Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!ll-xn!ames!oliveb!enchant
From: enchant@oliveb.UUCP (Dan Crocker)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Which 80386 system to buy?
Message-ID: <5126@oliveb.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Sep-87 19:37:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: oliveb.5126
Posted: Mon Sep 14 19:37:05 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Sep-87 01:37:12 EDT
References: <133@ncrcpx.UUCP> <256@etn-rad.UUCP> <209@trwrc.UUCP> <135@splut.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 19
Keywords: 80386 systems
Summary: possible confusion???

In article <135@splut.UUCP>, jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard) writes:
> Considering the list of things that won't work quite right on a 6300, I hope
> AT&T (Olivetti?) did a better job of engineering this time around. I've lost
> track of the things that wouldn't quite work on AT&Ts.

Don't confuse the 6300 and the 6300+.  The 6300 was designed by Olivetti and
is billed as an XT compatible.  The 6300+ was designed by AT&T.  It is a
286 based machine but is not an AT compatible.  AT&T's 6310 is an AT 
compatible.

If you are truly talking about the 6300, then I am very surprised to hear
that it is so incompatible.  I have never seen any problems here.

				dan
-- 
Here comes the supernatural anesthetist
If he wants you to snuff it
All he has to do is puff it
He's such a fine dancer