🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <102@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU>
	cs163aeo@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (Professor I.R. Gumby) writes:
>In article <98@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU>,
>	cs163afu@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (Some call me...Tim) writes:
>> At the Anaheim Atari fair, Avant-Garde was displaying PC Ditto II,
>> the hardware supported (NO processor, by the way, just hardware) IBM
>> emulator.
>> According to the person at the fair, PC Ditto II is in the "AT"
>> class.
>Define AT class machine.  Will PC Ditto II be able to execute 286
>instructions?  Can I put it in protect mode?  Can I run *gasp* OS/2
>with it?  How BIOS compatable is it?  An AT class machine is
>something that not only is up to par with the AT on speed, but also
>has the AT compatability.
> [ much about AT-compatibility deleted ]
> JCA

    Arrghrhrh.  Not to flame too much (8-)), but from reading reports in
Current Notes magazine, Avant-Garde is claiming XT-emulation at AT speed.
With no co-processor.  The SI rating of 3.0 and speed of 10MHz are as
claimed in Current Notes.  The upshot of this is that a) it won't run 286
instructions, b) it won't go into protect mode, c) it won't run OS/2,
and d) it's XT BIOS compatable, but not AT BIOS compatable.  Personally,
I wouldn't worry about AT compatability and OS/2 compatability quite yet.
I imagine that, by the time OS/2 has come of age (if ever), there will
be PC-Ditto III, with 386 compatability 8-).

--
Jared J. Brennan <ins_bjjb@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> or <c08_d102@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>
BITNET: INS_BJJB@JHUNIX,JHUVMS		ARPA: ins_bjjb%jhunix@hopkins.ARPA
UUCP: allegra!hopkins!jhunix!ins_bjjb	"What's up, Spock?"
-- 
Jared J. Brennan <ins_bjjb@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> or <c08_d102@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>
BITNET: INS_BJJB@JHUNIX,JHUVMS		ARPA: ins_bjjb%jhunix@hopkins.ARPA
UUCP: allegra!hopkins!jhunix!ins_bjjb	"What's up, Spock?"