Your input requested: Scope of the Pentium subforum

[mbbrutman]

Let's get back on topic please ...

Let's get back on topic please ...

I'd like to gently remind everybody that the only forum change we are discussing is a possible expansion of what is acceptable for "Pentium." As things are now, it means the first generation of Pentium class machines. We are considering expanding it to later, more powerful classes of machines.

We are not entertaining changes to the other PC related areas. It also doesn't help the general conversation to point out every exception to a rule that you know about because we all know there are exceptions to rules the moderators have never enforced such precise definitions. While they are interesting bits of trivia, they really don't help the conversation.

Back to the question at hand ... if you were to expand this area (The Pentium area), how far would it be expanded ?

 

[RWallmow]

Back to the question at hand ... if you were to expand this area (The Pentium area), how far would it be expanded ?

Is there a way to set up a poll so we could vote on it?

EDIT:
Also off topic on pentium, and for that I apologize, but in a similar line of thought; what about expanding the Apple forums to include PPC, PPC is obviously vintage/legacy now days, it seems it should also have a place on this site.

 

[Scali]

You can prove they aren't supposed to be?

No, I can prove that most PC-compatibles aren't as compatible as they claim

 

[Scali]

OK, so make one category for PC and PC/XT and their clones, and put all AT and clones in a second one, up to Pentium. Put Pentium and up in a third.

Yes, that is pretty much what I had in mind as well. Possibly instead of "Pentium and up" it may be more interesting to draw the line between AT and ATX machines.
So you'd get PC/XT, AT and ATX categories.

Incidentally, I was still using PC/XT style components in my AT-clone right up until I switched to Amiga in 1995. And I wasn't the only one. I knew lots of guys who went from PC/XT to AT and brought along all their ISA cards and disk drives.

Yes, but that went a lot better than the other way around

 

[Chuck(G)]

Yes, that is pretty much what I had in mind as well. Possibly instead of "Pentium and up" it may be more interesting to draw the line between AT and ATX machines.

I don't think that would be a good idea--the line is too blurred. At one point, what was basically the same board could be had in either form factor. How about BTX and WTX boards? Or proprietary form factors used by HP and Compaq for workstations and servers?

 

[Scali]

I don't think that would be a good idea--the line is too blurred. At one point, what was basically the same board could be had in either form factor.

Your board can be only one or the other
I don't think these edge-cases are an issue.

How about BTX and WTX boards? Or proprietary form factors used by HP and Compaq for workstations and servers?

There's always the 'other' category.

 

[Chuck(G)]

Your board can be only one or the other

Maybe (I haven't explored the possibility of one being both). But I have seen ambiguous AT/ATX cases; I have one such.

I think it's not a good idea to create a division according to motherboard layout. Too many ambiguous cases. Besides, what many call an "AT" form factor board is really a "baby XT". Real AT boards (e.g. 5170) are quite large.

 

[krebizfan]

I don't see a good obvious breakpoint from the Pentium II to now. New CPU designs which performed about the same the ones replaced make it difficult to include one but reject the other.

Maybe use the Pentium 4 as the top end? The RAMBUS era Pentium III and 4 have enough unusual properties to fit them into the no longer standard systems categories. Only people who worked with computers more than 10 years ago can offer help.

 

[Scali]

I think it's not a good idea to create a division according to motherboard layout.

This is a misunderstanding. I am talking about the entire case specs, not specifically a motherboard layout.
Yes, there's baby-AT, mini-ATX, micro-ATX and all that... But that doesn't really matter. They're all either AT-ish, or ATX-ish. So they will use the same type of case, same type of PSU, and generally share the same features, and belong to a similar generation.
Eg, AT-class will cover 286, 386 and 486, mostly concentrate on ISA cards (some localbus here and there), and classic IDE, classic AT-style keyboard etc... with perhaps some PS/2 stuff at the edges. This will also mostly concentrate around MS-DOS and 16-bit Windows.

ATX will be late Pentium and newer, and the usual suspects will be things like USB, PCI, PCI-e etc. You'll likely be seeing Win9x and NT-based versions of Windows as the usual OSes.

I don't think any categorization will be catch-all, but I think this is a decent way to try and separate different technologies and generations of PC platforms.

 

[vwestlife]

EDIT:
Also off topic on pentium, and for that I apologize, but in a similar line of thought; what about expanding the Apple forums to include PPC, PPC is obviously vintage/legacy now days, it seems it should also have a place on this site.

The title says "68000+ based machines". I take that to mean 68000 and above, including PowerPC Macs (and clones).

 

[RWallmow]

The title says "68000+ based machines". I take that to mean 68000 and above, including PowerPC Macs (and clones).

I always took it to mean "68000, 020, 030, 040", but maybe you are right, I think I have posted a few PPC things there, but I've never been real cut or dried on that.

 

[vwestlife]

Eg, AT-class will cover 286, 386 and 486, mostly concentrate on ISA cards (some localbus here and there), and classic IDE, classic AT-style keyboard etc... with perhaps some PS/2 stuff at the edges. This will also mostly concentrate around MS-DOS and 16-bit Windows.

