Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!emory!tridom!atssc!fang!att!cbnewsk!cbnewsj!davet
From: davet@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Dave Tutelman)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: 8088 vs 8086
Message-ID: <1991Jun27.122840.3190@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
Date: 27 Jun 91 12:28:40 GMT
References: <17641@helios.TAMU.EDU> <64S4LPY@dri.com> <91176.135005U39648@uicvm.uic.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs - Lincroft, NJ
Lines: 23

In article <91176.135005U39648@uicvm.uic.edu> U39648@uicvm.uic.edu (Darius Vaskelis) writes:
>
>The first PC to use the Intel 8086 that I'm aware of was a
>Compaq.  On this fact however, I'm not so sure.  I still have
>the PC World when it was introduced, and it seemed to refer
>to it as the first 8086 machine, and it explained what an
>8086 was since it was new to everyone even though it's an
>older chip, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone digs up
>an older compatible design that used the 8086.

I believe that the Compaq used an 8088, though I could be wrong.  The
press (and the industry) sometimes referred to them generically as
"8086 machines" because, after all, the 8086 had been around for some
time, though not in desktop PCs.  There were "cage" computers (S100 bus
comes to mind) that used it, and I worked on a PBX (private telephone
system) whose processor was an 8 MHz 8086.

The first IBM-compatible PC I know that used a true 8086 chip was made
by Olivetti, and sold in the USA as the AT&T PC 6300.  That was about
1984 or '85.  I could be wrong, and would be interested in facts to
the contrary.

Dave