Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ukma!rutgers!sunybcs!ugbell
From: ugbell@sunybcs.uucp (William Bell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt
Subject: Need some info!
Message-ID: <6102@cs.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 25 May 89 19:54:20 GMT
Sender: nobody@cs.Buffalo.EDU
Reply-To: ugbell@sunybcs.UUCP (William Bell)
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 25


	I am in the process of buying a 80286 IBM compatible system.
I have been involved in MicroComputers for about 10 years but just
recently took a class for the 8085 microprocessor used with an
SDK-85. I just recently sold my ATARI 520ST which has the MC68000 micro-
processor, 32-bit internal, 16 bit external, 8MHZ clock frequency.
Prior to this I was involved with the 8 bit Atari, etc.
	The 8085uPC is 8 bit. What I am confused about is:
1. Am I wrong when I say that Intel designed the 8085, 8088, 80286, 80386
   lines?
2. Does IBM only use Intel's uPCs? And if so, what uPC is in the IBM PCjr,
   IBM XT, IBM AT, and IBM PS/2? (I think this is all of them).
3. Why does every clone manufacturer coin the phrase "IBM Compatible?"
   Should they be saying "Intel uPC compactible?"
4. I thought IBM did there own R&D. If so what uPc did they develop?
5. Why is the ATARI 520ST with the 68000 said to be easily "portable" to
   IBM systems. They are running different uPc right?
6. I thought that 8088 was 8 bit, 80286 is 16 bit, 80386 is 32 bit, and
   there is some talk of a 80486 coming out, am I right?
7. The ultimate question: I have used the IBM AT (I have no idea of the
   hardware, uPc, etc) and I am told the Compac 80286 based system
   is totally better (in design, etc.) why does compac say they are
   "IBM compatible" is they are better?
8. Lastly, does IBM have a computer running the 80386/ and or 80486?
   And why do people say that the IBM PS/2 line is so bad?