ATX will be late Pentium and newer, and the usual suspects will be things like USB, PCI, PCI-e etc. You'll likely be seeing Win9x and NT-based versions of Windows as the usual OSes.

I don't think any categorization will be catch-all, but I think this is a decent way to try and separate different technologies and generations of PC platforms.

The problem is that a novice user probably would have no idea which specific architecture/platform their system is based on, especially for OEM systems with a proprietary motherboard layout. The CPU type is much more obvious, as it's usually written on the case, on the BIOS screen during POST, or at least in the Windows system information.

 

[Eudimorphodon]

Back to the question at hand ... if you were to expand this area (The Pentium area), how far would it be expanded ?

If it can party like it's 1999 then it's in! Otherwise, no.

It sort of bugs me to say it but I think there might be a case for saying "Pentium II". On one hand it feels like an artificial technical distinction given the PIII is just a Pentium II with SSE tacked on, but the problem with the Pentium III is it had a much longer market life than the II. Low power versions were still cropping up in laptops into 2004 while the Pentium II was pretty much dead for new designs by late 1999. The Pentium III also topped out well north of a gigahertz in clock speed while the Pentium II's 450 Mhz ceiling mostly disqualifies it from consideration running modern operating systems even if it might be technically capable. Setting the bar at this height would effectively resolve any ambiguity around the various "Super Socket 7" CPUs (IE, they're fine; I'd also probably allow Pentium II-based Celerons, given the technical similarity and their 533mhz clock ceiling) while excluding CPU families with gigahertz-plus speed members should keep any discussion of modern OS problems down to a dull roar.

 

[vwestlife]

Yes, the Pentium III was long-lasting and covered a wide range of speeds... but so what? All of them are well over a decade old by now, and are no longer supported by the latest versions of Windows. If there was going to be a large influx of Pentium III users flocking to this forum, we would've seen it by now, either here or in the "Other" section. A name change of this category would mostly just be symbolic, as I highly doubt it will suddenly release hordes of unwashed AOL/MySpace-era n00bs that have been waiting all this time to finally come in and take over the forum.

 

[Scali]

The problem is that a novice user probably would have no idea which specific architecture/platform their system is based on

I don't think a novice would visit this forum though. I don't think this applies to the target audience of this forum.
ATX is very easy to spot anyway, because of the standardized backplate.

 

[KC9UDX]

All of them are well over a decade old by now, and are no longer supported by the latest versions of Windows.

Is a decade really that old?

In 1990, an Apple ][+ was considered junk, not desirable by anyone, yet.

 

[lowen]

...
Eg, AT-class will cover 286, 386 and 486, mostly concentrate on ISA cards (some localbus here and there), and classic IDE, classic AT-style keyboard etc... with perhaps some PS/2 stuff at the edges. This will also mostly concentrate around MS-DOS and 16-bit Windows.

ATX will be late Pentium and newer, and the usual suspects will be things like USB, PCI, PCI-e etc. You'll likely be seeing Win9x and NT-based versions of Windows as the usual OSes....

Pentium III can (could) be easily obtained in AT form factor. I have more than one 'ambiguous' motherboard around here, each of which is generally square in shape, came with an ATX backplate, has a single AT or PS/2 keyboard connector cutout in that backplate, takes either ATX or AT power supply connections, and has either Socket 370 or Slot 1. Likewise, I have more than one tower case that is ATX in form factor but has an AT power supply and an AT backplate. The ambiguous motherboards I have can easily be installed in either an AT or ATX case. (Reference the PC-CHIPS M748LMRT for one example.)

One of them has a PowerLeap CPU upgrade in it with a Tualatin-based Celeron 1.2GHz (100MHz FSB) and is installed in a full-size AT tower (I've posted photos of it before). There is a seriously long overlap between AT and ATX. Those aren't corner cases; but just a major area of overlap.

I'm still pretty convinced that the 'Pentium' group should become at least for now the 'Pentium/Pro/II/III but not yet P4' group; 'pre-Netburst' in other words. P4 in a few years, especially the RAMBUS and Socket 423 systems.

I fully agree with what mbbrutman has posted, and I'll suggest that we cut it off in the P4 era for now. Having the current split in PC's I think is wise; this isn't the 'Vintage PC Forum' after all. Otherwise I would suggest splitting the Tandy PC Clones and the CoCos out of the Tandy/RadioShack group and having three of them since they are so different (lots more differences there than between PC generations!). (Mods: I'm saying that tongue in cheek, I'm not really advocating splitting the Tandy forum out into three separate forums..... )

 

[Eudimorphodon]

Yes, the Pentium III was long-lasting and covered a wide range of speeds... but so what? All of them are well over a decade old by now, and are no longer supported by the latest versions of Windows.

But they were sold during the XP era, and XP support officially ended less than two years ago. Setting it to Pentium II implicitly moves the OS discussion bar firmly down to Windows 9x (or seriously historic versions of NT) territory.

 

[Osgeld]

well xp will run (arguably) on a Pentium MMX

 

[Cimonvg]

hello
some more brainstorming - Sub grouping could be oriented by which OS's the hardware can run
8 bit ( 8088 )
16 bit ( 286 )
32 bit ( 386-486 )
64 bit ( Pentium + -> )
again just a thought.
/cimonvg