[comp.sys.ibm.pc] The Itty Bitty Monster in trouble re: PC's?

brandon@tdi2.UUCP (12/29/86)

Quoted from <1373@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> ["Re: Many Questions/ some answers"], by news@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Usenet netnews)...
+---------------
| >allowing them to challenge minis and mainframes.  And IBM?  They
| >invented the PC/DOS game and now they can't even play their own game
| >successfully and the game is threatening to destroy their big Fortune
| >500 mainframe business.  Kind of like letting the genie out of the
| >bottle.
| 
| Next, I can't see how PCs are competing with minis and mainframes.  An
| 80[23]86 at 8 or even 16Mhz still doesn't pack a fraction of the
| computing power of a Vax 11/780.  And, for the work I do, a Vax is
| a small machine.  A 3090/400 is roughly 50 times as powerful.
+---------------

An article I read in Datamation (pre-386) stated (from memory; this is not
the exact quote):  ``if IBM produces a machine more powerful than the AT,
it will be in competition with its own System/36 line'' -- I think it was
the /36, it may have been the /1 or /3, I'm not familiar with IBM's mini
line.  Anyway, the 386 is on its way.  Frankly, I doubt that IBM will sell
386 machines, since they will then be in competition with themselves, and IBM
won't want to compromize its mini sales.

Given this, I suspect that people at IBM, upon hearing about the 80386, tore
their clothes, shaved their hair, and put on sackcloth.  The demise of the
low-end IBM mainframe seems imminent.  So much for IBM; their 1979 bombshell
just blew up in their own offices.

++Brandon
-- 
``for is he not of the Children of Luthien?  Never shall that line fail, though
the years may lengthen beyond count.''  --J. R. R. Tolkien

Brandon S. Allbery	           UUCP: cbatt!cwruecmp!ncoast!tdi2!brandon
Tridelta Industries, Inc.         CSNET: ncoast!allbery@Case
7350 Corporate Blvd.	       INTERNET: ncoast!allbery%Case.CSNET@relay.CS.NET
Mentor, Ohio 44060		  PHONE: +1 216 255 1080 (home) +1 216 974 9210

ward@chinet.UUCP (ward) (12/31/86)

Regarding article about IBM feeling a 386 may impact the S/36, as mentioned
by Brandon Allbery - if anything, IBM has 'boosted' the idea of the
low- to middle-ground mainframe, with the introduction of the 9370 - a S/370
architecture in a box as small as - well not sure, - a filing cabinet at 
least.  This could open the door to some interesting "cooperative processing"
because these boxes will continue to have better communications and larger
disks (with no 32MB limitations, ;-) than the PC.

 -- Ward Christensen ihnp4!chinet!ward

rwwetmore@watmath.UUCP (01/08/87)

In article <989@chinet.UUCP> ward@chinet.UUCP (Ward Christensen-) writes:
>Regarding article about IBM feeling a 386 may impact the S/36, ...
> ... the 9370 - a S/370 architecture  ...
> ... these boxes will continue to have better communications and larger
>disks (with no 32MB limitations, ;-) than the PC.
>
  I thought the 32Mb disk limitation was a DOS limitation built into
the IBM bios. The Unix implementations I know of don't have this, and
there are numerous bios enhancements such as by Golden Bow and On-Track
which circumvent the limitations for DOS.
  Now that reasonable operating systems exist, and clones have surpassed
the 6 MHz IBM limitations, PC-AT's and 286 XT's are showing their true
power. IBM should be concerned about these non-proprietary systems.

Ross W. Wetmore			| rwwetmore@water.NetNorth
University of Waterloo		| rwwetmore@watmath.waterloo.edu
Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1	| {clyde, ihnp4, ubc-vision, utcsri}
(519) 885-1211 ext 3491		|   !watmath!rwwetmore