dpd@tellab5.UUCP (Dan Dietrich) (01/04/88)
I'm currently trying to buy an AT clone system and I'm can't seem to find a "safe" buy. I *must* have a 10 MHZ, 0 wait state mono system with a 40 MB fast (40 ms) hard disk. My goal is to spend no more than $1600 so COMPAQ, AST and other brand name clones are out of my financial reach. Being a EE type, I would prefer a motherboard based on the CHIPS & Technology chip set (higher reliability, lower cost, newer technology, etc). My concern after reviewing an application note from CHIPS & Technology is that clone designers might be cheating with the chipset. The application note basically says that with great care their chipset will go to 10 MHZ 1 wait state. From what I've seen on boards, most of them claim to work fine at 10 MHZ / 0 wait states. Am I missing something or are they just trying to sell me a marginal system? One dealer actually said he'd rather not sell me a motherboard based the the CHIPS chipset. He said he's had quite a few returned and they've been too much trouble for what he makes on them. From what I have heard, the DTK motherboard is the top of the line clone board among the dirt cheap systems. It does not use the CHIPS chipset but seems to be well established. Has anybody had/heard of any problems with this board? I also believe I should stay away from "baby AT" systems. My concern here is that "standard" AT memory cards will not fit into a baby system. I would hate to have problems expanding the memory if OS/2 ever takes off. Am I just being paranoid in this area or is this true? Just for grins, these are some of my favorite lines from clone sales types: "...and it's got a 32 megahertz hard drive with 28 microsecond access time." "We use high quality 100 millisecond RAMS in our systems." Please email any comments, I'll post a summary if enough people are interested. Thanks for any help! Dan Dietrich ...!ihnp4!tellab5!dpd dpd@tellab5.UUCP
danh@atexrd.UUCP (Dan Hochman) (01/13/88)
In article <813@tellab5.UUCP> dpd@tellab5.UUCP (Dan Dietrich) writes: >I'm currently trying to buy an AT clone system and I'm can't seem >to find a "safe" buy. I *must* have a 10 MHZ, 0 wait state mono system with >a 40 MB fast (40 ms) hard disk. My goal is to spend no more than $1600 so >COMPAQ, AST and other brand name clones are out of my financial reach. > >I would hate to have problems expanding the memory if OS/2 ever takes off. Don't plan on having an easy time getting OS/2 to run on a clone system. The OS/2 operating system is tied very closely to the architecture of the hardware of the machine and generic versions will not be available. The only way to get OS/2 will be through the vendor of your particular computer. Just because a particular machine is IBM compatible running DOS, don't believe that it will be compatible enough to run OS/2. The compatibilty that is gained through the BIOS in clones will not be avbailable under OS/2 since the BIOS is ignored after loading the operating system. Now, how many clone vendors do you know of have programmers on staff that could handle customization of an operating system? and can afford to buy a license for OS/2 from Microsoft. Best bet in my book would be Compaq if you want a compatible that will run OS/2 and possibly PC Limited since they claim they will have it available. -- =============================================================================== | Dan Hochman, Atex Inc., A Kodak Company 1-617-276-7390 | | {ll-xn,genrad,munsell,kodak}!atexrd!danh | ===============================================================================
rsl@well.UUCP (Roy Stuart Levin) (01/13/88)
try club at freemont calif. they have monochrome systems available at decent prices based on everex motherboard. DTK is a solid taiwan board using their own bios; everex used AMI bios which is excellent. they're safe; i should know, I install clone systems and for a year was the BBS sysop of the San Francisco IBM XT/AT/386 Clone Users Groups.
wcf@psuhcx (William C. Fenner) (01/14/88)
The most recent PC Magazine has a feature article on cheap AT clones. They reviewed several AT clones under $2000. I just glanced through the article, but I saw that one that they said was a very good choice was $1400. __ _ _ _____ Bill Fenner wcf @ psuhcx.bitnet / ) // // / ' wcf @ hcx.psu.edu /--< o // // ,-/-, _ __ __ _ __ ihnp4!psuvax1!psuhcx.bitnet!wcf /___/_<_</_</_ (_/ </_/ <_/ <_</_/ (_
dbraun@cadev4.intel.com (Doug Braun ~) (01/15/88)
In article <305@earth.atexrd.UUCP> danh@earth.UUCP (Dan Hochman) writes: >Don't plan on having an easy time getting OS/2 to run on a clone system. . . . I'm sure if the clone makers can come up with whole chip sets (Chips+Technologies, etc.), they will have no problem getting OS/2 to work. Most clones seem to have very similar motherboards. It's probably the "mostly compatibles" (not exact physical replicas) that will have problems. Doug Braun Intel Corp CAD 408 496-5939 / decwrl \ | hplabs | -| oliveb |- !intelca!mipos3!cadev4!dbraun | amd | \ qantel /