The 02.12.23 at 16:50, Ken Hough wrote:
386, but it served me well, I did not complain. You see, I only noticed it was slow when I first saw a pentium 90 ;-) - nowdays, a pentium would be considered horribly slow.
Sorry Carlos. I didn't doubt you. I meant that you would have trouble trying to run any form of windows under Linux. DOS/Win3.1 is no problem. I still have a 486DX 40 set up to run DOS 6.2/Win3.11 (plus a TCP/IP stack so it talks to my LAN) and it's quite fast!
Sorry, I missunderstood O:-) I never thought of running modern windows on that machine - linux, I managed already, but W95, I won't even try :-)
I also have a small 'museum' --- includes a Sinclair Spectrum, BBC and an original IBM PC/XT -- remember when a 10MB hard disk was BIG and nobody needed more than 640KB of RAM?
Indeed I do! I remember the first day I saw one. I had bought, at last, an Amstrad 1512: an 8086 at 8Mhz (still in working order, by the way) with 512 Kbytes and two 360Kb 5 1/4 floppies. I went to see some friends, who had a PC and an oscilloscope - thus, a lab ;-) - and they were complaining that their 10 Mb hard disk was full and would have to be cleared. I could not understand how on earth was it posible to fill that much space! X-) -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson