Card gives memory management to people with >286 systems which don't have it (practically everything besides >the AST Premium). Most of the people who need it probably have >memory hog applications like Excel or Word for Windows. Neither >the old 123 or the new 123 seem to benefit very much, the old >one because it is smaller and the new one because it can use >extended memory. Now that Win3 is out, its standard mode is far >superior to anything the ACC can do. > >For people who want to do multi-tasking with DV or such, why >would you spend $300(list) on an ACC when you could get an >entire 16 Mhz 386SX mother board for about the same amount of >money? > >Have I missed anything? > Uh, no, I don't think so. I too though about the AC card a while back, but figured I would wait a little while and get a 386 motherboard. I am glad I did. I just replaced my 286 board with a 386DX board and had a very good experience all in all. No compatibility problems, all my cards worked, etc. Since I have replaced my disk controller with a SCSI (can get 2.5Mbytes/sec out of the track read ahead cache on a Quantum P105S). In my opinion, replacing a 286 board with a 386DX or SX board is the way to go. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (06/28/90)
In article <11102@netcom.UUCP> ergo@netcom.UUCP (Isaac Rabinovitch) writes: |Well, some of us have don't have the expertise to rip out and replace |a motherboard. And I dunno if a generic 386 motherboard would fit in Maybe you don't realize this, but the ACC requires you to take out the processor chip, which in my expert opinion (20 years of hardware hacking) is MUCH more likely to get a user in trouble than a simple motherboard swap. |my Zenith machine (very idiosyncratic, physically). Zenith sells a |386 replacement motherboard, but for proprietary prices. And could I Gee, a new box is about $50. What more do you need? |go on using my 16-bit extended memory cards? Depending on what kind of memory you have, you'd be better off moving them onto the motherboard. If you can't you can always use your memory cards but your performance would be lower. |Also, you're comparing the list of the ACC with the street price of a |386SX motherboard. The street price of an ACC is about $100 less. I didn't know discounts on the ACC were available, it's certainly a much lower volume, harder to find, device so discounts are probably not as good in any case. -- Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil PALASM 90: it's not the same old PALASM any more!
ergo@netcom.UUCP (Isaac Rabinovitch) (06/28/90)
In <1990Jun27.215008.3927@amd.com> phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >Maybe you don't realize this, but the ACC requires you to take out >the processor chip, which in my expert opinion (20 years of hardware >hacking) is MUCH more likely to get a user in trouble than a simple >motherboard swap. Huh? I've taken the 286 out of my machine, just because I was curious about what it would look like. It's just a little flat package with leads on the surface, held to its contacts by a little metal plate. I understand some 286 packages are a little more complicated, but it's hard for me to see how you can say pulling a chip could be as hard as installing a new motherboard! >|my Zenith machine (very idiosyncratic, physically). Zenith sells a >|386 replacement motherboard, but for proprietary prices. And could I >Gee, a new box is about $50. What more do you need? The expertise to put it all together without frying it or myself. Get it through your nerdish head that there are people, of quite adequate intelligence, who lack your skill with a soldering iron and screwdriver. >|go on using my 16-bit extended memory cards? >Depending on what kind of memory you have, you'd be better off moving >them onto the motherboard. If you can't you can always use your >memory cards but your performance would be lower. But your argument was that getting a 386 would speed things up. Which is it? >|Also, you're comparing the list of the ACC with the street price of a >|386SX motherboard. The street price of an ACC is about $100 less. >I didn't know discounts on the ACC were available, So get on some mailing lists, and read some magazines. Where do you think I got my "street price"? > it's certainly >a much lower volume, harder to find, device so discounts are probably >not as good in any case. Blah, blah, blah....
