mbharrin@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Matt Harrington) (11/20/90)
I would like to get into the IBM world, switching from
my Mac. A laptop seems great, but I can only afford
a 386sx. Someone a while back mentioned that more and
more software is only being written for the 386.
Does this include the 386sx? I know that laptops are
not very expandable, but I don't anticipate needing much
more expansion than it comes with. However, I don't want
to buy a dog of a system that won't have any software
written for it in a few years. So, my question stands:
will the 386sx run all software that a true 386 will?
Thanks for putting up with my questions...
-Matt Harrington
--
Matthew B. Harrington Internet: matt@ucsd.edu
University of California at San Diego Work shall set you free.
Department of Biophysics Think! It's not illegal
Ask me about my Mac SE for sale ! yet. kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley ) (11/20/90)
In article <14368@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> mbharrin@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Matt Harrington) writes: >written for it in a few years. So, my question stands: >will the 386sx run all software that a true 386 will? Let's all sing the 386 song (sung to the tune of Revolution #9) A 386, is a 386, is a 386, is a 386,.... According to the Intel reference manual, the SX is 100% compatible with a DX (that's a 386SX and a 386 to the non-cognoscenti.) An SX only has a 24-bit address bus, so it'll only be able to address 16 Meg, compared to a DX which'll address lots more. Every SX based computer should run any software that a DX can; if it doesn't, it's broken, take it back and get your money back. Just plan on the SX being slower than the DX. I ran Unix Sys V3-386, OS/2, QEMM/Desqview 386, Window-386, and Windows 3.0 (386 mode) on my SX before I upgraded it. -- Kaleb Keithley Jet Propulsion Labs kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov I don't watch Twin Peaks; I just come to work.