A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » Intel
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Intel strikes back with a parallel x86 design



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old October 27th 05, 05:49 PM
Bill Davidsen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel strikes back with a parallel x86 design

keith wrote:
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 20:53:50 +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:


Grant Schoep wrote:

(MSCHAEF.COM) wrote in
:



My understanding is that IBM's original offerings were these:

CGA
- 80x25 and 40x25 text with an 8x8 character cell and color attributes
- 640x200 Monochrome Graphics
- 320x200 4-color Graphics Black + (White/Cyan/Magenta or
Red/Yellow/Green)

MDA
- 80x25 text with a 14x9 character cell

These adapters had different base addresses and could be run
on the same machine.



I'm not sure when it came along. But I remeber(wasn't that old at the
time... maybe about) we had this Tandy 1000, which had "Tandy 16 color" I
just remeber I thought it ruled because the graphics on it was better than
a lot of others kids Dad's computers. I think that was later though,
because it wasn't for a few years until we bought a real computer game for
it. Anyone know what time frame in here that Tandy 16 came out?

I remeber sitting at the dos prompt, trying to figure out how to play the
game "driver.exe" I could see that file listed on the dos 3.2 floppy, and
really wanted to figure out how to play it... :


I think the timeframe was mid to late 80's, after the XT came out. From
memory, it had an 80186 CPU (or 80188) which could be led to some
performance enhancements if you used assembler. It also supported 768k
(six) instead of 640k due to the controllers being in a better place.



The 80186/8 weren't fully PC compatable. The IBM PC devlopers, in their
infinite wisdom, squated on "reserved" interrupts that were reserved for
the 80186/8, relegating the thing to the embedded market. ...too bad, it
was a nice processor. Some tried to make it compatable, but there were
always problems with anything that wrote to the hardware, which was
more than "common".

Good point, although the Tandy 1000 did run most PC software. It run a
Tandy version of MS-DOS, which let you run 768k of memory. I never tried
to run anything else on the system, other things came along.

The 80186 was nice in many way for embedded, just as you noted. IIRC
there was an interrupt controller and some 1 bit parallel port which
could be taught to do RS-232 just by a driver to the correct voltage.

Speaking of which, wasn't the 8086 5 and 12v and the 8018[68] single 5v?
The memory is going...

--
-bill davidsen )
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me
  #182  
Old October 28th 05, 02:34 AM
keith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel strikes back with a parallel x86 design

On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:49:49 +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:

keith wrote:
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 20:53:50 +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:


Grant Schoep wrote:

(MSCHAEF.COM) wrote in
:



My understanding is that IBM's original offerings were these:

CGA
- 80x25 and 40x25 text with an 8x8 character cell and color attributes
- 640x200 Monochrome Graphics
- 320x200 4-color Graphics Black + (White/Cyan/Magenta or
Red/Yellow/Green)

MDA
- 80x25 text with a 14x9 character cell

These adapters had different base addresses and could be run
on the same machine.



I'm not sure when it came along. But I remeber(wasn't that old at the
time... maybe about) we had this Tandy 1000, which had "Tandy 16 color" I
just remeber I thought it ruled because the graphics on it was better than
a lot of others kids Dad's computers. I think that was later though,
because it wasn't for a few years until we bought a real computer game for
it. Anyone know what time frame in here that Tandy 16 came out?

I remeber sitting at the dos prompt, trying to figure out how to play the
game "driver.exe" I could see that file listed on the dos 3.2 floppy, and
really wanted to figure out how to play it... :


I think the timeframe was mid to late 80's, after the XT came out. From
memory, it had an 80186 CPU (or 80188) which could be led to some
performance enhancements if you used assembler. It also supported 768k
(six) instead of 640k due to the controllers being in a better place.



The 80186/8 weren't fully PC compatable. The IBM PC devlopers, in their
infinite wisdom, squated on "reserved" interrupts that were reserved for
the 80186/8, relegating the thing to the embedded market. ...too bad, it
was a nice processor. Some tried to make it compatable, but there were
always problems with anything that wrote to the hardware, which was
more than "common".

Good point, although the Tandy 1000 did run most PC software. It run a
Tandy version of MS-DOS, which let you run 768k of memory. I never tried
to run anything else on the system, other things came along.


Right, as long as every access to hardware went through a *DOS* interrupt,
the Tandy DOS worked. If it went to BIOS or diddled with bits directly,
not so good. That's clear by your 768K number, though a *compatable*
could have 704K with no problems (until much later when the EGA came out).

The 80186 was nice in many way for embedded, just as you noted. IIRC
there was an interrupt controller and some 1 bit parallel port which
could be taught to do RS-232 just by a driver to the correct voltage.


I don't remember any one-bit parallel ports, but it did have
integrated address decode logic (another issue in the DOS map), that I
suppose could be used for such. It also had integrated DMA and timers,
along with a few instruction improvements (stack sorts of thigns IIRC).

Speaking of which, wasn't the 8086 5 and 12v and the 8018[68] single 5v?
The memory is going...


Sheesh! ;-) Interesting note though, the 80186 and 80188 were origianlly
the same die, with only a bondout option difference. I think that was the
first time that was done.

--
Keith
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Asus Fanless Design Interferes with Intel Fan? Al Franz Homebuilt PC's 2 August 5th 05 04:37 PM
Intel pulling back on DDR2 for the moment Yousuf Khan Intel 5 December 31st 04 05:53 AM
Intel vs. AMD: Best bang for buck, at the moment Dave C. Homebuilt PC's 40 September 27th 04 07:19 AM
P4 Prescott 3.2GHz Leigh-Anne Mills Asus Motherboards 3 May 20th 04 03:26 AM
OT sending a faulty CPU back to intel Aosmosis UK Computer Vendors 23 January 1st 04 11:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.