ganzer@cod.NOSC.MIL (Mark T. Ganzer) (06/28/90)
In article <1990Jun26.212154.2980@amd.com> phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: > >For people who want to do multi-tasking with DV or such, why >would you spend $300(list) on an ACC when you could get an >entire 16 Mhz 386SX mother board for about the same amount of >money? > Don't always assume the same path works best for everybody. In my case, I have a Zenith 248. I had 2.5 MB of extended memory boards for it laying around, and an AST Rampage 286 installed in the machine with 2MB. The Zenith boards are NOT ISA compatable (they have what looks like a 32 bit bus). So to upgrade, I either have the choice of a Zenith upgrade (expensive, as the memory boards get pitched), replace with a 386 motherboard, or an All Charge card (not really an upgrade, but makes Desqview run a lot nicer). Even using a 386SX motherboard, I have to pitch 2.5MB in Zenith cards, so add that to the cost of the motherboard. Also add the cost of a coprocessor chip (app. $320 for a 387SX), and the resulting price tag is quite a bit higher. -- Mark T. Ganzer Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego UUCP: {bonnie,sdcsvax,gould9,hp-sdd} - !nosc!ganzer {apl-uw,ncr-sd,bang,crash } / Internet: ganzer@nosc.mil Compu$erve: 73617,442
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (06/28/90)
In article <11175@netcom.UUCP> ergo@netcom.UUCP (Isaac Rabinovitch) writes: >In <1990Jun27.215008.3927@amd.com> phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: > >>Maybe you don't realize this, but the ACC requires you to take out >>the processor chip, which in my expert opinion (20 years of hardware >>hacking) is MUCH more likely to get a user in trouble than a simple >>motherboard swap. >Huh? I've taken the 286 out of my machine, just because I was curious >about what it would look like. It's just a little flat package with >leads on the surface, held to its contacts by a little metal plate. I >understand some 286 packages are a little more complicated, but it's >hard for me to see how you can say pulling a chip could be as hard as >installing a new motherboard! > >>|my Zenith machine (very idiosyncratic, physically). Zenith sells a >>|386 replacement motherboard, but for proprietary prices. And could I > >>Gee, a new box is about $50. What more do you need? >The expertise to put it all together without frying it or myself. Get >it through your nerdish head that there are people, of quite adequate >intelligence, who lack your skill with a soldering iron and >screwdriver. >>|go on using my 16-bit extended memory cards? > >>Depending on what kind of memory you have, you'd be better off moving >>them onto the motherboard. If you can't you can always use your >>memory cards but your performance would be lower. > >But your argument was that getting a 386 would speed things up. Which >is it? > >>|Also, you're comparing the list of the ACC with the street price of a >>|386SX motherboard. The street price of an ACC is about $100 less. > >>I didn't know discounts on the ACC were available, >So get on some mailing lists, and read some magazines. Where do you >think I got my "street price"? >> it's certainly >>a much lower volume, harder to find, device so discounts are probably >>not as good in any case. >Blah, blah, blah.... There are things a 386 can do that a 286 can never do. Such as virtual 8086 and such. The memory management on a 386 blows away any combination of 286 and the ACC or anything else. A Motherboard swap is very simple. I did it myself in about 10 minutes. No soldering or anything else. All connections are done with standard connectors. If you get a decent manual, it is very easy. Yes a motherboard swap may be more expensive, but I would rather pay $400 now (or maybe a little later) than $200 now just to realize that it isn't every- thing I need and have to spend $400 anyway to get a 386 later on. For some, the ACC may be the right thing to do (is it compatible with Windows 3.0?). But for most, saving a little more money and getting a 386 is far better. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
mms00786@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (06/29/90)
I suggest we move this thread to a new one titled : The death of the All Charge Card and the consequent demise of Zenith computers!!! :-) Milan.
phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (06/29/90)
In article <1981@cod.NOSC.MIL> ganzer@cod.nosc.mil.UUCP (Mark T. Ganzer) writes: |Don't always assume the same path works best for everybody. In my case, I |have a Zenith 248. I had 2.5 MB of extended memory boards for it laying Ok, but you shouldn't assign the cost of 2.5 megs of new Zenith memory, but rather the cost of 2.5 more megs for the SX motherboard. 1 megabyte is around $70-80 now. Minus whatever you could sell the Zenith for (probably someone could use the RAM chips at least). You're right about cost of the coprocessor, for people who must have one. -- Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil PALASM 90: it's not the same old PALASM any more!
