Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!duke!unc!mcnc!ecsvax!dds From: dds@ecsvax.UUCP Newsgroups: net.micro.pc Subject: re: pc lookalikes (tropix.170) Message-ID: <1547@ecsvax.UUCP> Date: Tue, 15-Nov-83 18:31:18 EST Article-I.D.: ecsvax.1547 Posted: Tue Nov 15 18:31:18 1983 Date-Received: Tue, 22-Nov-83 00:01:07 EST Lines: 36 In response to Bob Moore's jaundiced view of the Compaq's compatibility with the IBM PC, I'd like to say that I've used a Compaq on a number of occasions to run standard applications programs--WordStar, dBASE II, and MultiMate--in the IBM disk format. All ran without the slightest problem. Certainly it's important to know how readily an MS-DOS computer will run IBM software without modification, especially since IBM has become such a dominant force in the 8088 market. But many of the 8088 computers offer splendid features that the IBM lacks. I direct a microcomputer lab at North Carolina State University equipped with 25 Victor 9000s. Our computers aren't compatible with the IBM, but we deliberately rejected compatibility to get some important features that the IBM either didn't offer or were available only as expensive add-ons to the basic unit. Our Victors provide us with a totally programmable keyboard, programmable character sets in RAM, 600K drives on the least expensive model, two serial and one parallel port, and an 800 x 400 resolution screen display. True, we're limited in the software we can run, but in a University lab situation, we can only afford to license a few programs anyway. My point? Well, I'm annoyed when I read someone's comments that the IBM is the only product you should buy. Microcomputer technology isn't well served by such a simpleminded view. The technology will flourish the better if people make computer purchases with broader objectives in mind than "Is it just like an IBM?" Douglas D. Short Director, Computer Lab Department of English North Carolina State University Raleigh, NC 27650 ...ucbvax!decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!dds