werner@aecom.yu.edu (Craig Werner) (06/29/90)
In article <11102@netcom.UUCP>, ergo@netcom.UUCP (Isaac Rabinovitch) writes: > In <1990Jun26.212154.2980@amd.com> phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: > > > >For people who want to do multi-tasking with DV or such, why > >would you spend $300(list) on an ACC when you could get an > >entire 16 Mhz 386SX mother board for about the same amount of > >money? > > Well, some of us have don't have the expertise to rip out and replace > a motherboard. Doesn't a company named Cheetah (or Leopard, or some felinoid) make a board similar in design to the All Charge Card (i.e., it fits into the 286 slot) but contains a 386SX and two support chips, and hence upgrades the processor without changing the motherboard? -- Craig Werner (future MD/PhD, 5.5 years down, 2.5 to go) werner@aecom.YU.EDU -- Albert Einstein College of Medicine (1935-14E Eastchester Rd., Bronx NY 10461, 212-931-2517) "My philosophy, like color TV, is all there in black and white."
jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) (06/29/90)
phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <1981@cod.NOSC.MIL> ganzer@cod.nosc.mil.UUCP (Mark T. Ganzer) writes: >|Don't always assume the same path works best for everybody. In my case, I >|have a Zenith 248. I had 2.5 MB of extended memory boards for it laying > >Ok, but you shouldn't assign the cost of 2.5 megs of new Zenith memory, >but rather the cost of 2.5 more megs for the SX motherboard. 1 megabyte >is around $70-80 now. Minus whatever you could sell the Zenith for >(probably someone could use the RAM chips at least). > >You're right about cost of the coprocessor, for people who must >have one. I believe it will be the death of the All-Charge Card if the company folds. Since there's a large installed base of 286 boxes, no sense in chucking something that works. What the maker of the All-Charge card should do is make an implementation of Unix that utilitizes the capabilities of the All-Charge card, it would make for an interesting and quite usable product. Just like my soon-to-be ex-boss (who was a regional VP for AMD), you assume that your way is the right and only way. Maybe it comes from working from AMD? :) // JCA /* **--------------------------------------------------------------------------* ** Flames : /dev/null | Small memory model only for ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil | Unix? Get the (*bleep*) out ** INTERNET: jca@pnet01.cts.com | of here! ** UUCP : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca **--------------------------------------------------------------------------* */
phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (06/30/90)
In article <3341@crash.cts.com> jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes: |Just like my soon-to-be ex-boss (who was a regional VP for AMD), you assume |that your way is the right and only way. Maybe it comes from working from |AMD? :) I never said my way was the only way. I just pointed out that the ACC is not much cheaper than a solution which can run 32-bit software, BSD 4.4, and virtual DOS machines, and the ACC is a lot less versatile. As always, the decision on which way to go is in your hands, not mine. -- Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil PALASM 90: it's not the same old PALASM any more!
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (06/30/90)
There are enough systems out there which will not accept enough clone
motherboards that many people will not be able to easily get a match. It
is also a lot faster to install the ACC (about 4 minutes if you know
what you're doing).
If you have a nice standard system and know a vendor of a motherboard
which will fit, you might as well go that way. That still leaves a nitch
market for ACC (laptops, for instance).
It also seems to me that ACC can do something which a 386 can't unless
there's hardware support, but I can't remember what it is. LIM 4.0?
Maybe someone will remember better than I do.
--
bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen)
sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX
moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -mecjp@beartrk.beartrack.com (CJ Pilzer) (06/30/90)
> > a motherboard. > > Doesn't a company named Cheetah (or Leopard, or some felinoid) > make a board similar in design to the All Charge Card (i.e., it fits into > the 286 slot) but contains a 386SX and two support chips, and hence > upgrades the processor without changing the motherboard? I think that the add in board you are referring to is made by: AOX Incorporated 486 Totten Pond Road Waltham, MA 02154 (617) 890-4402 I don't have any personal knowledge on how well it works, but the company is working with IBM on a product that IBM supports. -- cj
stroh@ssc-vax.UUCP (Steven K Stroh) (06/30/90)
A better way to go was recently announced by a company called (I believe) Evergreen Technologies in Portland, OR. They announced a small board very similar to the All Charge Card, but what they did was to put an 80386sx chip and the necessary support circuitry to make it pin compatible with an 80286. You remove the 286 chip, and plug in this board, and voila! You're a 386 user. Cost is $295. It's important to note that this is not an accelerator card, like the Intel boards. This is simply a processor upgrade. There isn't any memory on the board, and although the 386sx is capable of 16 MHz, it runs at your system's normal clock speed. If I were All Computers, I'd be really sweating now. Steve Stroh